Facebook Bans AdSense In Apps

An anonymous reader writes "Three days ago Facebook finalized their list of accepted ad networks for use within Facebook Apps; AdSense being an (unsurprising?) omission from the list, stating that any missing ad network had yet to agree to the Facebook TOS. Facebook developers were quick to point out the only losers in this cold-war between Facebook and Google are the developers themselves. Other devs go on to clarify that the reputations of some of the accepted networks is shady at best, leaving developers with sub-par options to monetize their work on the Facebook platform."

Comments

Re:Slashdot bias

[causality]

I love how Facebook can't do anything right as far as Slashdot is concerned. If they block ad networks, their evil...if they don't their also evil. Come on people!

Yes there is a definite pro-Facebook bias around here. Otherwise there'd never be so many Facebook stories.

Bear in mind that the very worst thing you can do to a company like Facebook is to ignore them.

To see their name in news headlines on so many sites tells them that they are important, that people are waiting with bated breath to see what they will do next, that people think it's worth talking about. It's what helps keep their brand in mind and ultimately helps to drive traffic to their site.

Other devs go on to clarify that the reputations of some of the accepted networks is shady at best, leaving developers with sub-par options to monetize their work on the Facebook platform.

If Google is willing to partner with Facebook for advertising and Facebook thinks having a pissing contest is more important, then to any would-be Facebook developers: doesn't that tell you what their priorities are? Their priorities certainly don't include you. If you have skill and talent and a good work ethic, why not go someplace where your efforts are better appreciated?

Re:Slashdot bias

[causality]

If they tick off advertisers, then who are they going to sell your information to?

I imagine advertisers would overlook a ton of BS in order to gain access to (what they'd perceive as) such a treasure trove of personal information. The prize is too tempting to walk away from that easily.

Developers are a different story. If Facebook insists on alienating them, effectively using them as pawns in their pissing contest with Google, they might eventually get tired of that. Most people don't like being jerked around, especially for no good reason. If they finally go elsewhere, Facebook will miss them when they're gone.

Re:Slashdot bias

[Donniedarkness]

If they finally go elsewhere, Facebook will miss them when they're gone.

Very true. I believe 100% that the biggest reason that Facebook has grown to the size that it is today is because of the (mostly shitty) applications.

People no longer play Farmville because it's on Facebook-- they go to Facebook TO play Farmville.

It makes me sad to say that.

Re:Facebook's demands

[Maestro4k]

The TOS "advertising providers" have to comply with are very very strict. I doubt Google will agree to things like these:

[...] upon request, the Advertising Provider agrees to provide Facebook the names of and contact information for any employees and/or contractors and to specify those employees and/or contractors involved in designing, targeting, serving advertising related products/services, or otherwise providing any services covered by this Agreement.

That's rather draconian, I'm not sure why any ad company would agree to those terms. It's a bit unreasonable for Facebook to demand the names and contact info of everyone involved in "designing, targeting, serving advertising related products/services". Does this mean that the companies who have agreed will have to fork over the contact info for every ad buyer that provides pre-designed ads? (In other words, nearly all ad buyers.) Sure sounds like it.

Frankly this sounds like an attempt by Facebook to get the names of employees to headhunt for an eventual Facebook-owned Ad network, as well as making sure they have plenty of contacts at the companies who buy ads as well. This is seriously abusive, even by Facebook's normal behavior. I suspect any ad companies who have agreed to this already are going to seriously regret it in the future.

Now as to me personally, I don't give a damn what they do here, I'm going to continue to adblock on Facebook because all the ads Facebook themselves run are obnoxious and annoying.

Facebook Apps and privacy

[bmo]

I don't use any Facebook apps at all. Ever.

Why?

Because every "click to confirm" dialog contains requests for information tantamount to anally raping my account with no lube and no reach-around.

Maybe, just maybe, if I had more control over the granularity of such requests, I *might* just consider using a Facebook game or something. But the way things are right now, nope, not gonna happen.

And if you're a Facebook app developer that is intent on anally raping Facebook user accounts, die in a fire.

--
BMO

Re:Facebook Apps and privacy

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

"Social Networking" certainly, by design, involves some disclosure of certain information to certain people. That's the whole point. However, there are more and less privacy-hostile mechanisms for achieving the ends that users typically want.

When it comes to Facebook's arrangement of privacy-related options, settings, and design, they are either actively malicious or so incompetent that their handling is indistinguishable from malice.

Good, now facebook should ban all ads

[Cito]

Nobody likes ads anyhow, I cut cable tv 9 years ago and have pirated ever since due to spam and the massive amounts of ads that pop culture has turned into. I use adblock, peerguardian, updated blocklists and null routes in my router to avoid spam at all costs... several years ago people were as massively anti ads as I am now, but somehow the new 'politically correct' thing to do is to embrace ads for some odd reason and people actually defend ads nowdays... Sad really. There are many alternate ways for developers to monetize their applications... I ran a forum in the 90's on "donation ware" with ability to pay monthly for additional privileges like uploading files / etc, and it was plenty to pay for itself plus extra in pocket to help pay the bills. People need to quit settling for ads and actively block all ads and protest media that spam by using alternate means to aquire said media without ads :) 9+ years and counting and in those 9 years I have never installed antivirus software (never a virus/malware/spyware thanks to massive firewall/peerguardian/adblock and similar in past ), or had to bother with pesky 40 minutes of commercials to watch a 20 minute show. :) yet people like me have become the "bad guy" when just 5 years ago those that employed spam, ads, commercial networks were the "bad guy"

Re:Slashdot bias

[causality]

As intelligence goes up, happiness often goes down. See, I made a graph. I make a lot of graphs...

God damn, as a tendency this one is the straight truth.

Intelligence makes happiness more difficult to achieve. It also makes it more meaningful and more deeply appreciated once attained. It is solid and meaningful then, not fleeting and transient like the happiness (i.e. indulgence) of too many.