andrewducker: (Default)
[personal profile] andrewducker
From: [identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com
That's interesting. I don't particularly care who "fell" for it, the article is right that many communities do (and should) rely on trust. And I don't want this to become too common (cf. Neal Stephenson and Vernor Vinge books where pumping distorted information onto the web is a whole industry). But I think it is interesting to study under what circumstances it works and what circumstances it doesn't, to give us a greater idea of when to trust other information online.
From: [identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com
Ooh. The article actually had a link to a university page, which had a link to the original paper in an open access online journal. And it sounds like the experimental protocol was fine, the lack of explanation in the linked article notwithstanding :) So the effect seems (surprisingly to me) quite real!

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036671

Date: 2012-05-17 11:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bart-calendar.livejournal.com
I've never understood why so many companies are convinced that advertising on Facebook is a good investment.

It is so ridiculously easy to game the system on Facebook in order to get completely inappropriate and amusing ads.

I recently spent probably less than two hours time total over the course of three days and managed to get Facebook to the point where the only ads they sent me were for guides on how to make your own bullets, ads for shotguns and kits to build log cabins the woods to prepare for the coming Apocalypse.

How did I do so? By using Timeline to take credit for killing JFK, RFK and MLK and for the Patty Hearst kidnapping. (And listing my occupation as "Rumsfeld Black Ops.")

The only way their targeted advertising could possibly work is if people are always 100 percent honest with their Facebook posts (and who the fuck is 100 percent honest when posting stuff that will be seen by their peers, parents and whoever the fuck else they decided to "friend") and if people never, ever use irony, snark or sarcasm in their posts.


Edited Date: 2012-05-17 11:38 am (UTC)

Date: 2012-05-17 11:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com
OK, "Real Life: Dragons in the Murderdome" is totally replacing IRL and F2F for me now! :)

Date: 2012-05-17 11:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-pawson.livejournal.com
Because Facebook and social media in general are being touted by marketing "gurus" as the be all and end all of the internet. "Social media" is the new "Web 2.0".

Also people keep repeating that Facebook is far better at targeting ads because they have so much personal data. Yeah they do, but Google, Bing etc. know what I am searching for. The chances of me clicking on an ad for a specific product I just searched for are far greater than me clicking on a random tech ad Facebook threw onto the screen because it thought that I was interested in Computers.

Date: 2012-05-17 12:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] naath.livejournal.com
Standardised testing:
By definition, about half of all teachers will add value, and the other half will not."

No. This is not a question about students scoring above the median (which would be half/half) it's about students scoring above what they are predicted - you could in principle get ALL students to improve on predicted achievement.

“They did phenomenally,” Abbott said. “If they did so well, I don’t see how they can say I added no value whatsoever.”

If that is how well they were predicted to do, then you may not have added much value; although you presumably have added to their knowledge, because the prediction assumes they will gain knowledge. If a school selects on ability-to-do-well-on-exams the students doing well on exams in subsequent years is not a surprise; it is expected, and this sort of teacher evaluation works very poorly in that circumstance.

Date: 2012-05-17 12:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nancylebov.livejournal.com
I've never understood why so many companies are convinced that advertising on Facebook is a good investment.

Because people in business get bored, just like anyone else.

Date: 2012-05-17 01:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cairmen.livejournal.com
Said Pizza company, like most people, did their Facebook advertising completely wrong. I'm not surprised their ROI was through the floor.

There are ways to make money out of Facebook - I know people making thousands of dollars a *day* (self-reported, but on industry forums where there's no real reason to lie) using Facebook ads. But you need a lot more testing - and, sadly, a big cash loss in the beginning - to do it.

(In the case of the Pizza Guys, I'd strongly suspect that their landing page was to blame. Their self-reported CTR isn't awful, but a conversion rate of less than 1% from a click is, well, abysmal.)

Still, I doubt any serious PPC experts are going to be complaining about all the bad press Facebook ads are getting. Bad press = lower ad costs.
Edited Date: 2012-05-17 01:24 pm (UTC)

Date: 2012-05-17 01:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] momentsmusicaux.livejournal.com
Case in point: Google spams me with ads for hosted development cloud stuff targeted at the CRM system I work with, because my emails are full of mentions of that.

Facebook hows me ads so irrelevant I can barely remember them. Oh apart from Russian girls, possibly because my profile has said I'm single for long lengths of time?

Date: 2012-05-17 01:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-pawson.livejournal.com
You are right, Google does do content based ads which it calls "adsense" and are displayed both in their own products like (Gmail and Youtube) and on third party websites. But those ads are very cheap compared to their adwords (search term) advertising, simply because they are ineffective by comparison. I don't know what proportion of their revenues come from the non-adwords ads, but I suspect it is a small percentage.

Date: 2012-05-17 05:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] octopoid-horror.livejournal.com
The article about the gay President brings to mind the conversation we had a while ago about whether a single man (or indeed woman) could be elected President of the US or Prime Minister of the UK.

Date: 2012-05-17 08:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] iainjcoleman.livejournal.com
Did the conversation encompass Ted Heath?

Date: 2012-05-17 09:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] octopoid-horror.livejournal.com
Yes - but also about how there was always huge publicity around any prospective leader these days about how their role in their family and suchlike.
From: [identity profile] snarlish.livejournal.com
I find this really interesting, too, especially in testing out blatant statements against historical record.

I've sprinkled some of my factuals on Everything2 with utter tripe with little reaction. Mr. O'Leary had 15 minutes of internet fame there when his article on Pete Doherty was picked up as fact by an eager DJ: http://everything2.com/title/Pete+Doherty?author_id=697763#bol

February 2026

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 2425262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 24th, 2026 09:26 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios