Slashdot Mirror
MySpace Treads Carefully With "HyperTargeting"
Ian Lamont writes "MySpace is preparing to boost its advertising systems, by launching a targeted ad platform called HyperTargeting and creating a Web-based system that lets vendors purchase ads without dealing with human sales teams. HyperTargeting will 'look at a person's interests listed on their public profile and then classify the user into particular interest-specific categories.' MySpace claims that early tests resulted in a 300 percent increase in the number of ad click-throughs. The company apparently learned a lot from Facebook's earlier experiences with Beacon — MySpace members will be able to opt out of HyperTargeting, according to the company."
It sounds like they haven't learned from Facebook. I thought the whole problem is that Facebook had an opt-out rather than opt-in system. This supposed improvement is also an opt-out system.
If done properly, this really isn't a bad thing for users. It only uses information put on your public profile. You really shouldn't have anything incriminating or overly personal on there anyway. I mean, if you're willing to share it with strangers (I assume that's what "public" means), why would it be a problem for an ad company to see it? That's not to say that there aren't nefarious uses to which this kind of thing could be put. But just from what I read in the article, there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem.
Myspace has very low ad rates for contextual ads, and very low quality advertisers. The typical Google AdSense ad is something like "Free MySpace Backgrounds, Profile Layouts, Smileys all in one place. Download them all for Free!"
Their banner ads tend to be from major consumer brands, and are probably more valuable than the contextual ads.
Increased click-through rate is not necessarily a win. Remember, there's that 10-15% of Internet users who produce 50% of the click-throughs, but don't buy much. (That's probably Myspace's demographic.) The advertiser problem today is to make those users go away, instead of paying Google money for their clicks.
As the metrics get better, it's becoming clearer that what's good for the advertiser is quite different from what's good for the online ad delivery service. The advertiser wants a sale; the ad service wants a click. This is starting to be a problem for Google as advertisers realize that the "Google content network" often has negative value and opt out.
Web pages have ads? That's news to me.
Its just an extension of demographic advertising, augmented with data-mining of more content based information (such as what bands you say you like).
Yahoo does the same sort of thing, and so would Google if they had more of a portal (and pretty sure they will build user models from your searches eventually - what do you think Google Toolbar's motivation is). Yahoo's is more subtle (and more insidious even) as they are tracking your page views on the Yahoo site, and building a model of you in terms of things like finance, football, blah.
MySpace's targeting is based on what YOU EXPLICITLY SAY about yourself in public. For sure, if you're profile is completely private, then perhaps they shouldn't mine your data for targeting, but frankly, its really hardly an invasion of privacy (unlike sharing your video rental/purchases would be cf Facebook). It will probably take into account groups and bands you link to.
It should result in better ads for users (assuming you are willing to assume ads for free hosting is a reasonable trade off).
Winton
It'd be great if myspace could use the same technology to help their *users* find people with similar interests, instead you have to wade through a sea of groups, forums, and crappy search results. lol. I guess advertisers come first, it's a business afterall.
On another note, damn I hate context ads. Everywhere I go Google serves up "meet hot local shemales" ads, because I happen to be transgender and that's probably the most profitable keyword on my profile.... everywhere, the same damn ad. It's like Google's some sort of overbearing e-pimp who doesn't take no for an answer. Bastards.
I'm so tired of that Slashdot rant that goes: "People don't block ads if they're targeted, because it's not as annoying." Targeted ads are *far* more annoying because they pick one expensive keyword and bombard you with it everywhere you go.
I suspect Myspace will be more of the same, but stupider. [Blocked!]
Tautologies, they are what they are.
I haven't used MySpace in a long time, but when I did, I was annoyed at how UN-targeted their ads were. I had listed lots of Christian music and writers in my profile, but was always getting skanky ads that bordered on obscene. Adblock didn't stop all of them.
At the time, I emailed them to say that they were wasting an opportunity and hacking off their users by ignoring the very profile information they had collected when it came to displaying ads.
I don't think privacy is as big a deal here as in say, Google searches. After all, you've already knowingly posted your profile information; what's the harm in them using it to give you ads you won't hate (as much)?