Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Essentially Has Been Telling Advertisers It Can Reach More People Than Actually Exist, Analyst Finds (marketwatch.com)
Facebook claims its ads have the potential to reach more people than recent U.S. census data shows exist, and that's troublesome for one analyst, who thinks third-party measurement services stand to benefit. From a report: Recently, Pivotal Research Group analyst Brian Wieser was intrigued by a trade publication study in Australia that said Facebook was claiming to reach 1.7 million more 16- to 39-year olds than actually existed in the country, according to Australian census data. In reproducing the study for the U.S., Wieser said Facebook's Ads Manager claims it can potentially reach 41 million 18- to 24-year-olds, 60 million 25- to 34-year-olds, and 61 million 35- to 49-year-olds. The problem arises when Wieser pulls up U.S. Census data from a year ago, showing 31 million 18- to 24-year-olds, 45 million 25- to 34-year-olds, and 61 million 35- to 49-year-olds. The upshot: Where is Facebook getting the extra 25 million 18- to 34-year-olds that the U.S. census did not count? "Conversations with agency executives on this topic indicate to us that the gap between Facebook and census figures is not widely known," Wieser said. "While Facebook's measurement issues won't necessarily deter advertisers from spending money with Facebook, they will help traditional TV sellers justify existing budget shares and could restrain Facebook's growth in video ad sales on the margins."
Advertising/marketing should be about 0.001% its current worth.
Honest question.
I'm thinking the Facebook numbers are closer to reality. After all, there are a LOT of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. at this point, and also probably a lot of people using some kind of internet service that appears to be from the U.S. to make use of U.S. media services. All of those Facebook would see, but not the census...
The most interesting thing to me is it's only the younger demographic counts that are off; for the older ranges, the values match.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Do the authors of the article really not know that people use fake ages, have two accounts, etc.
forgot to take into account all people with multiple facebook accounts
*demographic figures assume Everett Many-Worlds model of universe
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
(Oh for fucks sake, we're an existing software company with a new product)
Anyway, we have no CAPTCHA/robot check on our sign up form. And our execs love to brag about the userbase numbers both internally and to investors/partners. I'm fairly certain 90% of the users are bots.
Fake accounts, multiple accounts, fake information such as age/etc.
#DeleteFacebook
That's because you're reaching potential FB accounts, not people. There are many, many fake accounts on FB. I know of lots of people who have abandoned accounts and created new ones - either because they lost their password, or were being harassed, or because they just didn't know any better (my dad, who is not a big computer user, created a second account early on when he thought he was just logging in. It's still there, just not being used). As others have said, many people lie about their ages - at first FB would not allow minors to have accounts, so they would simply say they were at least 18. So that age range of demographics has to be quite skewed as well, especially the 18-25 range.
Better known as 318230.
"Facebook claims its ads have the potential to reach more people than recent U.S. census data shows exist"
Possibly that's because more people exist outside the US... Perhaps even more than exist inside the US!
Look, everyone has:
school FB that your parents can see
gaming FB that you use a gmail account for
sports or arts or news FB that you surf stupid cat vids on
in each group you connect to different people. You never post stuff to the first one that is really you.
in the second one you only post cosplay or fake pics so nobody can figure it's you.
in the third one you post a pic of a fuzzy animal or a truck or some animorph.
Are you guys so new to the Net that you don't know this?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
So they are counting the bots and people with multiple accounts. AI-s are people too aren't they? If I have multiple personalities, can't someone use which ever account they feel comfortable with at the time. Can't we all accept each other without judging. Why should we let mere-biology facts dictate our biases? ;^)
Or are we supposed to be hating on this (sometimes I forget, it's so complicated)...
That could potentially explain the US numbers. But as far as I know Australia doesn't have quite the same issue with border control. The majority of illegals in Australia are people who overstay visas and that is about 65,000. No where close to 1.7 million, though census data is estimated, so that is more likely the issue.
You think I tell the government how many children my wife gave birth to at home without tax ID numbers? Facebook probably has better census data incidentally than the government does directly.
It's all the sub-13 yr olds that lied about their age to get an account.
I'm neither surprised nor upset that these scoundrels rip-off each other.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
There are actually very few undocumented immigrants in the United States. The millions of illegal immigrants in the country are mostly documented in one or more databases.
More likely the issue is Facebook counting fake/duplicate accounts, combined with profit motive. There is no law stating you can only have one account.
Estimating things isn't hard and certainly wouldn't be of the magnitude Facebook shows.
The census isn't over 30% off dude, just think about it for a minute, isn't the more likely explanation that the discrepancy is from fake accounts? It's like you've never gotten a fake friend request
Nail, Head, Hit!
You have accurately diagnosed the issue.
There is no law stating you can only have one account.
No, but it's a violation of your user contract with FB.
Nobody faked being an overweight career focused 45 year old.
Plenty of reasons to be a fake 18 year old party girl.
No, but it's a violation of your user contract with FB.
Ha ha ha. Now pull the other one.
It amazes me how many 'Murikans are perfectly okay with facebook/google/etc tracking them for profit, but if the evil guvurnment does it, they freak out.
I trust the government a lot more than these for profit companies that screw their users for pennies.
This reminds me of the Democratic Party: Vote early and vote often. It almost worked for Hillary.
You are negating yourself here. According to you FB has lot of foreigners who appear to be US people to get US media services. So they are not US people. If my product is limited to US, the FB numbers are deceiving as they include foreigners.
I'm thinking the Facebook numbers are closer to reality. After all, there are a LOT of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. at this point,
Gee, if only someone had ever tried to quantify the number of illegal immigrants in the US...
#DeleteChrome
People fake their age on FB. Some young ones want to access without parental restrictions and may put age 18 and some older people might put age lower.
Defunct accounts: People opened account and don't remember or lost access (password forgotten and email provider went bust) and opened a new one
Duplicate accounts - some folks are using duplicate accounts for whatever reasons
Fake accounts - some accounts are just fake.
Facebook has over a billion users - it's not just Americans who are "perfectly okay" with being tracked for profit.
#DeleteChrome
Why do people assume everyone has just one Facebook account? I've created throw-away accounts myself. Yes, Facebook would like to sell you on the total number of accounts created, rather than the number that are actually being used... but that would result in a lot less ad revenue, wouldn't it? My mother has a Facebook account that she literally hasn't logged into since 2007... but I'm sure Facebook still counts her as a customer! (She has alzheimer's, I'm pretty sure she's forgotten the password by now.)
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Agreed, but it's the Americans who freak out over the evil NSA while sharing everything with facebook.
Remember the leaked chat logs - "they trust me, dumb fucks."
And remember how often Facebook has been caught slipping changes into their privacy settings and policies?
Unsurprised.
FTW!!!
DACA...is CACA
Why does anything I said imply I'm OK with anyone tracking me?
I'm just saying Facebook is at this point WAY MORE EFFECTIVE at tracking than the government is at recording people.
Do you really doubt that?
People raise good points about fake accounts, but I'm sure Facebook is accounting for those to some degree also. If you don't think Facebook knows which alt accounts are from the same person you are dreaming.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That could potentially explain the US numbers. But as far as I know Australia doesn't have quite the same issue with border control. The majority of illegals in Australia are people who overstay visas and that is about 65,000. No where close to 1.7 million, though census data is estimated, so that is more likely the issue.
Australia has recently done a full five yearly census, so census data is NOT just estimated.
Having advertised on Facebook, I don't trust them any further than I can throw them.
If the site I was advertising really had the tens of thousands of clicks they claimed to have sent to my site, then the business in question (a small local restaurant) would have had 100% name recognition in the geographical area. They were junk clicks.
Google clicks cost a lot more, but I believe them, if only for the smaller volume they could attract for the price.
My question,not being a facebook-er, is why does Slashdot have a facebook page? Who benefits?
" but it's the Americans who freak out over the evil NSA while they _get to choose_ what they 'share' or 'like' with facebook."
ftfy
Now advertising to illegal immigrants?
How many people have had facebook show up on their doorstep with guns and handcuffs?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Every below-the-age-limit child in facebook using countries has been lying about their age to Facebook in order to use the service. They are listed as being within the 16-39 year old age group when they are not. This has certainly been true of my own daughter for the past few years and explains the excess millions.
Census data doesn't include Facebook bots.
Obviously bots account for a significant portion of the numbers.
They are counting Democratic voters ;-)
love is just extroverted narcissism
I'm thinking the Facebook numbers are closer to reality. After all, there are a LOT of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. at this point, and also probably a lot of people using some kind of internet service that appears to be from the U.S. to make use of U.S. media services. All of those Facebook would see, but not the census...
Facebook doesn't see every single person in any demographic, so if Facebook's numbers are true, the real numbers are significantly higher than even what they claim.
Realistically, the census is almost certainly off and there are almost certainly many people who study how and how much.
Also realistically, Facebook is definitely full of shit.
But they do choose to share with face with facebook while freaking out about the NSA. The ones who choose not to share when they have a choice have a valid point. The facebook users who freak out about the NSA are idiots.
These must be the millions and millions of illegal aliens he spoke of! [/s]
*Nodding* yeah, you're right; 'troll accounts'.
Sock puppets are people too, my friend!
~ Mitt Romneyberg
Problem is advertising people really don't care. They are given money to spend and by god, they are going to spend it.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Only if they're incorporated.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I personally am more comfortable with facebook having access to my data than the government because facebook has no motivation to go on a fishing expedition and try and take away my liberty (to be fair, I don't think the government does either, but it's more likely).
A bank has access to my finances, but I wouldn't want to put them in a black box government bank. The bank has a motive to protect my money.
If it came out facebook was doing something truly nefarious with our data, they cease to exist, the government, not so much.
In theory the facebook data is protected by judicial oversight, the NSA data not as much (the part that is upsetting).
National Security Letters (part of what we freak out about) make the difference somewhat without meaning.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Foreigners pretending to live in USA.... just to throw off pesky marketing BS.
Nope they just need to register to vote.
The story behind Facebook can be found in "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook: A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal" by Ben Mezrich, which "The Social Network" movie was based on. "The Boy Kings: A Journey into the Heart of the Social Network" by Katherine Losse takes place after the movie and from a woman's perspective that I'm currently reading. The most recent Facebook-related book is "Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley" by Antonio Garcia Martinez, who sold his startup and engineers to Twitter while getting a job at Facebook in a three-way deal, and developed the ad system at Facebook that tracks both logged in and anonymous users with third-party demographic data.
Bots.
Please show me a copy of the legally signed and dated contract I have with Facebook for each of my 4 Facebook accounts and the one my ex made under my name, too.
Thanks!
I'm thinking the Facebook numbers are closer to reality.
And people like you get to vote...
Australia has recently done a full five yearly census, so census data is NOT just estimated.
And if you knew how well that went you wouldn't be so confident in the numbers...
The article doesn't indicate that the facebook numbers are for US customers reached.
This is like saying Coke says it has millions of customers, but there's only 5 people in my house, so how can that be possible?
It's entirely possible that there is a real issue here, but that's not indicated by the terrible article.
Who is considered an illegal immigrant varies a lot depending on politics.
With the DACA repeal we get 800,000 more illegal immigrants since they were previously considered legal.
Essentially people who says "I don't mind legal immigrants, it's the illegals I want to stop" are full of shit.
They just want every immigrant to be considered illegal and stop them.
Who cares if advertising people spend money on fake info?
Most nerds don't.
Advertisers aren't really hurt by it either. They keep statistics for how much ROI they get on different platforms.
They don't care if Facebook lies about their numbers or if it's just that the user base is less likely to buy.
All they care about is how many more customers do we get per dollar spent on Facebook.
The thing is that there is a delay on the statistics, so Facebook/Twitter/Twitch and other platforms can lure advertisers in by inflating their user base, but it is a temporary effect so they have to keep increasing the amount of fake accounts.
I doubt that either of them inflates the user numbers by themselves, it's just not worth it. They probably just don't care much about getting rid of fake accounts and bots.
I don't know if anyone on Facebook and Twitter is hurt by all the bots, but on Twitch the legit streamers gets less revenue because of it.
Who cares if advertising people spend money on fake info?
Because it's money that could be spent elsewhere. Like compensation for employees, or new machinery, or bigger offices, etc. Or it could not be spent at all. Who do you think pays for this? You do. You seem perfectly happy paying more for goods and services so that companies can throw your money away. Well done, consumer.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
They keep statistics for how much ROI they get on different platforms.
