Facebook to Sell Targeted Ads in Your News Stream

Facebook will soon have targeted ads in your news stream. Why do I make this baseless1Okay, I got nothing… ;-) claim? Allow me to direct your attention:

Facebook has proposed an updated Statement of Rights and Responsibilities that bans sponsored status updates. That indicates two things:

  1. Facebook is contemplating commercial messages in the news stream.
  2. Facebook doesn’t want the competition. If anyone’s going to make money off advertising in your stream, it’s going to be Facebook. Don’t believe Facebook is looking out for its users in banning these third-party ads. Facebook is looking out for numero uno.

Facebook believes it knows best. They ignored all the complaints when they changed the user interface. Now, Facebook isn’t responding to requests to block quizzes in the news stream. What does this have to do with ads? Once again, two things:

  1. Facebook is good at ignoring what its users want. Ignoring all the requests for blocking quiz results is just good practice for ignoring all the requests they’ll get for blocking ads. If Facebook caves and lets us block quiz results, that will set a precedent for letting users control their news feed. They obviously can’t have that.
  2. Facebook wants these quizzes in our news streams. Facebook knows these quizzes make our news streams gutters of suck. If our streams get bad enough, Facebook knows we’ll willingly welcome anything for a break from the quizzes, even ads. We’ll be like watchers of reality TV, anxiously awaiting the next commercial break.
    Think about it. Facebook knows where we went to school, where we work, and our religion affiliations (or lack thereof). Facebook knows who our friends are and our relationship statuses. Facebook knows what we look like and where we live. Imagine looking in your news feed and seeing ads for:
  3. Weight loss programs. After all, your pictures show you’ve gained weight and you’re a fan of Weight Watchers.
  4. Hair loss treatment. Again, your pictures rat you out. If software can detect a face it can’t be hard to create software to detect bald spots. With a little tweak, the software would know from the baseball cap you wear in every single picture that you’re follicly challenged as well.
  5. ED treatments. Hopefully, your pictures don’t reveal your need for this product (please!), but a heuristic analysis of your age, relationship status, and your compensating automobile purchase (okay, your pictures do give you away) will still provide a reasonable target demographic.
  6. Plastic Surgery. Yup, blame those stupid pictures again. Try not to take offense when the ad specifically mentions your turkey neck, thick thighs, or flat chest.
  7. Divorce attorneys. At first, this seems a little harder to target. But take your relationship status, mix in a psychological analysis of your status updates and they might get lucky. Throw in all your  “private” messages and “discrete” chats with members of the opposite sex (or same, if your profile so indicates) that are not your significant other, and luck goes out the window. Facebook has you nailed.
  8. Religious tracts. Did you go to a religious private school? Unwilling to list your denomination? Are you a fan of an atheist page? Facebook knows and can sell targeted access to your stream. For an additional revenue opportunity, Facebook could up-sell these ads so they come knocking in pairs.

What ads do you expect to see in your news stream?

Dove Campaign v. Axe

The Dove Campaign strives “to make real change in the way women and young girls perceive and embrace beauty.” The campaign’s most recent viral video, Onslaught, depicts the “beauty” advertising that young girls face while developing their self images.

Exhibit A: the ads by Axe.

However, Dove and Axe are owned by the same company — Unilever.

Can you say hypocrisy?

A message from Unilever

Clutter Begone

Blogan.net was looking cluttered so I made a few changes:

  • No more ads. The money I was making (not much) wasn’t worth the visual distraction. They’ll probably come back later, but they’re gone for now.
  • No more Snap Shots preview. Josh Bancroft gave me a week before I tired of them. it took about four. Guess I’m slow…
  • No more little icons under the post titles. Even the text information is simplified.
  • I flitted between two and three columns, but with all this other junk gone, I’m down to two. I don’t have anything to put in the third column.
  • No more daily Twitter digests. If you want to follow my tweets, join Twitter and follow me there. For now, I’ll display my latest tweet on the top of my sidebar.

Those who follow my blog using its feeds will probably notice only the last change. Those who visit should also see faster loading.

Dove Onslaught

Dove released the video “Onslaught” in their Campaign for Real Beauty. Having three daughters, girls’ self image is important an important issue at our home.

Although I agree with Dove’s encouraging parents to talk to girls before they are exposed to advertising, “Onslaught” depicts such an overwhelming “beauty” culture that talking could be worthless. I don’t think that’s the message Dove intended to send.

It’s not pretty…

Hat tip: swissmiss.

MySpace Without True.com Ads

I have a MySpace account. As my tagline says, I’m “increasing the average age on MySpace.” I don’t have a lot of MySpace friends, but it’s one more way to watch my kids online. Yeah, I know, they could be sending messages that I would never see…

I’ve always hated the True.com dating service ads. Now, thanks to Firefox, GreaseMonkey and Ad Slicer for MySpace, I don’t have put up with True.com anymore. Sweet bliss. ;)

Army Strong without milblogs?

Sometimes, I think the Army gets it. One example is their new ad campaign, “Army Strong.” This is an ad that must have been created for new media. (The Army’s not going to buy time on TV to run a 2:34 minute ad.) YouTube is hosting it for free.

The military is attempting to shut down milbloggers in the interest of operational security. Yes, I understand that the Army must watch to ensure sensitive information is not disclosed. Yet, I can’t imagine why the would want to shut down what is becoming the primary source of positive news on the war. After all, the War on Terror has transitioned from a military battle to a media battle. Let’s not abandon that battlefield.