Items tagged with: advertising
"[...] it's important to note that using a blocker is NOT theft. Don't fall for this creepy idea. The ultimate logical consequence of `blocking = theft` is the criminalisation of the inalienable right to #privacy."
Wanted to give them money, but:
"Free. Open source. For users by users. No donations sought."
#Ads are something people get payed to give and distributed on a scale to maximise the return of investment.
An advise is something you give for free, occasionally, to share something you like with someone who could like it too.
I wouldn't use a banner to suggest my friends to use a certain free software. I'd write an article about it.
Even better: I'd give a party! 😉
Actually, in a world where any kind of advertising is forbidden by law, the only way a company would have to gain new customers would be to provide the best product for the cheapest price, so that their customers would suggest such product/service to their friends.
Much like when a friend suggest you a good book.
But it's not #Advertising, so don't call it so.
An advertising campaign by Germany’s transport ministry to persuade cyclists to wear helmets has sparked accusations of sexism, as it features a model wearing just a helmet and underwear.
With the slogan “Looks like shit. But saves my life”, the advert features a profile-shot of Alicija Köhler, a competitor in the gameshow Germany’s Next Topmodel sporting a violet coloured helmet and a lacy bra. #Advertising #Womensrightsandgenderequality #Germany #Gender #Media #Cycling #Europe #Worldnews
European Commission - Press release
#Antitrust: Commission fines Google €1.49 billion for abusive practices in online advertising
Brussels, 20 March 2019
- Google is dominant in the market for online search advertising intermediation in the EEA.
- Google has abused this market dominance by preventing rivals from competing in the online search advertising intermediation market.
Margrethe Vestager @vestager
The search engine has been fined for blocking rival online search advertisers.
Article word count: 375
HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19440926
Posted by okket (karma: 35450)
Post stats: Points: 169 - Comments: 140 - 2019-03-20T11:15:48Z
#HackerNews #€15bn #advertising #fine #from #google #hit #over #with
Google logo Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Alphabetʼs Google remains a dominant force in online advertising
Google has been hit with a €1.49bn (£1.28bn) fine from the EU for blocking rival online search advertisers.
It is the third EU fine for the search and advertising giant in two years.
The case accuses Google of abusing its market dominance by restricting third-party rivals from displaying search ads between 2006 and 2016.
In response, Google changed its AdSense contracts with large third parties, giving them more leeway to display competing search ads.
Google owner Alphabet makes large amounts of money from advertising - pre-tax profits reached $30.7bn (£23bn) in 2018, up from $12.66bn in 2017.
"Google has cemented its dominance in online search adverts and shielded itself from competitive pressure by imposing anti-competitive contractual restrictions on third-party websites.
"This is illegal under EU anti-trust rules," said EC commissioner Margrethe Vestager.
Last year, the EU competition authority hit Google with a record €4.34bn fine for using its popular Android mobile operating system to block rivals.
This followed a €2.42bn fine in 2017 for hindering rivals of shopping comparison websites.
The European Commission said that websites often had an embedded search function.
When a consumer uses this, the website delivers both search results and search adverts, which appear alongside the search result.
Googleʼs "AdSense for search" product delivers those adverts for website publishers.
The Commission described Google as acting like "an intermediary, like an advertising broker".
In 2006, Google started to include "exclusivity clauses" in contracts which stopped publishers from placing ads from Google rivals such as Microsoft and Yahoo on search pages, the Commission said.
From 2009, Google started replacing the exclusivity clauses with "premium placement" clauses, which meant publishers had to keep the most profitable space on their search results pages for Googleʼs adverts and they had to request a minimum number of Google adverts.
Publishers also needed to get written permission from Google before making any changes to how rival ads were displayed, letting Google control "how attractive, and therefore clicked on, competing search adverts could be", the Commission said.
Between 2006 to 2016, Google had more than 70% of the search intermediation market in the EU. It generally had more than 90% of the search market and more than 75% of the online search advertising market, the Commission added.
HackerNewsBot debug: Calculated post rank: 159 - Loop: 64 - Rank min: 100 - Author rank: 69
Metaphors for Presentations and Conway's Law
The metaphor of PowerPoint is the software corporation itself. To describe a software house is to describe the PP cognitive style: a big bureaucracy engaged in computer programming (deep hierarchical structures, relentlessly sequential, nested, one-short-line-at-a-time) and in marketing (advocacy not analysis, more style than substance, misdirection, slogan thinking, fast pace, branding, exaggerated claims, marketplace ethics). That the PP cognitive style mimics a software house exemplifies Conway's Law:The footnote for "the ethical values of teachers differ from those engaged in marketing" is:
"Any organization which designs a system... will inevitably produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure." [--- Melvin E. Conway, "How do Committees Invent?"]
Why should the structure, activities, and values of a large commercial bureaucracy be a useful metaphor for our presentations? Are there worse metaphors? Voice-mail menu systems? Billboards? Television? Stalin?
The pushy PP style tends to set up a dominance relationship between speaker and audience, as the speaker makes power points with hierarchical bullets to passive followers. Such aggressive, stereotyped, over-managed presentations---the Great Leader up on the pedestal---are characteristic of hegemonic systems and of Conway's Law in operation:
"The Roman state bolstered its authority and legitimacy with the trappings of ceremony...Power is a far more complex and mysterious quality than any apparently simple manifestation of it would appear. It is as much a matter of impression, of theatre, of persuading those over whom authority is wielded to collude in their subjugation. Insofar as power is a matter of presentation, its cultural currency in antiquity (and still today) was the creation, manipulation, and display of images. In the propagation of the imperial office, at any rate, art was power" [--- Jás Elsner, /Imperial Rome and Christian Triumph: The art of the Roman Empire/]
A better metaphor for presentations is good teaching. Practical teaching techniques are very helpful for presentations in general. Teachers seek to explain something with credibility, which is what many presentations are trying to do. The core ideas of teaching --- explanation, reasoning, finding things out, questioning, content, evidence, credible authority not patronizing authoritarianism --- are contrary to the cognitive style of PowerPoint. And the ethical values of teachers differ from those engaged in marketing.
-- Edward Tufte in Beautiful Evidence (2006:p.161)
On teaching see Joseph Lowman, Mastering the Techniques of Teaching (San Francisco, 1995); Wilbert McKeachie and Barbara H. Hofer, McKeachie's Teaching Tips (New York, 2001): Frederick Mosteller, "Classroom and Platform Performance," The American Statistician, 34 (1980), 11-17 (posted at edwardtufte.com)#FD #FacultyDevelopment #Teaching #Presentations #Metaphor #Marketing #Advertising #Education #EdwardTufte #JosephLowman #McKeachie #McKeachiesTeachingTips #ConwaysLaw #BeautifulEvidence
- Two Years Ago: Orignially a Huzilla Post
Tesla has agreed to no longer list an "after savings" price on its vehicle configurator page to avoid confusion.
Article word count: 392
HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19348151
Posted by Pharmakon (karma: 1593)
Post stats: Points: 130 - Comments: 64 - 2019-03-09T20:04:20Z
#HackerNews #advertising #cars #gas #german #price #regulators #savings #stop #tell #tesla #with
Tesla has agreed to cease using its common "after savings" pricing when advertising its vehicles to German consumers, reports Reuters.
The German Center for Protection Against Unfair Competition, natively referred to as the Wettbewerbszentrale, claims that it is the "most influential nationwide and cross-border self-regulatory institution for enforcing the right to unfair competition." The agency recently made claims that Tesla is ambiguously pricing its vehicles by obfuscating actual cost with its "after savings" fuel and incentive pricing in the region.
By default, when ordering on Teslaʼs US configurator, the "after savings" price is shown when selecting a battery.
When ordering a Model 3, prospective buyers are typically presented with two purchase prices: the "before savings" and "after savings." The latter is only displayed by looking at the bottom-left of the screen when selecting the vehicle options. Tesla chooses to show pricing inclusive of the federal tax credit, any state-level tax credits, and an estimated six-year gas savings. In some states like California, the "after savings" discounts can swell to $10,550.
The Wettbewerbszentrale used the Model 3 as an example for its pricing complaint, stating that it could be confusing to consumers that the automaker advertised both the purchase price of the vehicle, $63,811 (56,380 Euro) and the "after savings" price of $57,501 (51,380 EUR). It later said that Tesla has agreed to stop advertising the vehicle in such a way.
“Even if ‘savings’ could be realized, such an amount cannot be deducted from the purchase price or the monthly rate because customers must pay the full price at the time of purchase or financing,” Reuters quoted the Wettbewerbszentrale commenting in a statement.
An example of the U.S. Model 3 order page can be seen on the left, versus the German configurator on the right.
When The Drive checked Teslaʼs German ordering page for the Model 3, it confirmed that Tesla was no longer displaying an "after savings" price on the Model 3 configurator.
Tesla has been under scrutiny from media outlets and consumers for the way it advertises vehicle pricing for some time. CEO Elon Musk even announced the mid-range variant of the sedan in a now-deleted tweet, stating "Model 3 starting cost now ~$35k (after ~$8k of credits & fuel savings)". With self-regulating bodies stepping in to advocate for consumers, perhaps the automaker will revisit the language market-wide.
A Tesla spokesperson declined to provide comment on the matter.
HackerNewsBot debug: Calculated post rank: 108 - Loop: 293 - Rank min: 100 - Author rank: 44
Which websites featured on the Federation have the worst privacy?
My last post highlighted how ticking the OEmbed box to add a website picture to a post can compromise Federation users if it contains a tracker.
I also mentioned tools, like Disconnect, we could use to detect websites which track their users. In this post I reveal some of the most popular reference websites on the Federation with low privacy and high tracking rates.
I believe Federation users should consider not embedding, or at least warning their readers about the surveillance techniques carried out by these sites.
A Princeton University study identified almost a million websites that track their users. Here are just 5 examples of websites whose stories are commonly quoted on the Federation:
Wired is a popular website referenced on the Federation by many users because it publishes great tech-based stories. But how private is it?
Although it offers an ‘ad-free’ version for subscribers, normal visitors are ruthlessly fleeced for their data.
WIRED has embed deals (agreements to embed tracking codes into their pages for money or gain) with a staggering 171 third parties including Google, Amazon, Facebook, Vogue, GQ, Golf Digest, Bonappetit and Vanity Fair.
Some tracking beacons embedded on WIRED and captured by Ublock Origin
151 of these third parties are known tracking or advertising companies like Google, Amazon, Facebook, Turn, Add This, Scorecard Research, Adobe, Twitter Analytics, Typekit, Criteo and Quantserve. Aggressive trackers like Google Tag Manager (GTM), Add This and Turn are present here.
Below is a screengrab of the many scripts NoScript has blocked from the WIRED website, the 33 scripts, gifs and beacons blocked by Ublock Origin and a couple by Disconnect.
WIRED sets 25 short-term and 28 long-term cookies itself, while allowing its third party partners (including 69 tracking companies) to set 26 short-term and 133 long-term cookies.
It uses Google Analytics without the anonymization feature enabled, so user details are sent to Google servers.
All WIRED servers are based in the US so GDPR privacy rules can be ignored.
Websites loading this many scripts/cookies are usually blacklisted by most users, not least because they drain a device’s battery.
WIRED claims that subscribing with them will mean an ad free experience, but I find it hard to believe that a subscription to WIRED will suddenly load a clean page without a single tracker retrieving data. But then I am not a WIRED subscriber. Please comment if you are and have no trackers.
Seen by some as a safe pro-privacy resource celebrating Free and Open Source Software, FOSSPOST lets its users down by digitally fingerprinting their devices and loading 19 trackers into a browser.
FOSSPOST has embed deals with 27 third parties, making its embed renting in the ‘low’ category, including Google, Amazon, Creative Commons and WordPress.
13 of these are known tracking or advertising companies like Google, Amazon, Mailerlite, One Signal and the data-hungry caterpillar that is WordPress.
FOSSPOST sets 2 short-term and 2 long-term cookies itself while allowing its third party partners (including 3 tracking companies) to set 4 long-term cookies.
It uses Google Analytics without the anonymization feature so user details are sent to Google servers. All FOSSPOST servers are based in the US so GDPR privacy rules can be ignored.
Acquired by Yahoo’s parent company, Oath (a company that includes AOL), under the Verizon umbrella, in 2010, this is a popular reference source for researchers and Federation users.
Historically, Yahoo deserves some kudos as they were one of the few big tech companies that objected to sharing their users’ details with the PRISM
The Bush administration threatened them with $250k a day fines until they complied. Verizon bought them in 2017. Yahoo suffered the largest data breach in history in 2018.
The link to this NYT story is not embedded (consider blocking the GTM tracker on the site)
TECHCRUNCH.com fingerprints the user’s device and dumps 2-7 Yahoo trackers in their browser, depending on the page loaded.
TECHCRUNCH has embed deals with 27 third parties, including Google, Facebook, Yahoo and WordPress.
15 of these are known tracking or advertising companies like Google, Facebook, Yahoo, WordPress, Atwola, Typekit, AOL and Scorecard Research.
TECHCRUNCH sets 4 short-term and 5 long-term cookies itself while allowing its third party partners (including 4 tracking companies) to set 1 short-term and 7 long-term cookies.
It uses Google Analytics but interestingly enables the anonymization feature so some user details are not sent to Google servers.
All servers are based in the US so forget about GDPR privacy rules.
THE REGISTER .co.uk
Although a great resource with well-written and groundbreaking stories, it isn’t as private as I’d hoped.
There is no obvious digital fingerprinting but it seems to have gathered more Google syndication in the last couple of years, (9 of its 16 embed deals are with the Big G). 12 known tracking or advertising companies like Google, Admedo and the Amp Project gather data.
THE REGISTER sets 3 short-term and 4 long-term cookies itself while allowing its third party partners (including 2 tracking companies) to set 7 long-term cookies.
It uses Google Analytics without enabling the anonymization feature so user details are sent to Google servers. Although THE REGISTER’s domain is in the UK, both its data and email servers are based in the US so GDPR privacy rules could be compromised here, though I am not a lawyer.
The Guardian .com
I’ve been sitting on this for a few years now but it’s about time I blew the whistle.
I first noticed the Guardian newspaper’s website was digitally fingerprinting its users’ devices when they published an article on, um, Canvas Fingerprinting.
That page has been removed since, but they still continued doing it, long before Facebook, though not before Google.
I’ve kept quiet about this surveillance because I admire the paper for its incredible journalism, especially exclusives like the Snowdon revelations, and its general championing of freedom issues across many sectors of society. But the hypocrisy has started to wear me down.
Some tracking items & widgets embedded on Guardian .com and captured by Ublock Origin
The Guardian has embed deals with a privacy-sapping 142 third parties, including Google, Amazon, Bing, Twitter, and, despite being one of its main critics, Facebook. 132 of these third party partners are known tracking or advertising companies like Google, Amazon, Facebook, Turn, AddThis, Scorecard Research, Blue Kai, Twitter Analytics, Rubicon, Criteo and Quantserve.
Some of the most aggressive trackers like GTM, AddThis and Turn are present here.
The Guardian also sets 3 short-term and 5 long-term cookies itself, while allowing its third party partners (including 51 tracking companies) to set 10 short-term and 131 long-term cookies.
Yes, we NEED the Guardian’s continued existence, but castigating Facebook et al while allowing them to track its users doesn’t sit well with me.
The website uses Google Analytics but at least enables the anonymization feature, so some user details are not sent to Google servers.
Although The Guardian’s data servers are in Germany, their email servers are based in the US so GDPR privacy rules could be compromised here, though, again, I am not a lawyer.
In conclusion, I’ve given just 5 examples of popular sites Federation users quote in their posts.
I am NOT advocating a boycott of these sites but politely suggest we don’t OEmbed them, just feature a hyperlink and give readers the heads-up about these privacy concerns.
Alternatively, look for other sources featuring the same story. It’s also worth highlighting which websites do NOT add a tracker when we OEmbed a story, or have a low level of surveillance. Please promote those guys.
#news #fakenews #journalism #FreePress #PressFreedom #theguardian
#privacy #tracking #trackers #facebook #social #mass-surveillance #gdpr #google #location #user #device #setup #private #secure #internet #tips #tricks #online #os #windows #apple #ios #advertising #ad #revenue #streams #developers #media #data #corporations #telemetry #consent #spyware #surveillancecapitalism #humanrights, #anonymity #cookies #surveillance #browser #proxy #relay #network #www #leaks #fingerprint #activity #activitytrackers #thefederation #pods #federation #fediverse #friendica #mastodon #pleroma #socialhome # #Gnusocial #Funkwhale #Peertube #pixelfed #hubzilla #Diaspora
How can Federation users post more safely?
You know how it goes. We find a great story online and we want to share it with our supporters or feature it in our feed with appropriate hashtags for maximum reach.
But do we check the website featuring the story for privacy before we post?
When we embed a link by selecting the OEmbed box (often ticked by default) this displays an image or video on our post from the website we’ve featured.
They may look cool, but these images can contain beacons or other trackers. Embedded trackers also load into the browsers of any user who scrolls down the public feeds.
Should we ensure the website is safe before linking to it?
Actually some do. Posts that don’t feature a website’s images (with the OEmbed box unchecked as below) can actually protect Federation users from a serious amount of surveillance.
Some thoughtful users actually reproduce the article’s main points in their post, to protect their readers from visiting the site itself. They usually supply a link to the original content if one wants more detail and perhaps is protected with tracker blockers. So how do we know a site we recommend is safe?
Here are some privacy tips:
• Consider checking the page’s security/privacy before linking to it.
Using Tor, or a beefed-up Firefox fork or version (for detecting digital fingerprinting), and/or Disconnect, NoScript or Ublock Origin add-ons to reveal a multitude of trackers.
• There is usually more than one website featuring the same story. Consider picking the website with the least trackers and digital fingerprinting.
• Issue a warning in your post about any of the site’s surveillance methods and privacy issues you’ve detected.
• Embedding a picture/video could also make users vulnerable. Consider unchecking the OEmbed box.
In the next post I’ll give examples of a number of websites with low privacy and excessive trackers, commonly featured in the public feeds.
#secure #internet #windows #apple #revenue #streams #developers #Social #media #data #corporations #tracking #trackers #facebook #social #mass-surveillance #gdpr #google #alphabet #location #user #device #setup #private #secure #internet #chrome #tips #tricks #online #os #mobile #ie #safari #apple #ios #ad #revenue #streams #developers #telemetry #consent #windows10 #windows7 #windows81 #microsoft #linux #debian #ubuntu #mate #gnome #grub #iphone #firefox #advertising #android #chrome #browser #browsers #phone #phones #device #Tor #privacy, #humanrights, #anonymity #internet #security #cookies #surveillance #browser #web #onion #router #torbrowser #bridge #proxy #relay #leaks #fingerprint #activity #activitytrackers #spyware #surveillancecapitalism
Unearthed emails could be smoking gun in epic GDPR battle: Google, adtech giants 'know they break Euro privacy law' • The Register
Privacy warriors have filed fresh evidence in their ongoing battle against real-time web ad exchange systems, which campaigners claim trample over Europe's data protection laws.
The new filings – submitted today to regulators in the UK, Ireland, and Poland – allege that Google and industry body the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) are well aware that their advertising networks flout the EU's privacy-safeguarding GDPR, and yet are doing nothing about it. The IAB, Google – which is an IAB member – and others in the ad-slinging world insist they aren't doing anything wrong.
Facebook decided which users are interested in Nazis — and let advertisers target them directly - Los Angeles Times
Facebook makes money by charging advertisers to reach just the right audience for their message — even when that audience is made up of people interested in the perpetrators of the Holocaust or explicitly neo-Nazi music.
Despite promises of greater oversight following past advertising scandals, a Times review shows that Facebook has continued to allow advertisers to target hundreds of thousands of users the social media firm believes are curious about topics such as “Joseph Goebbels,” “Josef Mengele,” “Heinrich Himmler,” the neo-nazi punk band Skrewdriver and Benito Mussolini’s long-defunct National Fascist Party.
Experts say that this practice runs counter to the company’s stated principles and can help fuel radicalization online.
"#Thesocialnetwork is not owned by any one person or entity, keeping it from being subject to #corporate take-overs or #advertising."
"no big corporation will ever control Diaspora. #Diaspora* will never sell your social life to #advertisers"
The UK will prohibit child-friendly websites and video games from running gambling ads, a move that poses potential ramifications for app developers, soccer stars and social media influencers alike. Starting April 1st, gambling companies will be bann…
\#aevlus #public #news #learn #express #expand #podaevlus #quantum-mind-game #freethoughtproject #think #freedom #advertising #advertising-standards-authority #business #children #gambling #gear #internet #kids
Originally posted at: https://www.aevl.us/2019/02/13/uk-bans-gambling-ads-from-sites-and-games-that-target-kids/
KARE-TV was first alerted to the "parking lot price switch" by Target shopper Miranda Artz, who noticed the phenomenon while buying an electric razor last spring.~ from this article #target #deception #advertising #marketing #app
"It was $99.99 in the store, so I bought it," said Artz - only to find that the product was $69.99 on her Target app in the parking lot.
Artz went back in the store to deal with customer service, and noticed that the price had jumped back to $99.99. When she went back out to the parking lot, she noticed the price drop again, so she took a screenshot to show customer service, which then refunded the difference.
Turn off location. PART 2
Apart from Edge, which has to be tweaked from the W10 OS, most browsers can have their location services disabled through their menu. I cannot list EVERY browser in existence here, as I have a life. If you have other browser location tweaks, please share.
1. Click on Chrome’s menu and select the cog symbol – SETTINGS
2. Click the SHOW ADVANCED SETTINGS link at the bottom. Don’t be afraid of the ‘advanced’ implication, this has been worded to scare off timid sheep from reclaiming their privacy.
3. Click the CONTENT SETTINGS button under PRIVACY. While we’re here, consider unchecking the boxes urging us to use web services to ‘resolve navigational errors’ or ‘prediction services’ to auto complete our searches. This is just more telemetry.
4. Scroll down to the LOCATION section and select DO NOT ALLOW ANY SITE TO TRACK YOUR PHYSICAL LOCATION.
There are countless versions and forks of Firefox so, to save column inches, here are the about:config settings. Firefox (and especially Tor) should have location disabled.
To check, type about:config in the address bar and press enter.
• Press the button that says "I'll be careful, I promise!" or “I’ll take the risk!”
Type the terms in the search box and toggle to the following settings if you don't already have them:
geo.enabled = false → Disables the browser geolocation feature.
WITHOUT THE [SQUARE BRACKETS][geo].provider.ms-windows-location = false → Disables windows location.
geo.wifi.uri → Mozilla has used Google's geolocation service in Firefox by default for many years, so check for any Google addresses that may be here. This is an example of how Mozilla has lied about some of its user privacy claims – it seems to be posting our movements to the Big G. Erase any Google address and leave this field blank.
1. Click the TOOLS menu
2. Select INTERNET OPTIONS.
3. Click the PRIVACY tab at the top of the window
4. Check the NEVER ALLOW WEBSITES TO REQUEST YOUR PHYSICAL LOCATION box.
5. Click “OK” to save changes.
To disable Location in Safari, first click Safari > Preferences.
• Select the PRIVACY ‘hand’ icon at the top of the window.
• Under WEBSITE USE OF LOCATION SERVICES, select DENY WITHOUT PROMPTING to prevent all websites from asking to show your location.
Like the iOS, iPhone apps have to explain how they’ll use location data and must allow users to turn it off. Of course, access to this info is usually well hidden and when we find it it’s often written in brief, vague terms. To find LOCATION, do the following:
- Tap the SETTINGS icon, usually a cog or wheel
- Tap the PRIVACY icon, usually a white hand on a blue background
- Tap LOCATION SERVICES
• ALWAYS allow location (not recommended – it draws data even when it’s off)
• NEVER allow location
• Allow WHILE USING
The last one should be used for apps we think need to know our location or may be affected by disabling, although I’d venture there are few or none of these.
If you just want to block location on EVERYTHING just swipe that green switch in the pic above, to the left.
Always delete apps you never use. Limits spyware and saves battery.
Owned by Google, Android doesn’t stop snooping apps snuffle away location data, even when they’re turned off. It doesn’t even have the iPhone feature to turn off location when not using an app. After much criticism on this, on newer phones, the Big G reckons developers are only allowed to collect data “a few times an hour,” but if we don’t want ANY data collected, we have to do it from the phone’s main SETTINGS menu.
Older Androids are simpler to tweak
1. Open SETTINGS
2. Tap SECURITY and/or LOCATION
3. Uncheck ACCESS TO MY LOCATION box
4. Swipe GPS SATELLITES button to OFF
Like the iPhone, newer Android phones show a list of individual apps and allow us to turn off each app’s location button. Otherwise we can switch all location snoops off with the main button in APP LEVEL PERMISSIONS.
WIPE THE DATA GOOGLE HAVE COLLECTED
To be fair to Google, who collect data like bees collect pollen, they do have a portal where we can remove our location data (and more).
I am not sure if we can access all the data Google collects about us, or our device, if we DON’T have an account with one of their services, (#Gmail, Google Docs, #YouTube, Android, Google Drive, G+, etc) but it’s worth going through the data they’ve collected "to improve our advertising experience".
Obviously, we will be tracked within an inch of our life at Google central, but will have to suck it up if we want to clear our data. Be prepared for eyes to water and flabbers to be gasted.
#privacy #tracking #trackers #facebook #social #patent #mass-surveillance #surveillance #gdpr #google #alphabet #location #user #what3words #device #setup #private #secure #internet #chrome #tips #tricks #online #os #windows #mobile #ie #safari #apple #ios #ad #revenue #streams #developers #Social #media #data #corporations #telemetry #consent #windows10 #windows7 #windows81 #microsoft #linux #debian #ubuntu #mate #gnome #grub #iphone #firefox #advertising #android #chrome #browser #browsers #phone #phones #device
Just decided I don't need Yahoo News!
"Before you continue...
Yahoo is part of Oath. Oath and our partners need your consent to access your device and use your data (including location) to understand your interests, and provide and measure personalised ads. Oath will also provide you personalised ads on partner products. Learn More. Select 'OK' to continue and allow Oath and our partners to use your data, or select 'Manage options' to view your choices."
#surveillance #capitalism #privacy #brainwashing #yahoo #facebook #advertising
Blockchain technology could soon give users more control over their social media and digital ad experience.
I see this as the modern equivalent of venal poetry. (0)
The Enlightenment ideal, which all universities claim to endorse, is that everyone should think for themselves. So why do they run departments in which researchers explore new means of blocking this capacity?
Among the “neutralising” techniques it highlighted were “disguising the persuasive intent of the message”; distracting our attention by using confusing phrases that make it harder to focus on the advertiser’s intentions; and “using cognitive depletion as a tactic for reducing consumers’ ability to contest messages”. This means hitting us with enough advertisements to exhaust our mental resources, breaking down our capacity to think.
... researchers advised that the best means to enhance “the authentic persuasive appeal of a celebrity endorser” whose standing has slipped is to get them to display “a Duchenne smile”, otherwise known as “a genuine smile”. It precisely anatomised such smiles, showed how to spot them, and discussed the “construction” of sincerity and “genuineness”: a magnificent exercise in inauthentic authenticity.
... research showed how images and statements could be cleverly combined to “minimise stakeholder scepticism”.
#advertising #data #deals #hash(0x32eeaf0) #hash(0x32eebe0) #hash(0x32eecd0) #hash(0x32eedc0) #hash(0x32eeeb0) #hash(0x32eefa0) #hash(0x32f2858) #hash(0x32f2948) #like #more #sharing #sigh #watching
Tech companies say consumers prefer being shown ads that are relevant to them. But a professor’s research shows they trade data for those ads not because of convenience but resignation.
#advertising tech #captiv8 #data #fake #followers #highlights #instagram #report #social #spotting #startups
Captiv8, a company offering tools for brands to manage influencer marketing campaigns, has released its 2018 Fraud Influencer Marketing Benchmark Report. The goal is to give marketers the data they need to spot fake followers — and thus, to separate the influencers with a real following from those who only offer the illusion of engagement.
The report argues that that this a problem with a real financial impact (it’s something that Instagram is working to crack down on), with $2.1 billion spent on influencer marketing on Instagram in 2017 and 11 percent of the engagement coming from fraudulent accounts.
“For influencer marketing to truly deliver on its transformative potential, marketers need a more concrete and reliable way to identify fake followers and engagement, compare their performance to industry benchmarks, and determine the real reach and impact of social media spend,” Captiv8 says.
So the company looked at a range of marketing categories (pets, parenting, beauty, fashion, entertainment, travel, gaming, fitness, food and traditional celebrity) and randomly selected 5,000 Instagram influencer accounts in each one, pulling engagement from August to November of this year.
The idea is to establish a baseline for standard activity, so that marketers can spot potential red flags. Of course, everyone with a significant social media audience is going to have some fake followers, but Captiv8 suggests that some categories have a higher rate of fraud than others — fashion was the worst, with an average of 14 percent of fake activity per account, compared to traditional celebrity, where the average was just 4 percent.
So what should you look out for? For starters, the report says the average daily change in follower counts for an influencer is 1.2 percent, so be on the lookout for shifts that are significantly larger.
The report also breaks down the average engagement rate for organic and sponsored content by category (ranging from 1.19 percent for sponsored content in food to 3.51 percent in entertainment), and suggests that a lower engagement rate “shows a high probability that their follower count is inflated through bots or fake followers.”
Conversely, it says it could also be a warning sign if a creator’s audience reach or impressions per user is higher than the industry benchmarks (for example, image posts in fashion have an average audience reach of 23.69 percent, with 1.32 impressions per unique user).
You can download the full report on the Captiv8 website.
Captiv8 is making its influencer database available for free](https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/03/captiv8-creator-discovery/)
Poetry and Advertising (1946)
by S.I. Hayakawa
One does not often mention poetry and advertising in the same breath. Poetry is universally conceded to be the loftiest attainment of the verbal arts; its merits are attested to by the wise of all ages. Advertising, on the other hand, is not even an autonomous art; it is the handmaiden of commercial motives; its name carries connotations (well earned, one might add) of half-truths, deception, and outright fraud, of appeals to vanity, fear, snobbery, and false pride, of radio programs hideous with wheedling voices.
There are many more contrasts. The best poetry seems to be fully appreciated only by the few and to be beyond the comprehension of the many. Advertising, however, is considered best when it is laughed over, thought about, and acted upon by multitudes. Poetry is, in the general apprehension, something special to be studied in schools, to be enjoyed by cultivated people who have time for that sort of thing, to be read on solemn or momentous occasions. Advertising is a part of everyday life.
But poetry and advertising have much in common. They both make every possible use of rhyme and rhythm, of words chosen for their connotative rather than their denotative values, of ambiguities that strike the level of unconscious responses as well as the conscious. Furthermore, they both strive to give meaning and overtones to the innumerable data of everyday experience; they both attempt to make the objects of experience symbolic of something beyond themselves. A primrose by the river's brim ceases to be "nothing more" because the poet invests it with meanings; it comes to symbolize the insensitiveness of Peter Bell, the benevolence of God, or anything else he wants it to symbolize. The advertiser is concerned with the primrose only if it happens to be for sale. Once it is on the national market, the advertiser can increase its saleability by making it thrillingly reminiscent of gaiety, romance, and aristocratic elegance, or symbolic of solid, traditional American virtues, or suggestive of glowing health and youth, depending upon his whim. This is what the writer of advertising does with breakfast food, toothpaste, laxatives, whiskey, perfume, toilet bowl cleaners. Indeed almost all advertising directed to the general public is the poeticizing of consumer goods.
