Hacker News Reader

Comment by marcinzm | Hacker News Reader

Hard to know how much is ad fraud and how much is people just not being interested in what is being advertised. Don't see why I should care about yet another webinar especially if I'm already a successful CEO and get five thousand webinar requests a day. Might click for more info but then after 10 seconds on the page (and seeing it's more BS) I'll probably bail.

Same as this quote:

>“You’ll see the call to action is ‘Request Demo,'” Gellis said. “So, arguably, a user who sees this ad and clicks legitimately on it will be looking to get a demo of the analytics tool we were marketing.

No, if the only option you give me is "Request Demo" but all I want is more info then I'll click "Request Demo." Then when I don't get more info or info that I like I'll bail.

edit: Also at only 11 clicks, the metrics are pure noise. Sure they each cost $45 but it's still only 11 clicks. Can't even blame the CPC estimation for being off at such a low number.

View on HN

> No, if the only option you give me is "Request Demo" but all I want is more info then I'll click "Request Demo." Then when I don't get more info or info that I like I'll bail.

Exactly. Even if I was thinking about requesting a demo when I clicked the ad, I then want to see a lot of information on the target site before proceeding. I'm not going to sign up for a demo unless I think there's a pretty good chance I'll want to buy.

Most vendor websites don't provide nearly enough information for me to make that judgment. As someone who doesn't consider talking to sales people to be a recreational activity, that leaves me with little choice but to bail.

Same. I hate when I need to get on a call to just get pricing for something, or even worse, to just renew a yearly subscription.

Plus this was analytics software which is a dime a dozen nowadays. So you need to make your value proposition known very well and very quickly. Even then you'll get a very low conversion rate unless you've done a very good branding campaign to get your name out there.

No, thanks. Unless the person giving me the demo is the CEO, their entire salary and taxes are being taken out of my price, and it's most likely not the kind of company I want to do business with.

"LinkedIn says 11, our server logs show 10, our actual reporting software's only showing 8 people. The only reason that we would not see them pop up in this logging tool is that they were on the site and bounced so quickly that the logging tool was unable to load and capture anything of their session [We've went back and forth will the session recording company multiple times to confirm that]"

Seems awareness of ad/trackblocking and disabling JavaScript is low in this space.

Still, he could absolutely be right some portion of them are misclicks.

I'm sure Facebook will be lower than this in terms of awareness of adblock, considering the number of oldies there (including my relatives) who can't distinguish between sponsored content and original content. I'm honestly surprised LinkedIn has such high numbers, since I assumed the LinkedIn crowd would be more technologically savvy.

Tech savvy crowd and engineers probably only use linkedin once a full moon to fill out their details. The rest are recruiters, PR, management, students, and so on. Those are the regulars. You don't use linkedin when you have a job unless that is your job.

Yes that's exactly it, if they removed all the timeline I'm not sure I would even notice. I use Linkedin only for the messaging and the CVs.

Employed engineer here. I use linkedin to network and as a result I get a few inbound recruiting requests a week. Most are contract roles I'm not interested in, but some are for interesting companies that I wouldn't have found on a job board. I try to take interviews for the latter.

Going through an interview with nothing to lose helps me keep up my networking and interviewing soft skills. The best time to find a job is when you don't need one.

I meant tech savvy as in the younger crowd, who would know about adblockers. That would include students, tech workers , bankers, the whole lot.

Back in my old firm, I knew a ton of bankers and consultants who used LinkedIn regularly (mostly for stalking top performers).

Maybe back in the earlier years, but nowadays it's got just about everybody from all manner of professions.

I think the parent comment is about adblock awareness by advertisers. One reason their invasive tracking might say they have less visitors than their ad network is because some of the people clicking their ads block their invasive tracking.

The users we are talking about started by clicking an ad on LinkedIn. Seems pretty safe to assume they're not running ad blockers?

What do you think are all those articles on your LinkedIn feed?

DNS filtering or some lists focusing on privacy would definitely block one but not the other

> The only reason that we would not see them pop up in this logging tool is that they were on the site and bounced so quickly that the logging tool was unable to load and capture anything of their session.

I'm really happy to hear this shows up in site metrics, since it's exactly what I do when I follow a link into ad-laden crap. I don't block ads by default, but I also have zero tolerance for keeping crap open.

