5 ms·
> Is someone out there really thinking “ah man, if only advertisements were more relevant!” ??? honestly, yes. adverts pay for most if not all of the free cont
by simg 5y ago
> Is someone out there really thinking “ah man, if only advertisements were more relevant!” ???
honestly, yes. adverts pay for most if not all of the free content on the internet. if adverts were more targeted they would become more profitable and therefore pay for better content.
very well target ads will suggest things to you that you would genuinely like or would be useful to you but have not yet heard about.
- Daho0n 5y agoI use the internet a lot but i have never once seen an advertisement for something i thought "hey, that looks interesting". The problem is that millions (billions?) of dollars are spend on subconsciously making people want to buy what is advertised, no matter if they need it or not. In any other area this psychological meddling with people's subconscious would be highly illegal. So in short, as long as this exists (and it always will as you can't put research already done back in the box) all advertisement should be illegal if not consented into, targeted or not, beforehand.
- majewsky 5y ago> if adverts were more targeted they would become more profitable and therefore pay for better content. If ads were more targeted, that doesn't necessarily increase neither the ad spend of companies, and it most definitely doesn't increase the amount of money that consumers can spend on the things that are being advertised. Most of the time, advertising is a zero-sum game. If you take ad targeting away from everyone, everyone will just do untargeted ads (i.e. ads that are only related to the context they appear in, not related to the person seeing them), and there will be no comparative disadvantage for any particular advertiser.