| |||||||||||||
Do Not Track Does Not ConquerDo Not Track Does Not ConquerPosted Oct 20, 2012 20:28 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: Do Not Track Does Not Conquer by sfeam Parent article: Do Not Track Does Not Conquer
There was a fascinating article in the NYT earlier this year documenting that advertisers correctly know that shoppers hate to be targeted. OK, I read it and what one advertiser really concluded was this: We have the capacity to send every customer an ad blooklet, specifically designed for them, that says, "Here's everything you bought last week and a coupon for it." ... With the pregnancy products, though, we learned that some women react badly.That's a long way from saying advertisers know everyone hates targeted ads. In fact, it makes a good case for advertisers wanting a credible "do not track" header from browsers. Maybe with that, they could filter out those women who would react badly. (The article also talked about public relations fallout, which again might be counteracted if prospects had a way to shut off the targeting, even if they rarely use it).
(Log in to post comments)
Do Not Track Does Not Conquer Posted Oct 21, 2012 10:23 UTC (Sun) by bosyber (subscriber, #84963) [Link]
your quote:
"Here's everything you bought last week and a coupon for it." shows a fundamental issue with those targeted ads (heh, originally I found I wrote attacks, hm):
Why would people want an ad for something they bought already? Hardly ever unless it is only about weekly shopping. And then they don't need to be enticed to buy it as it is already on their shopping list, evidently. For one-time-only buys it is just as useless for the opposite reason.
In my experience, that makes it more annoying - yes targeted, but too late/useless. To make it useful, they'd need to predict buys. And that can be pretty creepy, like with the pregnancy stuff. If they get it right, which is really hard.
The Amazon 'other people that looked at/bought this also bought Y' is occasionally useful, when the items deal with a specific well defined topic (say learning about a certain programming language), but even there it has a lot of misses. For fiction it can be really off-putting even.
Do Not Track Does Not Conquer Posted Oct 21, 2012 17:27 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] Why would people want an ad for something they bought already? Maybe I didn't include enough context, but I'm sure what the advertiser was talking about was consumables, such as groceries and cleaning supplies. I can easily believe coupons for those work, because without the coupon, the person might delay restocking, and consequently consuming, or might go to a different store to restock. Obviously, the system isn't perfect. Sometimes the price you pay for sending someone a coupon that works is you have to send him 5 that don't. Amazon kept pressing me to buy a certain model of garbage can for a month after I bought it - from Amazon. But I know the program that did that works on average.
Do Not Track Does Not Conquer Posted Oct 22, 2012 6:32 UTC (Mon) by bosyber (subscriber, #84963) [Link]
Okay, I see, that might work then. Though as you say, it still is tricky to get right.
I suppose that we live in different areas (I live in the Netherlands) - I know hardly anyone who seriously uses coupons - sure we may watch what the advertising leaflets of the grocery stores have on offer and it might have some influence on where we buy what, but to be honest, the weather and other activities have more influence. Different experiences for different people I guess :)
|
|||||||||||||