this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
739 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

70041 readers
25 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Edit: I misread the post to be 28% CTR, you can ignore my comment.


There's absolutely no fucking way CTR for those is 28%.

I do not believe that.

Posts don't even have a CTR that high, that would mean the average user goes no further than 4 ads before clicking one.

Now I wish I bought some stock so I could get in on a shareholder lawsuit about them cooking the books on this shit.

Edit: for context, it's 0.9% on FB, 1.9% on Google.

What's more likely, someone at reddit fucked up an analysis, or these ads are 14x better than Google or 31x better than FB?

[–] Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Improved by 28%, not at 28%.

That would be some awful idiocracy type of future and we’re not there… yet.

[–] elvith@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

...but it's got electrolytes!

[–] dave@feddit.uk 7 points 1 year ago

I think maybe a re-read is in order. They’re claiming the new format outperforms the (presumably) old format by 28%, not that the CTR is 28%.

[–] numberfour002@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What’s more likely, someone at reddit fucked up an analysis, or these ads are 14x better than Google or 31x better than FB?

What's most likely is that you misread or misinterpreted what was stated. It says the new format outperforms other types of ads by 28%, not that they get 28% CTR.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Yes... It was me... I read it wrong

[–] Identity3000@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I replied to you you elsewhere in this thread, but they never claimed to be getting 28% CTR. They only claimed that this format performs 28% better than alternatives.

If a different ad format was getting 1% CTR, then a 28% improvement is still only a total 1.28% CTR.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks, I've updated both comments.

[–] Ihnivid@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, generally I'm all for shitting on reddit, but there's also a third option: Reader's not understanding what 28% better than other ad types means.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Yep, I misread it and have updated my comment