7 ms·
Tell HN: Facebook Messenger is testing in-call video ads
A few minutes ago I was calling my family, and had a 15-second video ad after they picked up. According to them, they saw the ad too.
Do you think this is a case of A/B Testing, or are the ads here to say?
Picture for reference: https://imgur.com/a/ddddPAm
- tomschwiha 4y agoIts a win-win. Less bandwith costs -> cost reduction. Higher revenue. More, more money. Sounds like someone deserves a promotion. Just look at the right numbers for your arguments.
- altruios 4y ago...what?
- GoodJokes 4y ago
- vondro 4y agoYes, I think that is actually great idea and should be rolled out to everybody! I hate using messenger but some people I communicate with still prefer it. If this is rolled out, they will surely move to other platforms.
- whimsicalism 4y agoThis makes 0 sense to me. There's literally no lock in with FB messenger. The second I get a video ad - that's it for FB video calls for me.
- apetresc 4y agoWhat do you mean? It's a messaging platform with built-in integration to the largest social network in the world. I couldn't possibly imagine a more textbook example of lock-in.
- otikik 4y agobecause it happens on a mobile phone, which already has a built-in way to do it. "Hey mum, I decided to call you because that video ad bullshit is bullshit".
- ajsnigrutin 4y agoBut that doesn't include video part of a videocall and in many cases (internationall calls) cost quite a lot still. The main push from sms/mms and calling to messaging services was the free price and additional features.
- monsieurgaufre 4y agoFacetime (and/or Duo) will work exactly the same. Both are free.
- ajsnigrutin 4y agoYes, but you need an apple device for facetime, and how many people actually have Duo installed? If your grandma has facebook and all her friends have facebook and all your friends have facebook... how many of them can you move over to Duo (r signal, telegram, matrix,...)?
- monsieurgaufre 4y agoI used Duo as an example. I fail to see a real difference between a FB account and an iphone. Both serve as a way to connect to a network. Not everyone I know has a FB account, but most of those without a FB account have a cellphone. And frankly, around here (I live near Montreal), the majority have an iphone (and they already have Facetime). I go where (my) people are and they are increasingly not on FB (and IG as well for that matter). Telegram, matrix and signal is not even mentionned. I kind of get your point, but it can be applied to every network ever (needing a way to be part of the network).
- i_have_an_idea 4y agoIf it's true, it's a hilariously bad decision
- ugjka 4y agoComing to Whatsapp soon
- thombat 4y agoAnd coming to Skype or Zoom or WebEx or some other competitor: a notification that "Unlike some of our competitors, we promise never to intrude into your calls"
- zelphirkalt 4y agoWe will never merge data from WA and FB!
- ahahahahah 4y agoIt's not.
- ismokedoinks 4y agolol
- theCrowing 4y agothat's amazing... there are people in a meeting room at facebook believing this will increase revenue and the product owner of fb messenger said yes. lol
- ergonaught 4y agoBecause consumers have a stellar track record of rejecting user-hostile decisions? May as well try it. People are swallowing everything else.
- victordmor 4y agoI don't think that said PO said yes naturally, I think he said yes forcefully.
- otikik 4y agoIf the meeting was virtual they could "enjoy" being interrupted by their own adds. Dogfooding!
- johannes1234321 4y agoJust tells you a lot a lot what to expect in Metaverse and the experience there.
- Yhippa 4y agoThis is interesting. It sounds like Facebook is potentially looking under the couches, so-to-speak, for spare change by doing this. I also wonder if other comms apps are going to be doing this too?
- joshstrange 4y agoZoom has the audacity to show me (a paying Zoom subscriber) ads in the UI and at the end of calls. It's infuriating, even more so since it's ads for nothing I'd ever consider using. In UI: https://cs.joshstrange.com/zTpdlC https://cs.joshstrange.com/zTpdlC End of call, always on top, popup: https://cs.joshstrange.com/BizVwE https://cs.joshstrange.com/BizVwE EDIT: I get that it's less offensive since it's a "first-party ad"/"upsell" and I could forgive the banner in the app (even though dismissing it only makes it go away for like 24 hours, if that) but the popups post-meeting drive me bonkers. To the point I've considered seeing if I can write some code to watch for that window and kill it right away.
- ceejayoz 4y agoFirst-party upsells aren't at all uncommon in paid products. That's very different than what Facebook is doing.
- yakattak 4y agoThis is annoying but advertisements tailored to the product you’re using aren’t nearly as offensive to just a random ad for some cheap wish.com product, interrupting your video call.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoFree customer? I get it. Paying customer? That's big no no
- ceejayoz 4y agoProbably 80% of the SaaS apps I've run into have "want this feature? upgrade your plan!" upsells scattered around. It's clearly not a big no no.
- user3939382 4y agoThat’s a f no from me dawg. They can add this to every video service out there and I’ll happily set up a SIP PBX. Not happening.
- kevinsundar 4y agoAssuming this is true, who comes up with ideas like this? If I was an advertiser do I really want to pay to have my ad (video nonetheless) shown to someone while they're actively trying to have a phone call? As a user, I'd just be pissed off at the advertiser plus im not looking at my screen when talking. I guess technically this increases ad "views" metrics. But advertisers are just wasting their money. I hope the fact that Meta is testing changes like this causes advertisers to re-evaluate the risks of using FB advertising.
- junga 4y agoAds are often (if not always) shown to users who are actively trying to do something else. Like watching a video or reading an article. Why should this be different?
- nyokodo 4y ago> video or reading an article Setting aside that people load their browsers up with ad blockers to avoid those too, they're also async experiences that have no real-time social dynamics involved with them. Video calls are interpersonal and interruptions are highly problematic.
- kevinsundar 4y agoYes, but in the cases you mentioned the user is interacting with the same pane of glass. In this case, the user's interaction is voice, not the screen. Also not to mention that calls are very private. And the impression it gives to consumers that their call is being used for ads or even tracking.
- burkaman 4y agoI am certain the advertisers love this. All ads are intrusive, and generally the more intrusive the more expensive.
- kevinsundar 4y agoYes but intruding into private audio calls is something users would be heavily suspicious of. It's not hard to imagine a non technical users thinking "OMG they're showing me ads based on my calls". Lots of people already think this. Also its one thing to show an expensive ad on a screen that the user is actively looking at (that might actually be effective), and another to show an expensive ad on a screen that 95% of users are not looking at.
- bitcharmer 4y agoI bet this is some MBA's idea
- aussieshibe 4y agoI suspect this will be the final straw for many users, myself included.
- MonkeyMalarky 4y agoBonus points if the ad preceding your next conversation is uncannily relevant to what you were talking about last time.
- LinuxBender 4y agoWait, what? On a private person to person call? Curious if this will be a thing on cell phone calls next. This seems like a great way to kill off a platform.
- srveale 4y agoWe use fb for the family calls. This will add years to the project of being able to get grandma on a call without difficulty and I'm not sure she has that kind of time. I'm only half joking.
- barbs 4y agoMight I suggest Jitsi? We've used it with success with our older relatives. https://meet.jit.si/ https://meet.jit.si/
- jsemrau 4y agoInteresting find. One might argue that ad-tech went too far on this one if they are tracking conversations to place the "right" ads. Some random thoughts: Would the ad be different for caller / recipient? Why would an advertiser place their ad there while there are "safer" places on Amazon, Apple, Netflix, Disney, etc? Are ad-tech business models at the end of the innovation cycle? What's coming next?
- theropost 4y agoIs it going to display ads based on the conversation of the call?
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoI need to say, that I would probably lost my marbles if video call application would do anything like that.
- rejectfinite 4y agoTime to move the family chat to Telegram.
- woofwoofwoof 4y agoIt is slowly adding ads as well. Currently in the channels only, but just give them some time.
- tapoxi 4y agoLook I get that people love to shit on Signal because its not perfect, but this is the main reason I use it to call and message my family. It's a viable alternative to insane shit like Messenger and you should consider having your family members install it. It's incredibly easy to use. Cue someone below me talking about how they set up a Matrix or XMPP server for grandma and its 'so easy' once you get the presence handshake working and if you're using a specific set of clients that support the right features.
- ceejayoz 4y agoIs there a reason Signal couldn't put ads in their video call product?
- woofwoofwoof 4y agoI believe it is non-profit currently, so making money is not their top priority.
- ceejayoz 4y agoNon-profits still have to stay in business. My health insurer is "non-profit".
- sschueller 4y agoSo why did they think they had to do the crypto token thing?
- fsflover 4y agoDoesn't Signal have $50 million in debt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software)#Developers_and_funding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software)#Developers_a...
- shaldengeki 4y agoThis is an interesting question. Doesn't Signal rather famously not track anything about who you're talking to? Reputational damage to Signal's brand aside, I expect it'd be hard to sell advertisers on a black hole.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- MandieD 4y agoSome chipper, go-getter PM forgot that not every call is a light, happy call.
- saos 4y agoIs this real?
- ahahahahah 4y agoNo.
- barbs 4y agoSeems like a terrible idea. As others have pointed out, there are plenty of alternative platforms at hand that you can use for videochats, and I can't think of any that show intrusive video ads like this. In the past, I've used Jitsi for when Facebook Messenger wasn't working for whatever reason.
- Ptchd 4y agoFB getting desperate....
- Grothendank 4y agoThis is reminding me of the demise of AOL. Suddenly ads were everywhere. Then AOL was nowhere.
- yrgulation 4y agoI am curious tho. How do people expect that these companies pay for the underlying infrastructure? If you dont want to pay a monthly fee, you dont want them to monetise with ads, how do you imagine they cover running costs? I dont like facebook or intrusive ads, but i wouldnt mind paying for a service that lets me connect with friends, make calls, store photos, and join groups, but doesnt sell me ads.
- xony 4y ago