Poetry and advertising are similar too in that they invite the reader to put himself in a role other than his own. In reading poetry we identify ourselves with the characters that a poet creates or with the poet himself. In the course of the experience that a poet puts us through during these identifications, we feel as others have felt, we see as other have seen, we discover new ways of looking upon ourselves in our relationships with fellow human beings. Advertisers also invite us to make identifications of ourselves in new roles, although the roles are simpler, pleasanter, and more easily within reach. Readers are invited to look upon themselves as "smart housewives and hostesses" (who serve Spam), as "men of distinction" (who drink Calvert's), as responsible and prudent fathers (who protect their dependents with Metropolitan insurance policies), as well-regulated families (who take Ex-Lax).
The identifications to which poets invite us require some imaginative strenuousness on the part of the reader; those to which advertisers invite us require no more than a disposition to daydream and the ability to remember a brand-name that is repeated eight times in sixty-five seconds in spot announcements at half-hour intervals sixteen hours a day. In spite of this marked contrast in the demands made upon the audience, both have the common function of entering into our imaginations and shaping those idealizations of ourselves that determine, in large measure, our conduct. "Life," said Oscar Wilde, "is an imitation of art," and in so far as both poetry and advertising exact this tribute of imitation, they are both, in a real sense, "creative."
Let us call this use of verbal magic (or skulduggery) for the purpose of giving an imaginative, or symbolic, or "ideal" dimension to life and all that is in it poetry. If we speak separately of what are ordinarily called poetry and advertising, let us speak of the former as disinterested poetry, of the latter as venal poetry, the word venal being used in the sense of being available for hire.
Using our terms in this way, we see that our age is by no means deficient in poetry as is often charged. We have more access to poetry (or perhaps we should say poetry has more access to us) than has been the case at any other time in history. One hundred and thirty out of the two hundred pages of each issue of Harper's Bazaar are devoted to venal poetry; a similar proportion of poetry to text occurs in most mass circulation magazines. This poetry is written by the highest paid writers in the country, organized into companies of poets, rhapsodists, sub-poets, and sub-rhapsodists, known as "agencies." IT is supplemented and reinforced by vast amounts of illustration on which the most expensive and most advanced methods of color reproduction are lavished. It is chanted into national hook-ups night and day at the cost of thousands of dollars an hour, and there it is tied into drama, music, satire, humor, social and political discussion, and news. Product and producer it sings—in unending paeans of praise.
None of the corrupt and vain emperors of history exacted of the sycophant poets in their retinues anything like the discipline imposed upon the poets of Procter and Gamble and Ford Motors. The copy-writer is immeasurably more restricted in his choice of subject-matter than a court poet ever was. Moreover, the merit of his poetry is not measured by the pleasure it gives a single patron; it is measured by its influence on sales statistics. Like the court poet, the copy-writer must praise not only his patron, but also the entire socio-economic system which keeps his patron rich and powerful. Milton was eloquent in his contempt for the "trencher fury of the riming parasite." A contemporary prophet able to look into the twentieth century might well have said to him, "You haven't seen anything yet. Wait until you see the institutional ads of the great corporations during World War II!"
Let us turn from venal poetry to disinterested poetry. Mr. Robert Hillyer in a recent article in Saturday Review of Literature entitled "Modern Poetry versus the Common Reader" speaks of modern poets as being in a "welter of confusion and frustration." He is distressed by the obscurity of their language—"the flight from clarity," as he calls it. He is certain that both the unintelligibility and the general tone of despair characteristic of much modern verse are due to the moral defects of poets. "Their confusion," says he, "is a sign of artistic effeminacy and egotism."
Mr. Douglas Bush has said in his paper for the Sixth Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion, that "the modern poet is not altogether fulfilling his traditional function. From antiquity up through the nineteenth century, the poet was regarded as a teacher and leader of his age, and nearly all the the greatest poets have been more or less popular; they have counted in the general spiritual life of their times." "Since the romantic age and the industrial revolution," he adds, "the artist has been given to conceiving of himself, not as a normal active member of society, but as a detached, lonely, and hostile observer; and the breach was never wider than it is today, in spite of the poet's concern with the world's ills."
What is responsible for this condition? It is customary, I should say too customary, to blame the shortcomings of modern disinterested poetry on the poets. A great deal of the critical literature of our times is devoted to scolding poets for their excessive compression of images, their oddities of syntax, and their unhappy states of mind. They are constantly being told to buck up and be men, to utter brave and positive affirmations. Very few poets respond to the call, and those who do are seldom praised, even by those who do the calling.
The difficulties of modern poetry, although often exaggerated, are real. As we have been told, it is due in part to the complexity of the modern consciousness; it is due in part to the lack of a widely accepted and recognized poetic tradition; it is no doubt due in part also to the special threats to individuality offered in the industrial age. In addition to the reasons others have given, I should like to add another, namely, that in a world so filled with the clamor of venal writing (of which venal poetry is only the most offensive example), all poetry has come to sound suspicious, so that disinterested poets are practically compelled not to sound poetic (as people ordinarily understand the term poetic) lest suggestions of venal purpose creep into their writing.
In other words, never in history has it been so difficult to say anything with enthusiasm or joy or conviction without running into the danger of sounding as if you were trying to sell something. I shall not say that it is impossible today to make affirmations in verse about the more or less universal fact of human experience that poetry has traditionally been concerned with. But of the vastly increased difficulty of doing so there can be no doubt, and the difficulty continues to increase with the increasing skill, talent, and ingenuity that are constantly being enlisted into advertising, publicity, and public relations as a result of the material rewards offered in those professions.
It is difficult to describe scenery without sounding as if you were promoting a summer-resort, although past ages have done it without compunction:
To one who as been long in city pent 'Tis very sweet to look into the fair And open face of heaven,-to breathe in prayer Full in the smile of the blue firmament
It is difficult to take delight in a woman's beauty without sound like an advertisement, although it used to be possible:
Whenas in silks my Julia goes, Then, then, methinks, how sweetly flows The liquefaction of her clothes . . . She was a Phantom of delight When first she gleamed upon my sight . . .
It is difficult to become inspired by those facets of American life familiar and dear to all of us without sounding as if you were leading into a message from the National Association of Manufacturers on the necessity of maintaining the free enterprise system. Indeed, it is even difficult to speak reverently of the courage of our soldiers and the debt we owe the dead without sounding as if you were shortly going to remind the reader how much he also owes to Nash-Kelvinator's contribution to the war effort.
In 1940, Mr. Archibald MacLeish in his controversial essay, "Post-War Writers and Pre-War Readers" (New Republic, June 10, 1940), described the younger generation as being "distrustful of all words, distrustful of all moral judgments of better and worse." He continued, "If all words are suspect, all judgments phony, all conviction of better and worse fake, then there is nothing real and permanent for which men are willing to fight, and the moral and spiritual unpreparedness of the country is worse than its unpreparedness in arms." The condition he described was not as bad as he feared, but there is no denying that to a large degree it still exists—perhaps, after the experience of war, youthful cynicism is even more intense now than then.
But Mr. MacLeish was entirely wrong, it seems to me, in ascribing this youthful skepticism to the influence of the disillusioned authors who followed the first World War: such men as Dos Passos, Hemingway, Barbusse, and Remarque. For every one person reached by such authors, advertisers and publicity men and economic propagandists with good or ideas to sell reached tens of thousands. The distrust of words does not come from reading writers who honestly state their feelings and convictions, even if those feelings and convictions are extremely gloomy. The distrust arises from long experience with an unending stream of venal poetry, venal speech, venal writing. People wonder if there is any other kind. The pre-emption by the venal poet of the common value-symbols of our culture, the symbols of courage, of beauty, of domesticity, of patriotism, of happiness, and even of religion, for the purposes of selling, that is, of advantaging the speaker at the expense of the hearer, has left the disinterested poet with practically no unsullied symbols to work with other than obscure ones hauled up out of The Golden Bough or the Upanishads, and practically nothing in common human experience to write about except those negative moods that the ghastly cheerfulness of the advertising pages of the Ladies' Home Journal has no use for.
The restoration of poetry to its traditional state as one of the most important of the communicators and creators of the values a civilization live by awaits therefore, a time when something less than 98 percent of radio time and 85 percent of space in mass-circulation magazines is devoted to selling something.(2) It awaits an economic change profound enough to relieve advertisers of the necessity of invoking all the symbols of home, of mother, of the American way of life, of morality, and of the Christian religion in order to sell a box of soap-flakes. It awaits the dissemination of semantic wisdom, which can be equally well given by departments of history, political science, chemistry, English, or home economics as by teachers of semantics, sufficient to restore insight into the often subtle differences between venal and disinterested utterance, between statements rich with meaning and other statements, equally resonant, containing only sound and fury. It awaits a vision large enough on the part of students of poetry to see that the problems of modern poetry are inextricably interwoven with the character of the semantic environment in which the disinterested poet is compelled to work, which in turn compels and examination of the technological, the sociological, the economic beliefs and practices that create that environment. In short, it awaits the time when students of poetry cease to treat their subject as a separate and isolated discipline and begin to look about them at the worlds of science, of commerce, of journalism, of public affairs, and find out what is going on. Then they will be able to do something more than deplore the state of modern poetry.
- (2) Eighty-five percent is perhaps a conservative estimate of the amount of venal writing in many popular magazines, since advertising by no means stops with the advertising pages. Indeed, Cosmopolitan, a Hearst publication, appears quite proud of the fact that its editorial content, including its fiction, is as venal in its intent as its paid advertising. The following is quoted from Cosmopolitan's advertisement in a trade journal, Advertising Age: "Paul Gallico has just told her a dramatic tale. Pepsi Cola is reaching her at the right moment! Because she's young—she's emotional! She responds easily, quickly, wholeheartedly. … And Gallico's fiction is just one example of the kind of brilliant entertainment that crowds the pages of Cosmopolitan. Great writing makes great reading. It exercises the emotions. It whets the appetite for gracious living. … Good going, Pepsi Cola! You've caught her in an emotional mood. She's just been through the make-believe world of Paul Gallico. She's been living the glamorous life so temptingly traced by Ursula Parrot, Sinclair Lewis and the other great Cosmopolitan writers. Emotion makes wars. Emotion makes marriages. Emotion makes SALES!"
- Toward Liberal Education First Edition (1948-1955) pp. 372-377
- "Poetry and Advertising," Poetry: A Magazine of Verse, LXVII (January, 1946), 204-212. A Paper given at the Sixth Conference on Science, Philosophy, and Religion.
- (IaR): The Future of the Humanities in General Education (1947)
- "Poetry is the unacknowledged legislation of the world." — Richards working with Shelley's "Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world."
- (Yeats) " poets and painters and musicians… are continually making and unmaking mankind. " — Yeats in Ideas of Good and Evil
Trivialization winning the contest with Blasphemy is memorable too.