No they don't. They can and they should, but they don't. Market research is something my wife does - and at a very high level in Fortune 500 companies - is something companies are spending less and less on each year. They think they can replace a trained researcher with survey monkey in the hands of a marketing graduate (market research != marketing kind of like a statistician is not an engineer). The attitude among companies is that market research is a waste of money and they can just guess if an ad is "good" or "bad" and go with their gut feeling - which is often completely wrong due to any number of biases. They generate statistics and studies that they don't understand or don't know how to apply. Etc. So yes you are right that they keep statistics. But they often have no idea what those statistics actually mean. You would be shocked at the stuff I've heard country and regional level marketing people say - and I only know what I know about research by "osmosis".
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Hello, my name is Robert Paulson and I am 42... but really my name is Johnny Mnemonic and I am 15. Voila!
Which country is this supposed to represent again? The article claims both Australia and the US using census data.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Facebook does not get census data for each user. Instead, they infer demographics from user behavior or whatever information they bother to put when creating an account. Most 13 year olds are 31 year olds. A considerable number of users probably have multiple accounts to keep mom away from edgier aspects of their lifestyle. So this can be "as far as we know" instead of, or in addition to, straight WV-style cheating to tempt advertisers.
Because it's money that could be spent elsewhere. Like compensation for employees, or new machinery, or bigger offices, etc. Or it could not be spent at all.
I am not a fan of the marketing department in general but lets be honest. On some level we know for many classes of products advertising both works and is probably needed to drive the sales numbers most manufactures/re-sellers/retailers etc are aiming for or need for economy of scale as opposed to some other activity like quality improvement, better employee compensation etc.
Also as a customer of facebook (ad buyer) you know how many units you actually end up moving. You probably know how many you were moving before you began facebook ad buys. That alone is enough to decide if facebook ad buys are worth it.
The other questions are really around conversion rates. If facebook says we showed your ad to 100 people and you got 10 orders that say they were referred by facebook, well that is a conversion rate of 10%. facebook charges you $X for 100 impressions. Alright suppose facebooks numbers are wrong and they only showed ads to 50 real people. facebook is effectively charging you double for each ad impression, but as I pointed out in the previous paragraph, that really does not matter. It was worth paying facebook $X dollars for the sales bump it generates or its not. It isn't like facebook is going to take less revenue if they have to revise their ad impression numbers down, they will just raise their rates because their current customers should recognize the value is really unchanged.
Now you might argue that say if other media are accurately reporting impressions, say AM radios numbers are spot on ( yeah right ) that facebook is making themselves look artificially effective in comparison. When FB was new that might have been true, but at this point its really its own unique medium and advertising elsewhere isn't really going to be like for like substitute.
At the end of the day where this probably matters is, back to those conversion rates. If my actual conversion rate is much higher than facebooks inflated numbers make it appear. I would think as an marketer I would want to spend more money running more of my ads on facebook not less! Where as if I think my conversion rate is low I might instead invest in producing new/different ad content, revising slogans or even revising the product!
Initially facebook needed to prove they could reach a lot people. There isnt much doubt of that now. Inflating impressions probably hurts their revenue rather than helps.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Is analyst trying to sell a product to facebook to give more accurate number?
Otherwise, this beating on the drum is kind of dumb. People don't always put down their real age and may have multiple accounts.
Idiot!
I can choose not to do business with Google, Facebook or any of the companies they sell information to. I can literally count on my hands the number of times in my life I have bought something because I saw an advertisement for it. Certainly its possible Google has steered me to a particular vendor by manipulating search results, but even in that case I was already in the market for the item.
On the other hand I have no choice but to do business with the government. They have guns and can invoke lethal force if they desire. They can use information about me to threaten my friends and family an as can be seen in some nations imprison me based on my sharing of data or opinions posted online.
So yeah there's a difference between the government having my data and a private business having it.
You don't need a signature to enter a contract. The courts have ruled on this. Don't be obtuse.
Fake/dupe accounts, fake DOBs. Used for spying on people, and used for older people to "be younger". They're pulling from their data stock, not from real data. Of course it's wrong.
They were never considered legal you freaking fool.