undefined | Better HN

0 pointsFridgeSeal7y ago0 comments

We do people who advocate for advertising insist so hard that pervasive tracking needs to be a part of it. If pages were serving up plain, static images, probably free of pervasive tracking, I wouldn’t feel the need to take the nuclear approach to ad tracking. Advertisers have really wrought this upon themselves.

I’m actually happy to pay for the media I consume, I actually do pay for some things, but nobody gets their advertising/trackers let through because the whole industry is patently untrustworthy. If publishers want ad revenue from me, they can remove pervasive tracking, it until then, they get nothing.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

joshmanders7y ago· 1 in thread

> If pages were serving up plain, static images, probably free of pervasive tracking, I wouldn’t feel the need to take the nuclear approach to ad tracking.

Because people who pay for these ads need to justify that the ROI is there. They need to know how many views, clicks, and other stuff. Just like you need to know many things in different areas.

I'm not defending terrible offenders like Google, but people don't just say "Yeah sure, let me just spend thousands of dollars on an ad and HOPE it gets clicks and views like you claim it will"

ForHackernews7y ago

> "Yeah sure, let me just spend thousands of dollars on an ad and HOPE it gets clicks and views like you claim it will"

Literally how marketing worked from the invention of the printing press right up until 2002 or so. It's obviously a sustainable business model.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse