this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2023
143 points (97.4% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gloriousspearfish@feddit.dk 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (9 children)

This is one of the most interesting and fundemental discussions happening. Meta absolutely depends on being able to deliver targted ads towards users, it is a must for that business model.

So in the end it seems fair to ask users either to pay for the service costs, or accept the directed advertising.

What is even more interesting is what other ways this could work? How can a platform - in general, not just meta - provide a "free" service, without monetizing it with targeted advertising?

Are we going to have to get all users to pay for every little service we use? Are we willing to do that to avoid advertising? To avoiding targeting?

This outcome of this will be a lot more important than most people realise.

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 47 points 1 year ago

I'm not so sure that hyper targeted ads based on a ton of granular data about me is a requisite for modern business not to collapse in on itself.

Advertisers made do just fine for quite a long time only being able to target the sort of people that would probably be consuming a given magazine or TV show. Ok so this is an auto enthusiast magazine, so lets advertise auto parts. This is a parenting magazine so advertise baby stuff. Etc. Same thing can be done online.

They don't need to have a creepy level of information about us and if they do their business model maybe doesn't deserve to stay afloat.

[–] Vincent@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How can a platform - in general, not just meta - provide a β€œfree” service, without monetizing it with targeted advertising?

One option would be contextual advertising, rather than advertising based on tracking the user.

(Contextual, as in: if you're looking at a Formula 1 community, you might be interested in car-related products.)

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

Yep and contextual advertising has worked pretty much since advertising has been a thing.

[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 28 points 1 year ago

I think there is a key distinction here: providing ads is fine, but tracking users and sending them targeted ads requires explicit consent. Forcing them to consent to giving up that privacy or else paying is not a fair choice. It's not even financially fair either as meta is apparently making 80usd a year per user.

Why not give a choice to a user to get ads but not being tracked and not getting targeted advertisements? Where is that option?

When you pay meta, do they comit to stop tracking you or only stop showing you target ads? Because I certainly care about the tracking part and giving users the false sense of privacy because they pay is so disingenuous...

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Meta depends on free collection of user data. That data has value, their entire business model relies on not paying users fairly for the value they take.

You can't build a car without paying for the nuts and bolts. We should be paid, not the other way around.

[–] Bjornir@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

I mean, worst case Facebook disappears or become a pay only service. I am 100% ok with that, it has been proven times and times again that society, children, young adults, older adults, democracies would be far better off without it.

[–] nitefox@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

So in the end it seems fair to ask users either to pay for the service costs, or accept the directed advertising.

By asking to pay a sum they are practically pricing out your data, which you are basically selling. It sets a very dangerous precedent.

[–] albert180@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They just charge waaaay more than they would get from advertising

[–] gloriousspearfish@feddit.dk 1 points 11 months ago

I am not actually sure about that. I have done some ad campains on facebook, and with the price I see per. impression, if the average users sees 1000 ads or promotee posts a month, the the price is about right.

That is 33β…“ ads or sponsored posts the user will scroll past every day, I don't think that is unrealistic.

[–] bedrooms@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I explained my opinion here, but they can even pay the user and keep their business going.

[–] Mahlzeit@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Login-wall. But what's that? I can use a Google or Facebook account! Yay!

[–] bedrooms@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just a link to my comment in this thread, sorry. Not something so important but I think they should pay instead.

[–] Mahlzeit@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

No worries. I just thought it funny.