If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   Huh, so it turns out that Facebook will charge you more for your political ads because they aren't "provocative" enough, still in this realm of reality   ( wired.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Facebook, Custom Audiences, facebook ads, Facebook advertising infrastructure, Facebook users, Facebook's monetization, Social network service, Facebook user ID  
•       •       •

2070 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Feb 2018 at 3:22 PM (20 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-02-25 10:50:54 AM  
i hope Zuck and @jack get knocks on the door from Mueller soonish
 
2018-02-25 10:58:58 AM  
I know that there aren't many of them left anymore, but this really seems like a violation of campaign finance laws.
 
2018-02-25 11:56:22 AM  
It's all about the clicks.  More clicks can charge less because it's made up for in volume.
 
2018-02-25 01:29:20 PM  

Gubbo: I know that there aren't many of them left anymore, but this really seems like a violation of campaign finance laws.


they probably can get around it because they aren't tv or radio, who IIRC, are specifically called out as not being allowed to charge different candidates different rates for political ad buys
 
2018-02-25 01:30:02 PM  
People used to talk about how Howard Stern got good ratings and the story went that those who liked him turned him on for a bit of their commute to work and those who hated him kept him on for longer. The whole "shock jock" thing was to stir up emotions and negative emotions worked as well or better.

Same as much trolling. The dumber the comment the more attention it gets, the more replies.

Understand that Facebook has two goals and they are inverted. Goal two is to make money, through ads. Goal one is to make Facebook a huge part of people's lives. More people, and more time per person. Do anything you can to get them to stay 5 more minutes, to visit more frequently. If they can keep you, get you addicted, they figure they'll be able to make money but most important is to grow grow grow. Just about everybody knows this, and don't care. More Soma.

No way they will stop pushing their most addictive drugs, click-bait. Of course they recruit it. It's their business model.
 
2018-02-25 01:36:58 PM  
Tampermonkey & FB Purity.

Also, I've pared my "friends" list quite a bit since the election. Lots of Mormon Republicans just had to go.
 
2018-02-25 01:41:55 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: Tampermonkey & FB Purity.

Also, I've pared my "friends" list quite a bit since the election. Lots of Mormon Republicans just had to go.


Yup. Someone here advised me to use FB Purity. That, and dropping several groups makes it more tolerable now, but still only on it 5 min per day, if that.
 
2018-02-25 03:24:17 PM  
I told you Hillary should've gotten naked
 
2018-02-25 03:29:42 PM  
This is kinda funny considering Goldman publicly walked back his statements a few days ago.
 
2018-02-25 03:30:02 PM  
Humans are impulsive, always have been, always will be. Clickbait just amplifies the possibility of converting that potential into ca$h money.
 
2018-02-25 03:30:24 PM  
Look, if you're using something like Facebook or Twitter, that is available to virtually everyone, most people on it aren't going to be very bright, to say the least.  In order to make money, those services have to attract the interest of idiots.  If Facebook doesn't serve that market, someone will.  How do people think any of this works? You can keep playing whack-a-mole with stuff like this, but it seems like a waste of time.
 
2018-02-25 03:32:12 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-25 03:34:14 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: Tampermonkey & FB Purity.

Also, I've pared my "friends" list quite a bit since the election. Lots of Mormon Republicans just had to go.


just cut ties with someone i'd known since high school when her reaction to the parkland survivors calling for gun control was "they should just expect a few school shootings a year, don't know why they're being so dramatic"

she has a teenage daughter.
 
2018-02-25 03:34:33 PM  
The more I read about how the Facebook revenue model worked - and how it was essentially designed to be gamed by sensationalist news and dishonest actors - the more I think Zuck and his senior marketing team should be brought up on the same charges that the 13 Russians were. Facebook was not a neutral actor in this clusterfark.

At the very least, Facebook has a lot of splainin to do.
 
2018-02-25 03:38:03 PM  
wademh:

Goal one is to make Facebook a huge part of people's lives. More people, and more time per person.

I deactivated Facebook earlier in the week.  Just tired of it.  I worried for a bit that I'd miss out on something.   But I feel better for not reading all the political memes and gun arguments.
 