(Blasphemy: 冒涜, Trivialization: 平凡化、 豆知識化、 つまらなくする、 浅はかなことにする)
The Future of the Humanities in General Education (1947)
by I.A. Richards
Even in that certain hour before the fall, Unless men please they are no heard at all. The Fabulists
Among the guests at the at the Conference on the Humanistic Tradition in the Century Ahead, which formed part of the Bicentennial Celebration at Princeton last fall, were men and women with good claim to speak with authority—and still more with responsibility—for their subject. The occasion was felt to be challenging. This conference had been preceded by one on nuclear physics and another on the social sciences; and the skilful planners of our programme arranged that we should be aware of this. It was hardly possible throughout the discussion not to wonder where—in the balance of forces that are shaping the future—the humanities did come in. Latish in our deliberations, somebody, perhaps unkindly, said that we had been talking a lot about our traditions. He questioned whether the physicists or the social scientists has said much about their tradition. He thought they were more likely to have discussed their programmes. The audience looked, it seemed to me, somewhat uncomfortable at that. But indeed to all to whom the humanities may well feel uncomfortable—extremely uncomfortable, if not indeed distressed and alarmed—about what is happening and not happening in the humanities at present. And they matter—by definition as well as in fact—to every man, woman, or child who aspires to become or remain a human being.
The Conference on the Humanistic Tradition in the Century Ahead is one source of the following remarks. Another which should be mentioned is the course on Homer, the Old Testament and Plato as Sources of Our Common Thought which I am giving at the moment as part of the experiments under way at Harvard towards 'General Education in a Free Society'. The Reflections thus prompted sum up to this. The antinomies focused in that title are very far from being resolved, anywhere or by anyone, either in theory or in practice. Certainly reverence and regard for famous books and a backward-looking trust that all will somehow yet be well are, as these very books might teach, and insufficient equipment with which to meet what does seem to be ahead. Convervatism, in a phrase, must continue to be revolutionary in its technique.
In the last hundred years the human race has multiplied threefold. In 1840 there were some 700 millions of us; now we are more than 2,200 millions. In the next fifty years there will be a further and still more critical increase—unless the worst happens meanwhile. Too much reflective attention cannot be given to this fact. It is far more relevant to the problems of our age—and especially to the future of the humanities—than has yet been generally realized. Quantitative factors, unless technique is developed in commensurate degree, can settle qualitative possibilities—disastrously.
Another new fact, even newer and more momentous, is equally relevant, though it is no easy to state. Minds have become more exposed that ever before. (If any point deserves italics, this does.) And this exposure too undergoing explosive increase. Mental and moral communications, within each culture and between cultures, have suddenly expanded beyond anyone's power to foresee the consequences. The agencies at work—with one exception—hardly need more than mention. They are mass education, with its stress on verbal or nominal literacy, motion pictures, radio, television, modern advertising, and—here is the exception—modern scholarship. These are the new forces which already expose every urbanized mind to a range and variety and promiscuity of contacts unparalleled in history. And this is but beginning. Already some of the effects are showing. It would not perhaps be a culpable exaggeration to suggest that this expansion of our spiritual communications—and the power of minds to influence other minds which goes with it—has already made two wars of a world scale possible. There will at least be no doubt that this new mental exposure makes immense changes necessary in our conceptions of what the humanities have to do and how they can do it. Let us take a brief look at these agencies in action.
Mass education is of course our hope—our one hope, maybe. But in so far as it must use classrooms, how are we to get teachers able to give their pupils any power to select from among the influences to which they become ever more open? Present economic and social conditions repel almost all who might be capable of doing so, and teaching conditions frustrate those whose imagination and devotion still make them enter the profession. And through the decline of the family and for a thousand other well-known reasons there is now incomparably more for the teacher to do. The humanities, being the hardest things to teach, suffer most. They are the hardest to teach because wisdom , which they exist to cultivate, cannot be cut and dried. Much in other subjects can.
Correspondingly the preparation of a teacher in the humanities is the hardest of all—which brings me to the not, as yet, sufficiently vexed topic of modern specialize scholarship. I have to explain its appearance in my list of disruptive agencies threatening the wholeness of present and future minds.
Modern scholarship is a fearful and wonderful as well as an unprecedented thing. It is unprecedented, I believe in character as well as in scale, though I would listen eagerly to a modern scholar who was interested in this historical question. Like so much else which should give us pause, modern scholarship is the product of admirably ingenious innovations in technique, on which Thamus' words to Theuth ( Phaedrus, 275) are to the point: 'Most ingenious Theuth, one man has the ability to beget an art, another to estimate the good or harm it will do to those who are to use it.' The words apply equally to the ingenious doings of the nuclear physicists and to all inventions which may threaten us with nuclear fission of our minds. In scholarly technique the innovations are the modern dictionary, the book index, bibliography, the specialized journal, and the museum. Most of them seem to be eighteenth century inventions. At any rate, as they affect us today they are recent. And it is relevant to not that Chinese scholarship only admitted the index to a book within the memory of those still living: and index being considered a subversive thing which would lead to superficiality and to disrespect for the teacher's authority—grounded on long and deep familiarity with a corpus rather than on quick glances at references.
However this may be, modern scholarship certainly requires ever more intensive and prolonged training of a sort which is of hardly any value to a teacher in general education. It is training in the administration of a vast body, an illimitable proliferation rather, of facts, comments, opinions, and mere phrases, too extensive and diverse to form, in any mind not of a very rare order, any coherent, much less any directing or confirming view of essential human purpose. Moreover, since this proliferation proceeds geometrically, training in its administration, as we well know, becomes departmentalized, then sub-departmentalized, and scholarship, in so far as it is that, becomes less and less useful to a teacher. It may fit him to continue as a specialized researcher—within 'areas' or on 'points' with no known relevance to any side of the world crisis. It quite certainly does not give him what he needs as a teacher of the humanities—reasonably rich and considered views of a person's human relationships to other persons. Worse still, it is intensive distraction from the hard essential task of nurturing such views. Worst of all, this training has now become professional qualification offered competitively by rival institutions.
I would not be misunderstood here. This recent achievement of a method by which scholarship becomes accumulative and responsible to a controlled record is one of the glories of our age. It ranks with the partly parallel achievements in mathematics and experimental inquiry. Together with them it holds out infinite promise to man, and must go on. But, for the time being, as with physics, biology, and psychology (on which last I touch later) its present dangers rather than its remote promises should concern us most. It is preventing us from supplying our greatest need—teachers able to help humanity remain humane.
Literature—a deep enough and leisurely enough familiarity with what the best minds have thought and felt about people—used to produce such teachers. Modern scholarship positively gets in the way. The critical apparatus of approach to the great things keeps them from their would-be students. He is daunted incessantly by the thought that somewhere there is something which would, if he only knew it, help him to understand better. He comes to distrust the direct approach, and lives in an unhealthy terror of his ignorance—which will anyhow for all men and to time's end be infinite. He forgets that help ourselves or others by collecting more facts and comments, but by understanding more clearly our problems and theirs. We learn best to do this by reflecting upon such problems and by seeing them through the eyes of the best minds. So we lose our best teachers.
To turn now to mass media. Radio, TV and the screen might provide some remedy for this loss. It is possible to believe, sometimes, that they could become the instruments of our salvation. But we will agree, without difficulty, that they are not that now—for well-known and chiefly technical reasons. Radio, TV and the screen propagate most successfully the most superficial, the most facile, and the least educating elements of a culture. This is partly because, as programmes, they have to go on. They have to change, every fifteen minutes or twice weekly. There is no time for what the present to be deeply pondered, thought over, returned to and considered afresh. Therefore, it is rarely worth such reconsideration. But in every culture it has been the things which received the most lasting and recurrent attention—the books re-read again and again, the stories and sayings known and familiar from infancy to old age, the rites repeated throughout a lifetime, the perennial monuments, the enduring ideas, the constant aesthetic institutions—which have done the most part of the work of the humanities. Mass media, at present, replace such continuous shaping forces by an incessantly shifting play of light and confusing impacts. It is no surprising that they are of little help in seeing life steadily and seeing it whole.
For these and other reasons, just when the humanities are more than ever needed and at a decisive turn of human fate, they are becoming through multifarious distraction—ranging from the movie to the graduate school—inoperative and ineffective. But what is this turn of fate? It is the juncture, at last, of the sciences with the humanities. A juncture is a meeting together, a convergence of different principles into one event; it is also a crisis. What are meeting now head on are two unreconciled ways of conceiving Man and his good and how to pursue it. Both wish him well, but they differ radically as to how he can be helped. The physical and social sciences alike—being applications of methods of observation and calculation—conceive men as units subject to forces playing upon them from without. A man is a complex unit, no doubt—the psychologist is the last man to overlook this—but differences between men are, for science, to be accounted for in terms of past influences (genes, prenatal supply, early nurture, education, etc.) and present conditions. Any inquiry based upon experimentation and comparison develops such a conception; it abstracts, in its own defence, from other aspects. Thus a man's desires and opinions and beliefs, the springs of his action and sources of his triumphs or sufferings, are likewise, for science, to be studied from without. If they are ever investigable at all by science, the must be public and they must be manipulatable: that is the methodical crux. It is the modes of such manipulation and the resultant behaviour which are really being studied. To the psychologist education is control of behaviour. Not unnaturally, therefore, mass influence techniques, by which groups in Germany, Japan, and elsewhere have controlled the behaviour of vast masses of population (though the behaviour was unfortunate), have come to offer—to better hands, no doubt—alluring prospects of doing man good even against his will.
In contrast, the humanities pin a faith, which is experimentally still ungrounded, on the ideal autonomy of the individual man. He is happiest who is least able to be changed from without, as Socrates averred (Republic, 381). Man is not a thing to be pushed about, however kindly or beneficently. He is a spirit who learns—not as a slave learns (Republic, 536E), but be exercising the freedom which is his being.
I should illustrate this opposition. I may do so best by an extract from page 18 of Who Shall Be Educated?, by Lloyd Warner and R.J. Havighurst, though the authors would, I hope, be horrified by the implications I am about to find in their sentences.
We will look at our American social system, which largely controls our behaviour, much as we would at a complex maze in which animals learn to behave. In such a system we must be taught to learn our way around as we grow up if we are to live normal lives and to behave normally as adults. This is true for all the Tom Browns, Katherine Greens, and Joe Sienkowitzes of our society. Growing up consists in learning how to behave, and learning how to behave means acquiring the proper responses to the batteries of social stimuli which compose our social order.It is the last sentence to which I would draw most attention. Should 'learning how to behave' mean anything like that? to a humanist (or a Platonist) it should mean learning the what's and why's of human good—what man's duties and responsibilities and his right relations to his fellows are, and learning how to stick to them under the terrible pressures of pleasure and pain—stronger than any lye or potash (Republic, 430)—which for ever try to force us from them. We only learn through understanding the differences and connections between things. It is possible, no doubt, to load the phrase 'acquiring the proper responses' with all this moral teaching. If we do so, of course, all is well! And I will only have been expounding for my authors their full intention. But is that what the sentence suggests? Does it no much rather suggest some smooth adjustment to and conformity with current fashions in morals, a facile acquiescence in socially acceptable mass-circulated doctrine?
