1759
Reddit abandons user privacy - Ars Technica (arstechnica.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
183 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I left a couple of months ago. Couldn't be happier.

The writing is on the wall. The leader thinks the Genius-with-hair-transplants is a superstar, despite destroying a globally recognised brand. Inspired by this, Spez is trying to get Reddit ready for an IPO. This means, maximise profits by any means.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 78 points 3 years ago (21 children)

Yea it feels like something has been rotten with the ads industry for a long while. I’ve read a few pieces here and there about how it could collapse and that it’s built almost entirely on dumb lies. But it’s still here.

I’m no economist, but my best guess is that it’s a little like war and the effort we put into it. Complete trashy waste almost all the time, except for when one person or country decides to put effort into it, because then you have to as well or run huge risks. We’d all be better off without ads, including brands/companies, but when one is doing it every company has to too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 33 points 3 years ago (14 children)

    Ads are meant to get brand recognition out there for most things. Then when you're in a store you buy what you've heard of before. They wouldn't do it if it wasn't effective.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 3 years ago* (4 children)

    You're putting too much faith in the talent and insight of marketing executives. Large companies throw tens of millions of dollars at their marketing department. They'll spend the money on a diverse ad campaign that ticks boxes, not one that is actually effective. People don't buy based on the commercial they saw last. People buy what's shoved in their faces.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    That's great, but you're still wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Absolutely spot on reply.

    Brand recognition and memory triggers is what big brand ads are about.

    Cleanex, Hoover, Coke, most cologne/perfume ads, Old Spice...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Brand recognition and memory triggers is what big brand ads are about.

    Cleanex, Hoover, Coke, most cologne/perfume ads, Old Spice…

    Late reply, but-- the above makes much sense to me when it comes to inexperienced / first-time buyers of a product. And/or buyers who simply get in to a rut and keep buying that product without trying anything else out.

    But for everyone else, I would think they sample enough tissues, sodas, perfumes, etc to gain an understanding of the ins & outs of a product, settling on choices which best represent their favorites / desired price point. For bigger-cost stuff like vacuum cleaners, I'm thinking people in this group also learn to use review resources to evaluate best choices rather than buy a Hoover just because some ads ran.

    So what does this all mean? Aside from overlap between these two groups, that there's enough revenue being produced by the former childlike group such that ad systems can afford to almost completely ignore the latter, more adult group..?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    The most effective ads I've seen in my lifetime have been podcast ads. I don't remember shit I see in mobile apps or on most corners of the internet. I could personally sell Blue Apron or Harry's Razors for all I've heard about them on podcasts though. The smartest companies allow the podcasters to joke around in their ads too. My Brother, My Brother, and Me will say some borderline offensive but hilarious stuff in their ads and I'll be damned if it doesn't keep me listening to their ads and hearing about the products being advertised.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    And by definition it's still nothing but systematic brain washing. It's actually very 1984, and I can't understand how some people are ok with being manipulated into buying shit 24/7 and think that global perpetual invasive advertising is this perfectly normal thing that humanity has always had around...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    With very, very few exceptions, any time I see an ad I make a mental note to never buy that product. As such, most products I am familiar with(presumably because I saw an ad) I will not buy. The exception is pretty much just Hershey's chocolate bars, I can't live without them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Yea it feels like something has been rotten with the ads industry for a long while.

    Advertising only has as much value to the advertiser as it can get in modified consumer behavior.

    If I only have $100/month in truly discretionary income, all the advertising in the world is only fighting for that $100. Realistically, though, we're not all susceptible to the same advertising influences, which is why ad personalization exists. But personalize it all you want and you're still, at most, getting a few percent of my monthly budget to shift towards what you want me to buy.

    That means that advertising is only really worth it for whales. The type of people who might buy hundreds of dollars of goods or services through clicking on ads on Instagram, who have that combination of a huge amount of discretionary income and are fickle enough that they might impulse buy big ticket items.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    It literally just dawned on me that some people intentionally click on ads. That's such an outlandish idea, it feels like fiction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Clickthrough rates are one thing, but plenty of ads don't rely on the ad being in the actual chain of purchase. Ads for small stuff like movies, beverages, snacks, etc., or big stuff like cars, furniture, etc., try to get consumers to buy those things outside of the medium that the ad is being presented.

    Plus native advertising when you're looking for a specific purchase can sometimes factor in. Someone might pay more for a particular hotel room to get more prominent placement in results, and I'm not going to intentionally ignore that sponsored placement when choosing between a bunch of hotels. Maybe the ad didn't actually make a difference (in theory my purchase decision would've considered that hotel anyway, and if it's the best for my needs then they would've gotten my business without the ad), but I've definitely purchased sponsored results when searching for a product that I already intend to buy.

    And if it counts as an ad, paid referral links from recommendation websites I trust are an easy way to "support" an outlet that I use.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •