The ads are a window into a blatantly illegal underground economy that Meta is not only failing to moderate, but is actively profiting from and injecting into users’ feeds.
Well, Instagram did just that for my little book publishing company. I signed up for a business account in the hopes of selling some books, putting up some ads, and posting a few updates, only to get a fucking PERMABAN during fucking SIGNUP.
Similarly, my YouTube shorts are filled with gambling videos and “get rich quick scheme” videos. Seems as though “do not recommend channel” blocks the channel but assumes you have some growing interest in the topic.
I just want to watch woodworking shorts and plumbing videos T_T
I just got an extension that removes shorts. I tried blocking channels, saying I wasn't interested, pressing the thumbs down button, but it would still show trash like Jordan Peterson and Andrew Tate.
Now here's the exact problem with the so called "personalized" ads, that Google and Facebook serves what the advertisers think you want to see, instead of what you actually want to see.
This is the fundamental conflict of interest which the obvious conclusion is that online banner/video advertisements doesn't work, and has never worked, because ultimately, no matter how many times you shove ads in people's faces via a thoughtless machine, you can't "trick" people into liking something. What people want is thoughtful, sincere recommendations by real people, which is why we have seen the rise of sassy brand Twitter accounts being so successful for a time: because there is a real person behind it.
(Of course, it's really funny if you take blatant advertisment to its logical extreme, and even that seemed more effective.)
Of course, Google and Facebook will never admit that they've been lying to everyone and themselves for more than a decade, because to do so is to admit that their entire business of Web 2.0 was built on an absurd and illogical premise of again, if you show people ads for things they never asked for a thousand times, then you can brainwash them into liking something.
In other words, Google and Facebook's entire advertisment business model, if you really think about it, is really no different than pick-up artist logic, and. They. Just. Won't. Go. Away.
Exactly. If it didn't pay off these companies wouldn't keep shoveling money to Facebook and Google to show their ads time and time again. Marketing is expensive. If it didn't at least break even then nobody would be doing it anymore by now. Obviously it works, otherwise I wouldn't ever know what the fuck a squarespace or a goddamn raid shadow legends is.
The ads that I mind the least and the ones I find the most effective are sponsors for creators that I like. Short sponsor segments really don't annoy me as much and I have actually tried a couple products that have advertised that way.
That said, almost all of them sucked in the end but that's another subject entirely.
Drugs or Chinese scam products. Had a friend tell me he ordered something that never showed up, turned out they sent these super cheap toothbrushes in the mail and then tried to use that tracking info as proof he received what he bought. They just allow anyone who will pay to advertise illegal shit, scams, whatever it's the wild West.
They are personalised by the "bucket" that data collection companies like Google or Facebook placed you into based on profiling. Browsing and search history is only one of the factors that is taken into account when you are profiled, there are myriad more ways to collect data about you.
And then what ads you see is determined by what advertisers think your "bucket" wants. If you are male in your 20s living in rural USA and advertisers think that males in their 20s living in rural USA are interested in guns, then that's what you will see - even if you never clicked on gun ad or searched for guns on Google.
That's exactly why I've never actually tried one of these things. I had someone on Reddit message me once and give me a dude's telegraph info and it was so obviously a scam.
The dude asked what I wanted and I said something really vague and he immediately said "okay how many" without clarifying. Then when I didn't respond, he sent a screenshot of allll his notifications from messages he was getting from "happy customers"
Yeah, there will always be dark markets. But it's nothing like, nor do I think it ever will be like it was in its hay day. I don't check regularly, but last I looked these markets have nothing close to the user base of even the days of agora/dream/Wallstreet. You could buy quantities of stuff at user level for real cheap. As they started cracking down, it all started to turn into bulk because no one wanted to deal with transaction frequency risk, I suspect it's the same today.
Well sir. Given that the algorhythm designed for procuring that content is literally the best at its job bar none. And having also had personal experience with this. One of two things or both is happening. #1 you like to partake in partying and you seek that out sometimes. And the software knows that. #2 you associate with drugs dealers who are in your social media circles.
Let's be clear. This content isnt shown to you just because. Its being shown to you because you have displayed a pattern of seeking where these items come into play or you talk to people who regularly engage in this.
I'm a 28 year old man. I have never been shown a targeted advertisement for feminine hygiene products. Also I had never seen advertisements on social media for literal drugs and shit until I went thru a phase where I developed a pretty bad coke habit for a while and had a lot of dealers in my phone.
You assume that the algorithm works perfectly. It does not. Sometimes, the data points it connects on people is "male person living in Kansas" and just serve you ads with those keywords. Which means one day you see an ad for Cheerios, the next day you see an ad for your local crystal meth store.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy that 100%. To an extent maybe, but there are ads that get presented to me sometimes that is just wild out of the blue and I'm like what the fuck. I didn't do anything to suggest. I might like this at all. So I can understand what this person saying
Asking tech giants to start policing people sounds like it can get bad really quickly…but at the same time letting them do nothing also sounds terrible
I don't use Instagram altogether, this isn't about me. The main audience of Instagram (and other Meta platforms) are teens, whom you should not expose to such advertisements. Some are not tech literate and are capable of blocking Meta's ads on a DNS level or with some other trickery. Look at the broader audience, this isn't a "Me" post.
You sound like you didn't read the article. This not about seeing ads or not, it's about large corporations allowing and making profits off advertising criminal activities.
allowing and making profits off advertising criminal activities.
You mean the same ones that could be easily blocked by extensions so none of us would be talking about it right now and giving them more clicks? you clearly missed the point.
The post title is the title of the article, where an investigative journalist intentionally manipulates the algorithm to produce this result. If he used an ad blocking extension, he'd be unable to hold Meta accountable for what they are doing.
So maybe calm down about that given the context, and perhaps establish the context before you decide to click reply.