2018-02-25 03:42:16 PM  
Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.
 
2018-02-25 03:42:20 PM  
Once we found out that Yuri Milner gave Facebook 100 Million, and that that money was essentially steered by the Kremlin, all bets are off.

Facebook is complicit and was willingly a cockholster of the Russians.
 
2018-02-25 03:42:26 PM  

Skyking Skyking Do Not Answer: wademh:

Goal one is to make Facebook a huge part of people's lives. More people, and more time per person.

I deactivated Facebook earlier in the week.  Just tired of it.  I worried for a bit that I'd miss out on something.   But I feel better for not reading all the political memes and gun arguments.


I get enough of that here, but it's by choice. Who the fark wants to see all that shiat when I just want to look at a friend's vacation pictures.
 
2018-02-25 03:46:58 PM  
What aggravates me the most about Facebook and Twitter is they want to play both sides of the "free speech" argument as an excuse to just not be responsible for anything that they enable while reaping huge cash rewards from their products. They have no problem manipulating feeds and ads and pushing people in certain directions through all manner of sinister little algorithms if it means selling more impressions and clicks. But, then, anytime their platforms are used to harass, bully or manipulate people they scream "FREE SPEECH" as an excuse not to address the problems they created.

You can't farking have the level  of manipulation in people's accounts that these sites do when it comes to selling ads and then whine when people want you to take at least a basic level of responsibility for controlling destructive content your users create.

Zuckerberg and Dorsey, IMO, are two of the worst people to ever participate in the Internet age. They're both irresponsible shiatbags and I hope somebody finds a way to sue both of them into the poorhouse for what they've done (or, more to the point, refuse to do).
 
2018-02-25 03:49:06 PM  
Way I see it, Donnie's subs were greened, but Hillary..well..
 
2018-02-25 03:51:10 PM  

Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.


Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.
 
2018-02-25 03:51:22 PM  
So casting Eisenberg was intentional. Zuckerberg IS Lex Luthor
 
2018-02-25 03:51:48 PM  
Thanks a million, M$ for your infinite stupidity in destroying Windows Live Messenger.
 
2018-02-25 03:56:51 PM  

Crewmannumber6: So casting Eisenberg was intentional. Zuckerberg IS Lex Luthor


Zuckerberg has stated on more than one occasion that personal privacy is an outdated concept in the internet age. That was enough for me to never create a Facebook account.

Google, on the other hand... Oh baby, I just can't quit you. I want to, but I neeeeed you so much!
 
2018-02-25 03:57:06 PM  

Naido: I told you Hillary should've gotten naked


The Onion says she did.
 
2018-02-25 04:02:03 PM  

skozlaw: What aggravates me the most about Facebook and Twitter is they want to play both sides of the "free speech" argument as an excuse to just not be responsible for anything that they enable while reaping huge cash rewards from their products. They have no problem manipulating feeds and ads and pushing people in certain directions through all manner of sinister little algorithms if it means selling more impressions and clicks. But, then, anytime their platforms are used to harass, bully or manipulate people they scream "FREE SPEECH" as an excuse not to address the problems they created.


That's the same side of the free speech argument.
 
2018-02-25 04:10:04 PM  
Facebook is happy to be used as a tool against democracy because they are evil. Their job is to make money, not be good people. Until we all stop using it we are to blame for the evil they perpetuate. We need millions to deactivate their accounts or nothing will happen.
 
2018-02-25 04:10:27 PM  
Wired has some weird date/time stamp lingo:

img.fark.net
 
2018-02-25 04:12:34 PM  

Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.


Change "nationalized" to "euthanized" and I'm right there with you
 
2018-02-25 04:15:34 PM  

Purple_Urkle: Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.

Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.


Benjamin Franklin was a rebel indeed, he liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed
 
2018-02-25 04:19:13 PM  

Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Purple_Urkle: Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.

Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.

Benjamin Franklin was a rebel indeed, he liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed


He was the Boobiesmaster General

And also the first person to be Postmaster General
 
2018-02-25 04:24:02 PM  

qorkfiend: Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Purple_Urkle: Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.

Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.

