lol a news site started just selling ads themselves instead of using targeted bullshit and made so much more money https://www.wired.com/story/can-killing-cookies-save-journalism/
its kind of amazing that newspapers ran for two centuries selling their own ads but google waltzed in and convinced them they couldnt do it on their own any more???
I love the part saying it will put out of business all those shitty content websites with empty shell articles ...
@kate you know the Inca empire was rulling an entire continent for two centuries and then a bunch of Spanish conquistadores walked in with a few horses, muskets and infinite greed and lack of morality and the rest is the history of rapid fire devastation and cultural anihillation
Never underestimate the disruptive potential of new technologies in the wrong hands
The good news is that its all just software. Any sector of society with two firing neurons could push back if they cared
@kate this has been shown before. Ads well tailored to the content do better than unrelated ads about something you already bought on a shopping platforms a week ago.
@kate I was told awhile back that if enough advertisers realized at once that targeted ads are kind of bullshit, it could trigger a "subprime attention crisis" that collapses a lot of Big Tech's revenue streams at once. With potentially far-reaching consequences for the rest of the economy.
This feels... at least plausible
@kate i am 100% convinced that google is suppressing internal research that collecting every iota of data about a persons browsing habits has absolutely zero effect on ad effectiveness
@cnx you seem very optimistic about how capitalism works
@email@example.com back to 1998. I like it!
@kate Wow, it seems like when someone comes up with a convincing technobabble of "with artificial intelligence-powered targeted advertisements we can increase your revenue", media providers were like "seems legit", and accepted and embraced an expensive, intrusive, and frankly abusive technology without actually testing if it brings in more money or not.
@kate I find it kind of hilarious that this article is paywalled
@kate Who would have thought. Lets hope this is a trend back to sanity.
The only thing which creeps me out more than a targeted ad based on my real-life purchases is a one that's clearly not based on any human's understanding of my purchases at all.
@kate "the viability of journalism and, by extension, the health of democracy"
LOL that's some self-serving careerist bullshit
@kate If journalism can't survive without advertising, let it die.
@kate Ironic that the site this article is on is riddled with targeted ads
look @steph this is cool :iwibunhyperwubbel:
@kate well huge fucking story, individually making your own contracts with advertisers nets to more than participating in a commodity market for ad space
> This doesn’t mean that US publishers could abandon microtargeting en masse right now and start raking in more money, however.
*proceeds to unrelatedly ramble about privacy laws*
the privacy laws are not a prerequisite for the fucking revenue increase, what the fuck
@kate even if you subscribe to “look more privacy actually means more money!!!” or something (wish it was true, but no, millions are not spent on violating our privacy for no reason), this point makes no sense
@mastodon anyone ever told you you're really annoying
It IS remarkable that that doesn't destroy the gain from disintermediation. A large part of the reason why ad services got started in the first place is because managing advertising is a heavy overhead cost.
Some of the services were pretty nice. I liked Project Wonderful while it lasted (it was broadly contextual - you chose sites or categories of sites).
ONLY CREATE ACCOUNT IF YOU PERSONALLY KNOW AN ADMINISTRATOR, AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF IN YOUR APPLICATION. YOU DO NOT NEED A SHRIKE CLUB ACCOUNT TO FOLLOW SHRIKE CLUB USERS. A PERSONAL FEDERATED SOCIAL MEDIA INSTANCE FOR SMALL CARNIVOROUS BIRDS BY SMALL CARNIVOROUS BIRDS