this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
739 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
69392 readers
2748 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- 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
view the rest of the comments
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?
Improved by 28%, not at 28%.
That would be some awful idiocracy type of future and we’re not there… yet.
...but it's got electrolytes!
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%.
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.
Yes... It was me... I read it wrong
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.
Thanks, I've updated both comments.
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.
Yep, I misread it and have updated my comment