Speaking of fashions, we need be no very deep students of social science to know that the heaviest massed 'batteries of social stimuli' directed upon young and old today are the ads. I listed advertisements among the disruptive agencies to which minds are now more exposed than ever before. It seems agreed that Goebbels and his gang learnt much from American advertising techniques. Even though we believe in the virtues of immunization to such attacks, we will do well to consider more seriously than is customary what the ads may be doing today to the humanities. Consider Christmas for a moment.
O never rudely will I blame this faith In the might of stars and angels
wrote Coleridge. But how about using the might of stars and angels in an attempt to sell one's wares? What's wrong about that? On a page of both stars and angels, under a caption: 'And the Angels bring…' we look to see what they do bring, and read, 'Heavenly gift robes and lingerie along the moon-lit trail leading to our star-studded Christmas collection… LUCKY STAR, above left… is all dressed up to go lounging in a cherubic rayon crepe…Radell Constellation…shining brightly on the angel's arm, dream gown of celestial rayon…matching figure-molding slip for heavenly array…', not to mention '/panties that lovely women prefer to were behind the "seens",' and lastly, that no insult should be lacking, 'MOONLIGHT MADONNA GOWN!' To attend for a second seriously to such exploits will make on wonder if he has lost his sense of humour. But it is more unwise never to reflect upon what an incessant exposure to this sort of thing may be doing to us, if only to the language which channels our inheritance. I have shown this ad to a meeting of teachers of English. My chairman, a superintendent of secondary schools in a great city, took a little umbrage. 'Didn't it at least show,' he asked, 'that the writer had profited by a sound grounding in the classics?' He seemed to think this was a proper outcome of a literary education.
We fail, I think, to realize how omnipresent these degradations are, or how much they may blur and disable the spiritual organs they play with and for what mean purposes. Was so much so skilfully designed to enfeeble and betray human judgment ever directed on a previous generation? We need men inspired by Irving Babbit's noble and tireless scorn to go on pointing to them. I will add but two examples:
In my first our hero is sitting—drinking his beer—in his overstuffed chair, his dog at his feet, the radio on, his floor strewn with papers whose headlines read, 'Cities Bombed', 'Famine', 'Air Raids'. The paper still in his hand says, 'Invasion!' Under the picture comes:
IN A WORLD OF STRIFECourage—if you please! Faith—I ask you! Is it surprising that such great words as these have become suspect: so that when people hear or see them they assume they are being got at? Where these words are no longer understood, men no longer understand themselves.
THERE'S PEACE IN BEER
In these bewildering times, where can a man turn to replenish the wells of his courage… to repair the walls of his faith?
My second: Edison Company placarding the subways in wartime with a bright-windowed villa thus legended: 'In a World of Darkness be thankful for the Light Within' or some such words. The light within—meaning their products! The strange and dismaying thing about all this is that to those responsible it will be the idea that there is anything objectionable here which will be strange. For this is not blasphemy, Would that it were! It is trivialization, which is truly dangerous. Blasphemy provokes. The trivialized mind is supine, at the mercy of slick manipulators. The outcome can be generations of dehumanized social animals in place of self-controlled, self-judging, self-ruling men and women.
Manipulation and exploitation—for the benefit of the operator, or of the subject—that is the chief danger man incurs through the decline of the humanities. The humanities are his defense against emotional bamboozlement and misdirection of the will. The student of science—without the support of that which has been traditionally carried by literature, the arts and philosophy—is unprotected; the main doctrines and positions which keep man humane are insusceptible, at present, to scientific proof. Present-day science, in fact, like dialectic in Plato's day (Republic, 539) or popular philosophizing in pre-Nazi Germany, tends to break them down. Without a vigorous and widespread upkeep of the humanities every country comes to be populated chiefly with 'suppositious sons' (Republic, 538). And science in the absence of the traditional communal loyalties can only supply their lack by indoctrination in what will probably be (as the samples run so far) nationalistic myths. Dangers due to new weapons will heighten men's susceptibility to such doctrines and also the temptation to teach them. Thus a very gloomy prospect looms up—deriving radically both from the decay of the humanities and from the exuberant vitality of the applied sciences.
It is not, however, the probability of more, and far more destructive, wars which most alarms a humanist. Circumstances are today too easily imaginable in which planetary disintegration would be a welcome release. What is daunting is the possibility that man may be permanently warped through these tensions—that the ideals which made him human may be destroyed---before their work can be taken over by science. For that science—or something into which science, given time and education by the humanities can develop—is the inheritor of their task seems to me a tenet that no true humanist, remembering Book VII of his Republic, can yield, any more than he can truly, as a humanist, despair of man.
- Speculative Instruments University of Chicago Press, 1955, pp. 57-71
- Reprinted from The Journal of General Education, Vol. I, No. 3, April 1947
- General Education in a Free Society
- Noam Chomsky on the threat to "organized human society": mid-term elections and moral and intellectual culture that ignores climate chaos and nuclear threats.
- George Monbiot on The Population Myth
- Freud's "lament" (Paul Goodman) on WWI: The Disappointments of War
- S.I. Hayakawa's "Poetry and Advertising"
Don't spend a penny on podcast advertising until you've read this.
Article word count: 3220
HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18577302
Posted by jger15 (karma: 228)
Post stats: Points: 121 - Comments: 67 - 2018-12-01T16:06:39Z
\#HackerNews #51975 #advertising #heres #learned #podcast #spent #what
Looking to advertise your business on podcasts? Don’t spend a penny until you’ve read this.
I remember the day Ahrefs’ CMO Tim told me I was “now in charge of podcast sponsorships.”
I said: “Awesome!!!”
I had never listened to a podcast in my life.
Naturally, the rest of my day was spent getting real intimate with Google. We covered important topics like:
\* What is a podcast; \* Why are podcasts popular; \* Podcast ad examples; \* Standard podcast formats
You get the gist. Here’s an overview of what Google told me that day:
\* Podcast listeners are among the most engaged and loyal audiences ever. The nature of the medium means that podcast hosts speak directly into our ears for over 30 minutes at a time, and many listeners build a strong affinity with the content and show host. Makes sense! \* The traditional success metrics are impressions and downloads per show. Obviously, the higher the numbers, the better. \* Podcast advertisers generally choose to have a dedicated landing page and a promotional offer for each podcast they sponsor – this is how they track conversions and the overall success of their ads.
I also learned that there are three main categories of ads in podcast sponsorships:
1. Pre‐roll: ~15–30 second ad at the start of the show.
2. Mid‐roll: ~1‐minute ad in the middle of the show.
3. Post‐roll: ~15–30 second ad at the end of the show.
As a general rule, mid‐rolls are the most expensive, followed by pre and post‐rolls.
Cool, I thought, this all sounds pretty straightforward.
You know how the story goes by now: I was quite wrong.
Over the course of half a year, I trial‐and‐errored my way through all the things that Google doesn’t tell you (at least, until this page starts to rank for podcast‐related terms.)
The good news? I’m about to share everything we learned with you.
Let’s start right from the beginning, shall we?
First Attempt: $14,200 Spent
While I’d personally never listened to a podcast before 2018, that isn’t true of 44% of the US population.
There’s a huge, thriving community of podcast listeners who avidly follow their favorite hosts, discuss takeaways from the latest episodes and recommend shows to each other. Many people even make a good living off podcasts now!
Taking notice of all of this, Tim decided to pay this channel some attention over a year ago.
Our first experience with podcast advertising: Tim spent ~14k USD to promote a special offer on five different podcasts, tracking traffic and leads by creating a specific landing page for each show.
Here are the results:
Podcasts sponsored: 5
Hack the entrepreneur by Jon Nastor
PNR With This Old Marketing by Joe Pulizzi and Robert Rose
“Mad Marketing” & “The Hubcast” by Marcus Sheridan & George Thomas
“$100 MBA Show” by Omar Zenhom
Trial signups: 11
The conclusion, in Tim’s own words:
It was quite foolish to expect a substantial ROI from “cold advertising” a complex product like Ahrefs with a 30‐second pre‐roll in a 30‐minute podcast.
This is probably a good time to mention what Ahrefs does.
We’re an industry‐leading SEO toolset. We help you get more website traffic from search engines and increase sales. We’re also very well known for our blog, which at the point of writing, sees close to 175K organic traffic a month.
a screenshot of our organic traffic growth via Ahrefs’ Site Explorer
Tim’s first thought was that we’d never sponsor podcasts again (and no wonder; it cost us almost $1.3k for each trial signup!)
But then he noticed something. While attending conferences and networking with people, many of them told him that they’d heard about Ahrefs in podcasts.
Sometimes an existing user would mention that they were happy to hear about us on their favorite show; sometimes a random person (not even in marketing) would remember us from an old podcast mention. Even if they didn’t convert at the time, they thought that Ahrefs was kind of cool—and this brand recognition stayed in the back of their mind.
That’s when it all clicked.
We were going about it all wrong—rather than being a tool for lead generation, podcast advertising is a tool for gaining exposure and brand awareness.
I wish the rest were history.
Second Attempt: $37,775 Spent
Armed with Tim’s findings, I set to work with a new understanding of how podcast advertising fit into our marketing strategy.
These are the lessons I learned.
Get in early, because the “big” podcasts are always full.
I began by creating a spreadsheet of all the podcasts I’d reach out to.
It was glorious. I looked for recommendations on Slack channels and Facebook groups. Trawled through “Best Podcasts” listicles and Reddit threads. Sorted the list by category: SEO, digital marketing, entrepreneurship, finance, and so on and so forth.
Then came the fun part: making actual contact and whittling them down.
Many podcasts don’t explicitly state that they accept sponsorships on their websites, so you’ll have to do a manual check.
Usually, the top podcasts are open to sponsorships and openly broadcast this. Many even have dedicated pages and “sales pitches,” like this one from Entrepreneurs on Fire.
Just one problem: these podcasts are really, really popular.
So much that when I started contacting them around mid‐April 2018, many were already fully booked for the quarter (some even through the year!.)
Note: This is actually a good thing because it means that these podcasts care about the quality of their content. Nobody wants to listen to a podcast that’s chock full of ads. You don’t want to sponsor a podcast that’s squeezing you in with four other sponsors, either.
Back to the topic.
After securing some positive responses, I found out that…
Pricing is completely arbitrary.
Some podcasts are completely transparent with their pricing structures and publish this on their websites.
Unfortunately, most aren’t. You’ll have to contact each podcast and ask for their current rates.
