Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

They're informing us about the performance of different kinds of advertisements, which helps us focus our money on the ones that count, which I can't deny is a pretty big value-add. I don't know of any direct alternatives for doing that.


sort by: page size:

More relevant ads would be the benefit for the user.

Would you prefer to see irrelevant ads instead?

Or just show ads relevant to the content? What better indicator of what the user is interested in right now?

Another second-order benefit is the fact that innovation in ad tech has bled over into other kinds of content recommendation. If you can figure out which ads I would likely click on, you can also probably figure out what news stories I’m interested in.

That being said, while ads may improve certain kinds of content, it is strictly negative for other kinds. For example, pretty much every kind of ad online which is intrusive. It’s intrusive because it’s not wanted. I don’t want a full screen Dior ad in the middle of an article about the auto worker strike.

So sometimes the interests of advertisers and users are aligned, but many times they are not. And ad tech companies know which kinds of content are improved with ads and which damage the user experience. They could measure this if they wanted. But because they are trying to maximize ad revenue rather than user experience, so the ads win.


Good point, the ads could be content driven rather than user profile driven.

There are other less invasive ways to advertise.

More honest about what the ads are and more useful.

I would hope that ads are generally useful to the people placing them.

I like their idea of making the area where they have ads occasionally show something else that might be of interest to persuade people to look even when there are ads.

The alternative is context-sensitive ads based on surrounding context.

I think it's a valid point for discussion but they deliver the ads through a different mechanism (system notifications). So it's a bit different than replacing the ads of other web pages.

what do you suggest in place of ads?

Good point. And I guess the answer is, the content is there to lead you to advertisements :)

And it's more commercially effective to be more specific than that and take the reader's profile into account.

It's also not a zero sum at all. An advertisement that is not within the user's interest is wasted, rather than going to the competitor.


They explicitly state 'more useful'. That is the metric they are using, better ads are ads which are more useful.

For example. Until a day or two I did not know the 'MX Master' mouse existed. An advert for this would have been useful.


I don't really understand why people don't seem to want tailored ads. All ads interupt attention, better that they have a chance if being useful.

How else are you going to see relevant ads?

I agree that advertising at the moment is an anti-feature, but it is at least theoretically possible that an advert could be of benefit to a user.

If advertising were to reach the quality and targettedness that they were telling you about things you genuinely wanted, it would be a useful service. Kind of like advertising as a recommendation engine. That would be quite people centric.

I don't think we will get there though.


In this sense I would like it if site took advertisement more seriously. Asking feedback, allowing personalization, selecting a few "endorsed" ads (as a quick and cheap Boolean review).

For Google and Facebook it doesn't make sense, but for a newspaper i would expect some selection on the ads they show.

next

Legal | privacy