Or the pop-up filled marketing sites. "Come chat with us." "Click this big banner for a discount." "Come to this webinar if you can't find the small X to close this banner." "This site uses cookies." "Watch these fifty background animations play."

I remember this JS prank, where you tried chasing the close X all over the screen.

Sadly, it is quite close to what actually happens.

Ctrl-w or cmd-w have saved me many times.

The type of people that have adblocking on likely would not have clicked / loaded / seen the LinkedIn ad in the first place, no?

"But we tested different call to action buttons, and 'Request Demo' was the one that had the highest click-through rate, so we went with that one..."

For some reason or other LinkedIn keeps thinking I must be very interested in Shell and Raytheon, though that couldn't be farther off the mark.

Having selected "I find this ad annoying or not interesting" numerous times without any effect. What is this algorithm behind that thinking? Certainly not a good way to get some ad revenue from me (tbh I'm a lost cause anyway in that regard.. can count the no. of ad clicks I ever made on one hand. So I guess LI is helping me here).

> Having selected "I find this ad annoying or not interesting" numerous times without any effect. What is this algorithm behind that thinking?

Just because you're not interested in hearing it doesn't mean advertisers don't want to try to tell you anyway.

Or LI tells these advertisers "my my do I have this large interesting target group based on your criteria" which was a bit inflated. Who knows.

Would be hilarious is their marketing reports counted "hide this ad" as "interactions"

Let's face it Shell and Raytheon have much much larger ad buying budget than probably any/all of your actual interests combined. If Shell/Raytheon/types target the same audience as smaller vendors with smaller ad buys, then they will always lose the auction. If someone has a $500/month budget, they will lose to someone with a $5000 budget. This is why I think these "targeted" ad pushers are the actual fraud.

Other mediums of advertising sell you a specific ad on a certain page of a website/newspaper/magazine/etc. You have no idea how many people really look at it. You make your decision on if the site/paper/zine attracts the crowd you are interested in. Buying TV/Radio ads also says for your ad buy you will get X number of ads in certain time spots, or for more money you can have your ad played during specific times during specific shows. Again, you have no idea on the exact number of people seeing/hearing your ad, but at least you know it's getting played.

If this is the case then why does LI even have the "I find this ad annoying or not interesting". I thought the whole point of that option was to counteract a company that the user is explicitly not interested in from winning the ad auction.

If the option doesn't work than that seems like an issue on the part of LI, either dishonesty (pretending it does something when it doesn't) or incompetence. Given the company we're talking about, neither would surprise me.

You must be thinking that the button is meant to improve your ad experience. All ad platforms care about are fulfilling their obligation of serving ads. They claim they are targeted. Again, that's not for your enjoyment. It's a way to get advertisers to spend more money. You clicking the button says you're an actual human like the 'unsubscribe' link in spam while being a placebo. Am I cynical, maybe? Am I wrong, ??

Ah that makes sense. I doubt you're wrong.

Perhaps we can find a reason in the article "Why the world is full of buttons that don't work"[0]:

"They're sometimes called "placebo buttons" -- buttons that are mechanically sound and can be pushed, but provide no functionality. Like placebo pills, however, these buttons may still serve a purpose, according to Ellen Langer, a Harvard psychologist who pioneered a concept known as the "illusion of control." "They do have a psychological effect," she said in a phone interview. "Taking some action leads people to feel a sense of control over a situation, and that feels good, rather than just being a passive bystander."

[0] https://www.cnn.com/style/article/placebo-buttons-design/ind...

Maybe their ad targeting criteria is "people who don't want to hear about us".

I’ve done the same to at least a dozen “Daily Show with Trevor Noah” ads on YouTube. I’m pretty sure there is no algorithm behind it. A switch connected to nothing that exists only to provide an outlet for user frustration.

Oh, it is valuable feedback. You indicated you actually pay attention to ads. They'd be foolish not to notice that.

"Not interested" counts as an engagement. It means you found the ad emotionally stimulating enough to want to hide it.

Dunno if they actually use that info though.

CPC estimation is not an exact science anywhere - most places are comparing it based on other ads with similar targeting to yours, they have no idea how much your ad content makes people want to click or not which is a big factor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com