Oh, and many podcasts offer set “packages” for sponsorship, where they include things like email newsletter mentions of your brand, social media promotion of the episode, etc.
So, how much does podcast sponsorship cost?
I wish I could give you a more concrete answer than “it depends,” but I really can’t. The shows set the pricing (this is sometimes negotiable, especially if you’re looking to sponsor for a longer period).
This can range anywhere from $300 per episode to…well, see for yourself.
This is the full list of podcasts that Ahrefs ended up sponsoring this year, along with how much it cost us.
*If you’re looking to sponsor these podcasts, their rates may change from the time of publishing.
Some podcasts offer contracts to be signed, while others simply send an invoice. You can request a contract if you’re uncomfortable with not having one.
Classically, ad placements don’t vary much.
Remember what Google told us about pre, mid and end rolls?
This is generally true, although they’re not always all available (or labeled as such.)
Get in touch with your chosen podcast, and you’ll instantly find out what the deal is for each show.
Here’s an example:
Whether or not they call it a midroll, this offer is exactly that.
The ads themselves, on the other hand, vary wildly.
Most podcasts will ask you to provide an advertisement “script”. These are usually the ones that offer pre, mid and post‐rolls.
You’ll need to prepare some pointers or paragraphs (follow each podcast’s instructions) for the show host to read off. You can either create it yourself or get someone from your marketing team to do it.
Here’s an actual one I wrote:
Even while writing it, I found “ad reads” like these to be rather unauthentic—you can see that I was trying to get the podcast host to add their own spin on it and share their own experience with Ahrefs.
No matter how good a podcast host is, true enthusiasm for your brand is hard to fake. So I count myself lucky that I ran into John from Marketing over Coffee early on.
When I reached out to him, this is what he proposed:
This blew my mind: he can do that for us?!
Podcast hosts know their audience better than anyone else. Having them promote us in their natural voice, and in a completely organic, non‐scripted way, was definitely the best way to go.
I jumped on board in a second, and that turned out to be a fantastic decision.
Podcast sponsorship is incredibly time‐consuming.
Let’s take a moment to recap everything we’ve learned so far.
These are the absolute basics of how to sponsor a podcast:
1. Find a suitable podcast. Their audience and content tone should align with your brand’s.
2. Reach out and learn about their pricing packages and availability.
3. Decide on a price point, type of ad, timeslot and other miscellaneous items.
4. Iron out the ad copy and delivery, along with other deliverables like your brand logo, newsletter copy, etc.
5. Enjoy the shows when they air. Keep in touch to answer any final questions along the way.
Sounds time‐consuming as heck?
It really is.
As you can probably tell at this point, there is A LOT of back‐and‐forth involved in sponsoring a podcast.
The more established a podcast is, the more rigid their processes are and the longer you’ll have to spend discussing things and ironing out details.
Be very prepared for some frustration and lots of lost time. It’s not anybody’s fault; sometimes things just don’t work out.
I’m mentioning this just in case somebody sees this article, decides that podcast ads are another “low‐hanging fruit” type of marketing activity, and assumes that all you need to do is toss some money into it and sit back.
Getting the Most From Your Advertising Spend
Since we decided to do away with conversion tracking, I had to get a little creative with how we went about handling our advertisements.
Here’s the highlight reel of how we got the most out of our budget.
Organic, not scripted, mentions
This is really important to us, and I find that results are the best this way.
This means that we give podcast hosts a free Ahrefs account, walk them through our tools (it’s ideal if they’re already familiar with us) and give them full control over all mentions of us and their placement in the shows.
This is the difference between a scripted sponsorship mention and a non‐scripted one.
Not to say that scripted ads are bad, necessarily. In the clip above, Rebecca does an absolutely fantastic job of promoting us according to the script I provided. She’s enthusiastic, authoritative and even adds on some points of her own.
But when the podcast host is fully fluent with our tools and then given the freedom to promote us however they wish, the difference in both the depth of content and persuasive strength is quite clear.
Again, think of this as enabling the host to be your brand ambassador.
This has benefits beyond just higher quality mentions on their own show, by the way.
Proof: Matt Giovanisci of Moneylab went on other shows like Niche Pursuits and The Fizzle Show (episode 285) and raved about us there, too. We got a handful of new signups after. (You’re the best, Matt!)
Some of my favorite “ads” from the shows we’ve sponsored so far:
This epic long introduction from the guys at Moneylab:
Just another regular mention from the guys at Marketing over Coffee:
Giveaways + social media engagement
It seems that the current industry standard is for advertisers to set up a unique promo code and specific landing page for tracking purposes, as well as to give people a nice incentive to convert.
Since Ahrefs never runs any promotions or discounts and we weren’t looking at podcasts as a direct lead generation channel, we figured out another way to spice up our podcast mentions.
What we do instead is run Ahrefs account giveaways with a tweet‐to‐enter mechanic.
It’s a win‐win for everyone involved: the podcast host gets a great prize to boost audience engagement and some extra social shares. We get extra attention to our message and a way to gauge if the ad resonated well with that show’s audience.
And of course, listeners love the chance to win a subscription to the tool they heard about on the show.
This started out pretty simple: listen to the podcast, then tweet @ahrefs and @podcast to be entered into the draw.
Hey @mktgovercoffee, enter me to win a free @ahrefs account. Love the show! Thanks guys. — Kevin Steffey (@steffeyk) July 18, 2018
After a couple of weeks of this, I got a little smarter and began playing around with the entry format.
Right now, I like asking people to convince us as to why they should win the account. It makes for entries like these:
My papa always said “Don’t work hard, work smart!”…I can write countless articles and hope some get some traffic (hard), or I can use @ahrefs to learn which topics people are actually searching for (smart!) #moneylab — Brent Wehmeyer (@brentwehmeyer) October 10, 2018 @ahrefs – I need a free year of ahrefs because I recently acquired two sites where the traffic charts look like this. 😬😬😬 A setback is just a set up for a comeback, right? #MoneyLab cc: @MattGiovanisci @andyfieb pic.twitter.com/nGgOyOUjd6 — James Sowers (@jamesrsowers) October 22, 2018
People are clearly excited to win an account and know exactly what they’ll use it for—definitely a win for working with Moneylab.
This also ties nicely into…
We pulled off something really cool with John and Chris at Marketing over Coffee: we managed to get one of the winners of the account giveaways back on the show to give us a testimonial!
You can’t get much more authentic than this. Have a listen and see.
While this is a little difficult to pull off regularly, it’s a good example of the cool things you can do with the podcast medium.
Working with foreign‐language markets
Early on in our podcast venture, Andres Kloster from La Maquina del SEO (translated: The SEO Machine) asked us to sponsor his podcast—which is held entirely in Spanish.
It seemed like a great opportunity to bypass the huge language barrier we experience with the Latin American market, so I went ahead with an exclusive partnership.
It turned out to be a big success.
Nobody in the Ahrefs team speaks Spanish or is familiar with the market, so Andres and his team do all the groundwork for us.
Quick example: they source for and conduct interviews with SEOs from Spain that we’d otherwise never be able to form a connection with (Natzir Turrado, Ruben Alonso, David Ayala, José Márquez and Juan González Villa, to name some names).
They also create content for us in Spanish and distribute it to their audience, which gives us a lot of exposure.
Just look at these sweet engagement numbers for the September 2018 giveaway:
The #lamaquinadelseo hashtag on Twitter is really active, too, where Ahrefs is featured lots.
I’ve even noticed recently that Spanish speakers have started asking Andres questions about Ahrefs tools after listening to his podcasts.
Job well done in my book!
It’s not completely true that we’ve stopped all tracking of our podcast sponsorship efforts.
When you sign up for a paid trial with us, we have a mandatory field that asks where you heard about us. I keep a pretty close eye on this.
This is what things look like currently:
From July to October 2018, we’ve seen 126 paid trial signups from “podcast.”
Prior to these four months of active sponsorship, we record 99 signups from “podcast” in total, ever.
Some things to note:
1. Our $37,775 spend includes shows we sponsored that haven’t aired yet;
2. Sometimes people quote the podcast show itself or even the host’s name, so the actual numbers are higher;
3. Ahrefs is often mentioned organically on non‐sponsored podcasts, so not all of these are due to sponsored mentions;
4. We used to run a free trial instead of the current paid one, which means it was easier to get signups in the past.
Yes, the numbers aren’t the most accurate. But this is enough to give us a good feel for what’s working and what isn’t.
You know the sponsorship is working when people say things like this:
Or they enter our giveaway with videos like this (this guy won the subscription.)
Hey @ahrefs, @MattGiovanisci and @andyfieb! This is why I deserve to win the light account. Also, here is a youtube video to get some extra points.https://t.co/ZFmeoO9Xpk pic.twitter.com/m2iR0pOzXR — Diego Vizcaino (@Y_Existo) October 26, 2018
Statistics like downloads and impressions are fancy, but they don’t count for much in the end (aren’t these numbers terribly easy to game, anyway?)
My main takeaway: it’s not always all about measurable ROI. If you look in the right places, you’re likely to see some other kind of magic at work.
Final Tips on Choosing a Podcast to Sponsor
The main thing to decide is whether you’d like to sponsor a “bigger” or “smaller” podcast. There are pros and cons for both (if your budget allows for it, feel free to experiment with both, of course.)
Bigger podcasts come with the benefit of a huge existing audience and lots of experience—they can really get your name out to an impressive number of listeners.
They tend to have broader topics, are extremely professional and pretty much guarantee the quality you’ll be getting, from timely communications down to the actual show production. On these shows, people might not become customers instantly, but it’s likely that they’ll make mental notes and might convert in the future.
Cons? They tend to be expensive and can be a little rigid. Since they have a dedicated team and processes in place (you often don’t even get to connect with the host himself at all), there’s zero room for flexibility – you work around their format. That’s the only way that you’ll be granted access to their audience.
My advice is: don’t be afraid to take a chance on a “smaller” podcast.
They may not have crazy impressive reach or download statistics to show you, but they’re often more affordable, more passionate, more willing to work with you and most importantly, generally have a super strong personal connection with their audience.
Also, look out for signs of enthusiasm and passion as early on as possible.
How excited the podcast host is about your product will translate directly into how excited their audience gets about you.
This is what you want to see:
Because this translates into mentions like this:
Another thing: “smaller” podcasts tend to be a lot more proactive and dedicated to making the partnership work for both of you, while “bigger” podcasts have brands lined up through the year just waiting for a sponsorship slot. They aren’t going to go out of their way to accommodate you.
This is the kind of email you’ll get from a more established podcast:
And this is one from a “smaller” one.
So: depending on your budget and resources, find a podcast that’s a good fit for you.
If you have lots of money and not much time, you’ll probably want to work with an established podcast that will take care of all the work for you.
