56
submitted 1 week ago by wuphysics87@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

In terms of cost of an ad to earnings, and how well, even a targeted ad, can hold a viewer's attention. Have we just become numb to ads? Does targeted advertising actually yield better results?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pathwonder@kopitalk.net 9 points 1 week ago

Super effective!

It's not so much that ads can only sell you something anymore. They're able to sell your personal details and identity when abused.

I believe the issue has been written on even prior to the 2025 article from Wired.

Data brokers are basically form centralized American platforms which carry immense databases about its users. These demographics can essentially be used to target high value targets. These can include government employees, members of military, and other persons of interest.

These brokers use Mobile IDs to allow advertisers to micro-target people with their habits, browsing fingerprint, and purchase habits. Even if these companies say they don't associate identities with these Mobile IDs, the brokers can cross-reference enough information to basically de-anonymize a target.

Plus with influencers these days, many don't disclose if what they do is sponsored or part of a greater outreach campaign. You're basically stuck wondering if you're getting targeted or astroturfed.

https://www.wired.com/story/google-dv360-banned-audience-segments-national-security/

[-] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago

many dont disclose if what they do is sponsored

I assume they all are. If they say "OK so I just got and..." I immediately disregard anything they have to say.

[-] bluemoon@piefed.social 1 points 6 days ago

this reminds me of many instances of undesireable policymaking where algorithms just connected state personell with agendas of politicians through the black box of social media... like a judge who got the thoughts of a politician on certain rulings which is illegal in nordic countries. like the message of "hey what if climate activists are obstructing capital ventures in law? can a judge try that?" is illegal for a politician to ask of a judge here, yet through social media it happened. she didn't see that politician's exact words but was bombarded by posts and probably ads that shaped the way she thought about her job as a juridical arbiter of lives. left uncorrelated in mainstream

this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2025
56 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

51094 readers
422 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS