For $29, This Company Swears It Will ‘Brainwash’ Someone on Facebook
thedailybeast.com
thedailybeast.com
This theme is repeated throughout the article but is missing data on actual behavioral change.
"Burn Money was a simple, free app that performed one function very well. You make an in-app purchase between $1 and $100 in real money, then watch as that amount in U.S. currency goes up in flames on your screen. The app recorded a video of the virtual conflagration that you could post on social media, and emailed you a “certificate” confirming you spent up to $100 for absolutely nothing."
Message: Play slots! Target: Existing slot players
Exposure to articles such as:
"Woman hits $1.6 million slot jackpot at Vegas airport Launch your micro-targeted content campaign today"
I would imagine it has to run afoul of at least one state's wiretapping laws though.
http://twicsy-blog.tumblr.com/post/174063770074/how-i-target...
>It turns out the Reddit CEO had a public Facebook profile, so I could go there to see details about him. Where he lived. What he was interested in. I took that info to the Facebook platform to help narrow down the campaign. But I didn’t want everyone to click on it, just one person. So I custom tailored the ad to directly target the one person I wanted to read it.
>“Steve: Reddit needs recommendations”
>The ad reached 197 people. 4 People clicked on it. One of them was the CEO of Reddit. I spent a total of $10.62.
>Steve Huffman, CEO of Reddit, saw my ad, clicked on it, read (probably skimmed) my article, and liked it well enough to send a note to Reddit HR to contact me about a position.
The practice is called "sniping".
Yes.
It would take tons of time to protect individuals from deceptive advertising. The bigger the group and the more public the ad the easier it is to protect the public.
Also, for $29 someone could bombard you with content about suicide or other dark topics and just be relentless with negativity.
It's so much different than showing an ad to 100 women ages 30-45 in Chicago.
I think we've defined "acceptable" advertising by working backward from what people find profitable to advertise about. We can chip at the edges here and there (not these products, forced demographic boundaries (or lack thereof)) but the overwhelming thrust isn't effected. It's a lie we tell ourselves because the alternative is to admit we're powerless. Powerless to control the content of ads, and powerless to identify and repel the forces ads wants to effect on our psyche.
In group targeting, only a few in the group need to know something is wrong and they can complain and save the group from further inappropriate advertising.
[0] https://ghostinfluence.com/the-ultimate-retaliation-pranking...
It has been a trend at startup weekends and accelerators since ~2014; Target your investors, coaches, and class to at least get them to perceive your brand as bigger than it is and use your app -- or get their children, friends to be aware of the brand.
That said, over and above the ethical issues, what man really wants a wife they have to nag for sex? I'll take solitude.