Benjamin Franklin was a rebel indeed, he liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed

He was the Boobiesmaster General

And also the first person to be Postmaster General


[whatyoudidthereiseeit.png]
 
2018-02-25 04:28:13 PM  

Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Purple_Urkle: Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.

Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.

Benjamin Franklin was a rebel indeed, he liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed


He wasn't a rebel for being naked. He thought that, medically, one had to be naked and let your skin breathe. He was like the worlds first homeopathic for believing made up shiat.
 
2018-02-25 04:31:22 PM  
Mitt Romneys Tax Return:
Zuckerberg has stated on more than one occasion that personal privacy is an outdated concept in the internet age. That was enough for me to never create a Facebook account.

Google, on the other hand... Oh baby, I just can't quit you. I want to, but I neeeeed you so much!


I'm the same way... no FB for me. I'l land on someone's page briefly that I really want to see, but as soon as their "sign up" crap pops up, I NOPE right out of there.

But Google... Gmail, Sheets, Drive, Keep... they got me. I do use an anonymizing front end to the search engine though... www.startpage.com.  I should remember to log out more frequently though, they are tracking every damn thing.
 
2018-02-25 04:34:02 PM  

Jaws_Victim: Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Purple_Urkle: Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.

Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.

Benjamin Franklin was a rebel indeed, he liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed

He wasn't a rebel for being naked. He thought that, medically, one had to be naked and let your skin breathe. He was like the worlds first homeopathic for believing made up shiat.


It's a song.
Tenacious D - The government totally sucks
Youtube ZhGaJGs1AQU
 
2018-02-25 04:36:50 PM  
Oh for farks sake, people stop commenting on shiat like it's the biggest scandal ever when you barely understand what's going on.

Facebook, like Google and most ad platforms, wants the ads they show to be engaging and get clicks. If the ads are engaging, they sell more ads. Also, you, as the customer, are more likely to like the ads. If you like the ads and engage with them, you're less likely to get an ad blocker or complain.

So, in order to get higher quality ads, they give ads a score of how likely a customer is to interact positively with that ad (and the page it leads to). Then it applies a penalty to bad scores. This isn't some malevolent Machiavellian plot to conspire with the Russians. It's a commonly known system that's been around since basically the beginning of these platforms and is in place to make user experience better. If Clinton's web team couldn't figure out how to make better ads, that's on them. This is a basic farking concept in digital advertising. Nothing unfair or inappropriate was done here. The rules were well known and applied equally and evenly. Trump's team just played a better game. And I say this as a full-on Clinton supporter.
 
2018-02-25 04:37:10 PM  

qorkfiend: Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Purple_Urkle: Nurglitch: Sites like Facebook and Twitter should be nationalized.

Tempting but that's something Putin wants and it's it's why the Kremlin has been trying to use social media and the wiki format to hurt us.

Trick us into clamping down on free speech by using it to hurt us. 

I wouldn't be against the government launching it's own clones of Facebook, Twitter, et cetera. Competition is good.

Even Benjamin Franklin was a shiatposting troll. His Fark handle was Silence Dogood.

Benjamin Franklin was a rebel indeed, he liked to get naked while he smoked on the weed

He was the Boobiesmaster General

And also the first person to be Postmaster General


Nice. Filter joke FTW
 
2018-02-25 04:38:04 PM  

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Crewmannumber6: So casting Eisenberg was intentional. Zuckerberg IS Lex Luthor

Zuckerberg has stated on more than one occasion that personal privacy is an outdated concept in the internet age. That was enough for me to never create a Facebook account.

Google, on the other hand... Oh baby, I just can't quit you. I want to, but I neeeeed you so much!


Yeah, I deleted Facebook a while ago.  I do still have messenger, and I'm not naïve enough to think that FB isn't tracking me through that, but I'm thinking I need to move away from that too.

Google is a lot more problematic.  I dropped them for search a while ago and now use DuckDuckGo pretty exclusively.  The two killer apps they have for me are email and maps/navigation.

I haven't switched away from Gmail yet because I don't want to switch to a different free service and end up right back in the same privacy quandary with someone else.  So I'll eventually bite the bullet and pay for a more private email service.

Navigation is also going to take a little expenditure.  I'll probably end up getting an old-school stand-alone GPS as a replacement, then downgrade to a dumb phone for calls and texts.
 
2018-02-25 04:42:24 PM  

Znuh: Once we found out that Yuri Milner gave Facebook 100 Million, and that that money was essentially steered by the Kremlin, all bets are off.

Facebook is complicit and was willingly a cockholster of the Russians.


I remember the $100K of Russian money Facebook copped to, and thought... "psssht... big deal".  But check out Mr. Milner and his shell-company-a-Go-Go:  NY Times
 
2018-02-25 04:45:23 PM  

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Skyking Skyking Do Not Answer: wademh:

Goal one is to make Facebook a huge part of people's lives. More people, and more time per person.

I deactivated Facebook earlier in the week.  Just tired of it.  I worried for a bit that I'd miss out on something.   But I feel better for not reading all the political memes and gun arguments.

I get enough of that here, but it's by choice. Who the fark wants to see all that shiat when I just want to look at a friend's vacation pictures.


It's different for me here on fark rather than facebook because none of you are my little brother, who's always been a rotten, conniving shiat, suddenly become a moral, responsible man simply by virtue of the memes he posts.  He's not fooling anybody.
 
2018-02-25 04:45:49 PM  

Lusiphur: Oh for farks sake, people stop commenting on shiat like it's the biggest scandal ever when you barely understand what's going on.

Facebook, like Google and most ad platforms, wants the ads they show to be engaging and get clicks. If the ads are engaging, they sell more ads. Also, you, as the customer, are more likely to like the ads. If you like the ads and engage with them, you're less likely to get an ad blocker or complain.

So, in order to get higher quality ads, they give ads a score of how likely a customer is to interact positively with that ad (and the page it leads to). Then it applies a penalty to bad scores. This isn't some malevolent Machiavellian plot to conspire with the Russians. It's a commonly known system that's been around since basically the beginning of these platforms and is in place to make user experience better. If Clinton's web team couldn't figure out how to make better ads, that's on them. This is a basic farking concept in digital advertising. Nothing unfair or inappropriate was done here. The rules were well known and applied equally and evenly. Trump's team just played a better game. And I say this as a full-on Clinton supporter.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-25 04:45:49 PM  

Dumski: ecmoRandomNumbers: Tampermonkey & FB Purity.

Also, I've pared my "friends" list quite a bit since the election. Lots of Mormon Republicans just had to go.

Yup. Someone here advised me to use FB Purity. That, and dropping several groups makes it more tolerable now, but still only on it 5 min per day, if that.


I used to be on facebook all the time, and viewed my page as a wannabe news editor, posting quite a bit, especially about causes that were near and dear to me.

Nowadays, I just go on rarely, and mostly to talk to a friend or keep tab with a family member.

deleting it all would be a headache and would set my family to wondering so I just let it go.
 
2018-02-25 04:47:46 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: Tampermonkey & FB Purity.

Also, I've pared my "friends" list quite a bit since the election. Lots of Mormon Republicans just had to go.


What exactly does FB Purity do?
 
2018-02-25 04:48:13 PM  

Dumski: ecmoRandomNumbers: Tampermonkey & FB Purity.

Also, I've pared my "friends" list quite a bit since the election. Lots of Mormon Republicans just had to go.

Yup. Someone here advised me to use FB Purity. That, and dropping several groups makes it more tolerable now, but still only on it 5 min per day, if that.


So, much as I despise the tracking and targeted ads and political crap on FB, what really bothered me most about it was just how often I'd notice my hand slipping into my pocket to pull out my phone and check my FB feed.  It was exactly like how Tolkien talks about Bilbo or Frodo unconsciously playing with the One Ring in their pocket and needing it to be there all the time.

Getting rid of all the ad crap and upping the quality level of what appears on my feed would only make that worse.

That's the biggest reason why I ditched FB.  All those little dopamine hits you get from it.  FB, especially in its ideal form, is psychologically unhealthy.  It's basically a drug.  That's why I got rid of it, and also why I'm in less of a hurry to purge Google.  Google just rapes my privacy.  Facebook rapes my mind.
 
2018-02-25 04:55:32 PM  

Bonzo_1116: What exactly does FB Purity do?


Browser addon.

It's got a whole pile of small blocking functions for various bits of Facebook, so that you can custom-trim whatever FB trash you find annoying.
 
2018-02-25 04:57:46 PM  
They don't charge more, the system reacts to shares, likes, and comments. If someone shares or makes a comment, the sponsored post might show up in a few dozen strangers newsfeeds without paying. And everything Trump made the suckers caught in the focused campaigns react in some way. Clinton was the meh candidate, not worth commenting on.
 
2018-02-25 05:01:42 PM  

Lusiphur: Oh for farks sake, people stop commenting on shiat like it's the biggest scandal ever when you barely understand what's going on.

Facebook, like Google and most ad platforms, wants the ads they show to be engaging and get clicks. If the ads are engaging, they sell more ads. Also, you, as the customer, are more likely to like the ads. If you like the ads and engage with them, you're less likely to get an ad blocker or complain.

So, in order to get higher quality ads, they give ads a score of how likely a customer is to interact positively with that ad (and the page it leads to). Then it applies a penalty to bad scores. This isn't some malevolent Machiavellian plot to conspire with the Russians. It's a commonly known system that's been around since basically the beginning of these platforms and is in place to make user experience better. If Clinton's web team couldn't figure out how to make better ads, that's on them. This is a basic farking concept in digital advertising. Nothing unfair or inappropriate was done here. The rules were well known and applied equally and evenly. Trump's team just played a better game. And I say this as a full-on Clinton supporter.


What criteria was used in determining what is more engaging? Lies and hate mongering can generate clicks but is that who should the ad that denigrates the brand get the discount? Did they actually get more clicks and generate more revenue than the Clinton ads would have?

Without transparency it sure looks like a scam to support one side over the other.

The Clinton campaign's ads probably weren't as enticing because of integrity and honesty but I suspect it really didn't matter.
 
2018-02-25 05:05:14 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Lusiphur: Oh for farks sake, people stop commenting on shiat like it's the biggest scandal ever when you barely understand what's going on.

Facebook, like Google and most ad platforms, wants the ads they show to be engaging and get clicks. If the ads are engaging, they sell more ads. Also, you, as the customer, are more likely to like the ads. If you like the ads and engage with them, you're less likely to get an ad blocker or complain.

So, in order to get higher quality ads, they give ads a score of how likely a customer is to interact positively with that ad (and the page it leads to). Then it applies a penalty to bad scores. This isn't some malevolent Machiavellian plot to conspire with the Russians. It's a commonly known system that's been around since basically the beginning of these platforms and is in place to make user experience better. If Clinton's web team couldn't figure out how to make better ads, that's on them. This is a basic farking concept in digital advertising. Nothing unfair or inappropriate was done here. The rules were well known and applied equally and evenly. Trump's team just played a better game. And I say this as a full-on Clinton supporter.

What criteria was used in determining what is more engaging? Lies and hate mongering can generate clicks but is that who should the ad that denigrates the brand get the discount? Did they actually get more clicks and generate more revenue than the Clinton ads would have?

Without transparency it sure looks like a scam to support one side over the other.

The Clinton campaign's ads probably weren't as enticing because of integrity and honesty but I suspect it really didn't matter.


In English...fixing a sentence

Lies and hate mongering can generate clicks but  should you sell to the ad owners that denigrate your brand.
 
2018-02-25 05:10:21 PM  

Skyking Skyking Do Not Answer: wademh:

Goal one is to make Facebook a huge part of people's lives. More people, and more time per person.

I deactivated Facebook earlier in the week.  Just tired of it.  I worried for a bit that I'd miss out on something.   But I feel better for not reading all the political memes and gun arguments.


I signed up for Fakebook in 2012 and deactivated my account in 2015. I've had no temptation to go back. I'm as happy now as I was before those three strange years of self-importance.
 
2018-02-25 05:25:54 PM  
I have family overseas and it's a good way to keep up with everyone is why I'm still active on Facebook
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report