On the other hand, If you have a million creative ideas and want the flexibility to experiment, look for a smaller one.
Over to You
I hope this post demystified a good bit of the podcast sponsorship experience!
To sum up: working with established podcasts feels a little more “pay‐to‐play”. Or to put it admittedly crudely, kind of like an audible version of Google Adwords.
Working with smaller podcasts, on the other hand, is a different experience that feels closer to influencer marketing.
Remember that there are countless ways to work with podcasts, from giving the hosts a specific message to promote to allowing them full control and fully enabling them to be brand ambassadors. Don’t pigeonhole yourself into thinking you can only “run some pre‐written ads.”
Have you tried sponsoring a podcast before? Did you have similar takeaways or a completely different experience? Have you experienced huge success sponsoring a particular podcast?
I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below.
P.S. (If you run a podcast and think your show would be a great fit for us, drop me a line!)
HackerNewsBot debug: Calculated post rank: 103 - Loop: 259 - Rank min: 100 - Author rank: 30
A 13-count indictment was unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn charging Aleksandr Zhukov, Boris Timokhin, Mikhail Andreev, Denis Avdeev, Dmitry Novikov, Sergey Ovsyannikov, Aleksandr Isaev and…
Article word count: 1669
HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18547745
Posted by NN88 (karma: 2054)
Post stats: Points: 90 - Comments: 31 - 2018-11-27T23:09:33Z
\#HackerNews #advertising #and #cybercrime #defendants #digital #eight #for #fraud #indicted #rings #two
A 13-count indictment was unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn charging Aleksandr Zhukov, Boris Timokhin, Mikhail Andreev, Denis Avdeev, Dmitry Novikov, Sergey Ovsyannikov, Aleksandr Isaev and Yevgeniy Timchenko with criminal violations for their involvement in perpetrating widespread digital advertising fraud. The charges include wire fraud, computer intrusion, aggravated identity theft and money laundering. Ovsyannikov was arrested last month in Malaysia; Zhukov was arrested earlier this month in Bulgaria; and Timchenko was arrested earlier this month in Estonia, all pursuant to provisional arrest warrants issued at the request of the United States. They await extradition. The remaining defendants are at large.
Also unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn were seizure warrants authorizing the FBI to take control of 31 internet domains, and search warrants authorizing the FBI to take information from 89 computer servers, that were all part of the infrastructure for botnets engaged in digital advertising fraud activity. The FBI, working with private sector partners, redirected the internet traffic going to the domains (an action known as “sinkholing”) in order to disrupt and dismantle these botnets.
Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, William F. Sweeney, Jr., Assistant Director-in-Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI), and James P. O’Neill, Commissioner, New York City Police Department (NYPD) announced the charges and domain seizures.
“As alleged in court filings, the defendants in this case used sophisticated computer programming and infrastructure around the world to exploit the digital advertising industry through fraud,” stated United States Attorney Donoghue. “This case sends a powerful message that this Office, together with our law enforcement partners, will use all our available resources to target and dismantle these costly schemes and bring their perpetrators to justice, wherever they are.” Mr. Donoghue thanked the FBI Cyber Division for its extraordinary efforts in carrying out the multi-year investigation.
“As alleged, these individuals built complex, fraudulent digital advertising infrastructure for the express purpose of misleading and defrauding companies who believed they were acting in good faith, and costing them millions of dollars. This kind of exploitation undermines confidence in the system, on the part of both companies and their customers,” stated FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge Sweeney. “Thanks to the hard work of our legal attachés and law enforcement partners overseas, with the cooperation of our international and U.S.-based private sector partners, the defendants will face justice for their alleged crimes.”
“This investigation highlights public- and private-sector collaboration across the globe, and again confirms the absolute necessity for interagency information-sharing. Criminals – especially those operating via the internet – do not concern themselves with jurisdictional boundaries, so it is critical that the law-enforcement community works together to achieve our shared goal of protecting the people we serve,” stated NYPD Commissioner O’Neill. “I thank and commend the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District, and all the investigators with the FBI Cyber Division and the NYPD. Together, we are ensuring that the vital systems and technologies of our economy are kept safe.”
The Criminal Scheme
The internet is, in large part, freely available to users worldwide because it runs on digital advertising: website owners display advertisements on their sites and are compensated for doing so by intermediaries representing businesses seeking to advertise their goods and services to real human customers. In general, digital advertising revenue is based on how many users click or view the ads on those websites. As alleged in court filings, the defendants in this case represented to others that they ran legitimate companies that delivered advertisements to real human internet users accessing real internet webpages. In fact, the defendants faked both the users and the webpages: they programmed computers they controlled to load advertisements on fabricated webpages, via an automated program, in order to fraudulently obtain digital advertising revenue.
The Datacenter-Based Scheme (Methbot)
As alleged in the indictment, between September 2014 and December 2016, Zhukov, Timokhin, Andreev, Avdeev and Novikov operated a purported advertising network (“Ad Network #1”) and, with Ovsyannikov’s assistance, carried out a digital ad fraud scheme. Ad Network #1 had business arrangements with other advertising networks whereby it received payments in return for placing advertising placeholders (“ad tags”) on websites. Rather than place these ad tags on real publishers’ websites, however, Ad Network #1 rented more than 1,900 computer servers housed in commercial datacenters in Dallas, Texas and elsewhere, and used those datacenter servers to load ads on fabricated websites, “spoofing” more than 5,000 domains. To create the illusion that real human internet users were viewing the advertisements loaded onto these fabricated websites, the defendants programmed the datacenter servers to simulate the internet activity of human internet users: browsing the internet through a fake browser, using a fake mouse to move around and scroll down a webpage, starting and stopping a video player midway, and falsely appearing to be signed into Facebook. Furthermore, the defendants leased more than 650,000 Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses, assigned multiple IP addresses to each datacenter server, and then fraudulently registered those IP addresses to make it appear that that the datacenter servers were residential computers belonging to individual human internet users who were subscribed to various residential internet service providers. As a result of this scheme, Ad Network #1 falsified billions of ad views and caused businesses to pay more than $7 million for ads that were never actually viewed by real human internet users.
The Botnet-Based Scheme (3ve.2 Template A)
As also alleged in the indictment, between December 2015 and October 2018, Ovsyannikov, Timchenko and Isaev operated a purported advertising network (“Ad Network #2”) and carried out another digital ad fraud scheme. In this scheme, the defendants used a global “botnet”¾a network of malware-infected computers operated without the true owner’s knowledge or consent¾to perpetrate their fraud. The defendants developed an intricate infrastructure of command-and-control servers to direct and monitor the infected computers and check whether a particular infected computer had been flagged by cybersecurity companies as associated with fraud. By using this infrastructure, the defendants accessed more than 1.7 million infected computers, belonging to ordinary individuals and businesses in the United States and elsewhere, and used hidden browsers on those infected computers to download fabricated webpages and load ads onto those fabricated webpages. Meanwhile, the owners of the infected computers were unaware that this process was running in the background on their computers. As a result of this scheme, Ad Network #2 falsified billions of ad views and caused businesses to pay more than $29 million for ads that were never actually viewed by real human internet users.
The Botnet Takedown
Following the arrest of Ovsyannikov by Malaysian authorities, U.S. law enforcement authorities, in conjunction with various private sector companies, began the process of dismantling the criminal cyber infrastructure utilized in the botnet-based scheme, which involved computers infected with malicious software known in the cybersecurity community as “Kovter.” The FBI executed seizure warrants to sinkhole 23 internet domains used to further the charged botnet-based scheme or otherwise used to further the Kovter botnet. The FBI also executed search warrants at 11 different U.S. server providers for 89 servers related to the charged botnet-based scheme or Kovter.
In addition, as part of its investigation, the FBI discovered an additional cybercrime infrastructure committing digital advertising fraud through the use of datacenter servers located in Germany and a botnet of computers in the United States infected with malicious software known in the cybersecurity community as “Boaxxe.” The FBI executed seizure warrants to sinkhole eight domains used to further this scheme and thereby disrupt yet another botnet engaged in digital advertising fraud.
Finally, the United States, with the assistance of its foreign partners, executed seizure warrants for multiple international bank accounts in Switzerland and elsewhere that were associated with the schemes.
The charges in the indictment are merely allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by the Office’s National Security and Cybercrime Section. Assistant United States Attorneys Saritha Komatireddy, Alexander F. Mindlin, Michael T. Keilty and Karin K. Orenstein are in charge of the prosecution.
The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs, the FBI’s Legal Attachés abroad and foreign authorities in multiple countries provided critical assistance in this case. The Office extends its appreciation to the Attorney General’s Chambers of Malaysia, the Royal Malaysian Police, the Malaysian National Central Bureau of Interpol, the Supreme Cassation Prosecution Office of Bulgaria, the Regional Prosecution Office of Varna, the Cybercrime Department of the Bulgarian General Directorate for Combating Organized Crime, the Bulgarian Ministry of Interior Regional Directorate of Varna, the Office of the Prosecutor General of Estonia, the Estonian Police and Border Guard Board and the FBI’s Legal Attaché Offices in Malaysia, Bulgaria and Estonia for their assistance in apprehending defendants in this case. The Office also extends its appreciation to the German Bundeskriminalamt Cybercrime Intelligence Operations Department and Polizei Sachsen Polizeidirektion Zwickau Criminal Investigation Department, the Dutch National Police, the United Kingdom National Crime Agency, the French Police Cybercrime Central Bureau, the Swiss Federal Office of Justice, FBI’s Legal Attaché Offices in those countries, and Europol for their assistance in various aspects of the investigation and botnet takedown.
Multiple private sector organizations also provided critical assistance in this case. The Office extends its appreciation to White Ops, Inc. and Google LLC for their assistance in the investigation and botnet takedown. The Office also extends its appreciation to Microsoft Corporation, ESET, Trend Micro Inc., Symantec Corporation, CenturyLink, Inc, F-Secure Corporation, Malwarebytes, MediaMath, the National Cyber-Forensics and Training Alliance and The Shadowserver Foundation for their assistance in the botnet takedown.
For technical details on the malware and botnets referenced in this case, please see US-CERT Alert TA18-331A: https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA18-331A
ALEKSANDR ZHUKOV Age: 38
BORIS TIMOKHIN Age: 39
MIKHAIL ANDREEV Age: 34
Russian Federation and Ukraine
DENIS AVDEEV Age: 40
DMITRY NOVIKOV Age: Unknown
SERGEY OVSYANNIKOV Age: 30
Republic of Kazakhstan
ALEKSANDR ISAEV Age: 31
YEVGENIY TIMCHENKO Age: 30
Republic of Kazakhstan
E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 18-CR-633 (ERK)
HackerNewsBot debug: Calculated post rank: 70 - Loop: 196 - Rank min: 60 - Author rank: 47