@cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Post #3468682
2026-06-29 11:14 UTC
Replies (1)
-
@Mordikan@kbin.earth 2026-06-29 14:58
So, a lot of people will quote reports that ads don't increase sales or anything, but that is technically wrong. It is wrong because they quote reports involving non-targeted advertisement which hasn't been widely used for 10-15+ years (since the rise of programmatic). Everything is targeted. Heavily. These kind of ads are proven to increase sales and market share. So, that is why advertisers run them. The problem isn't the advertisers/demand platforms though (they are actually on your side). The problem is publisher/supply groups and the inherent nature of greed in people. Example: Say I run a website. I make $X from running a banner ad at the top. Well, I have bills to pay, so I now run 2 ads. Well, why run 2 ads when I can run 5. Well, why run just 5 ads when I can put a video ad (higher CPM) floating to the side. Well, I have 6 ads on the site, why not make them refresh themselves every 5 seconds so they act as 12 ads. If I can keep them on the page long enough, I could make that 24 ads so let's spread out the content (like recipe sites). Why contact 1 demand platform when I can contact 10. This is why websites suck and this is why they run like complete shit. It is to such a breaking point that advertisers implemented ads.txt files and schain verification systems. Advertisers don't want to show you 3 ads for Tide back to back to back. They have limited budgets and are trying to reach as many people as possible for their new soap or whatever. If you have a budget of $200, do you want to show 1 ad to 200 people or 20 ads to 10 people? Advertisers are now even starting to run frequency checks to determine if a user has already been served to prevent that shit from happening. But publishers will send bid requests to 10 other demand platforms to get around that. TL;DR - Advertisers aren't the bad guy, Publishers are.