Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data
by btilly on Tuesday May 19, 2020 @03:31PM
(#23239100)
If the potential conversion rates are indeed higher, then that would have shown up on A/B tests.
The basic advertising infrastructure has been A/B tested to death. And one of the biggest takeaways that is that what people think that they respond to is not what they actually will respond to. One of the next biggest is that people who actually have responded are often completely unaware of what it is that they are responding to.
The underlying reason is simple. A/B testing is very good at teasing out what we respond to before we consciously notice that we are responding. But since that happens before we are conscious of it, we lack awareness of what caused that.
But the simple fact remains. If you think that advertising would work better if they just did things the way that you think that they should, you are almost certainly wrong.
The basic advertising infrastructure has been A/B tested to death. And one of the biggest takeaways that is that what people think that they respond to is not what they actually will respond to. One of the next biggest is that people who actually have responded are often completely unaware of what it is that they are responding to.
The underlying reason is simple. A/B testing is very good at teasing out what we respond to before we consciously notice that we are responding. But since that happens before we are conscious of it, we lack awareness of what caused that.
But the simple fact remains. If you think that advertising would work better if they just did things the way that you think that they should, you are almost certainly wrong.