Instagram Ads Now Include Mobile Banners (adweek.com) 37
More ads are coming to Instagram. The Facebook-owned photo and video sharing network has begun rolling out a feature that links ads to profile pages. When someone clicks on a profile, for instance, they will see a banner at the bottom, reports AdWeek. The banner prompts the user to either visit a website or download an app. From the report: According to an Instagram rep, so-called "profile taps" will be included in click reporting for advertisers and are rolling out internationally.
In a statement, Instagram said, "We found that Instagrammers were routinely tapping on a company's name from a direct response ad to learn more. Now when that happens, the call-to-action button from that same ad extends to the company's profile page to make it easier for people to discover a business they care about."
Yay! More advertising! (Score:3)
Yay! More advertising, lucky us! Yippee, whoo hoo, lets all celebrate!
Advertising doesn't work (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The only ads I clicked in 25 years was a few times on
And I do not have Instagram
Re: (Score:2)
I'm convinced that most or all of the clicks that popups claim are accidental, when people are trying to hit the close button.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
0.02% out of how many millions? I'll play those odds
Re: (Score:2)
0.02% out of how many millions? I'll play those odds
This is pretty much the underlying assumption of all marketing, thing is - there is no research backing up any of these. There are some number for in-line topic-relevant search results, but there is no numbers for social media and in-app banners. It could be 2*10^-18 for all we know and you can't make these odds work.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, it's a gamble, but considering how little effort it takes and the low cost, why not try to make some mad money on the side? I will grant that the market is saturated right now. Just gotta come up with a new gimmick to reel in the suckers...
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's a gamble
At this point you are into lottery-jackpot odds.
Just gotta come up with a new gimmick to reel in the suckers..
This is how you got to these shitty odds in the first place. People willing to punch only so many monkeys before you are mentally or technologically ignored.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, it's not me personally, but somebody out there is deciding it's worth it, even if it's just a way washing money that can be written off. If the business was such a miserable failure, you wouldn't see so much of it.
Will never see the ads... (Score:2)
You get what you pay for... I don't use Instagram. Tried it a long time ago and didn't feel the need to share my pictures. Don't use Facebook app either, but I am not a very social person.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, Zuckerberg will be putting banner ads on your lawn soon.
Easier to discover a business?! (Score:1)
No. Easier to pick up a virus..
Re: (Score:2)
BS (Score:1)
Routinely? The word they are looking for is "inadvertently". No one deliberately clicks or taps an ad unless they've been tricked into doing so.
The desperation to justify their existence is comical.
Translation (Score:5, Insightful)
In a statement, Instagram said, "We found that Instagrammers were routinely tapping on a company's name from a direct response ad to learn more."
Or, you know, users routinely click these ads by accident because they take up about a quarter of the screen (at least), or when trying to hit the tiny X button that is about the size of the period at the end of this sentence.
ad tolerance level of desired audience (Score:2)
to state the obvious but not much mentioned fact, most of what are called tech companies are nothing more than ad pushers.
everything else is secondary.
all their tech and other hypes, and constant need to keep high media profile, is driven by that need to push ads through higher usage. that is why even most of the stories that appear here in slashdot about them are lacking in substance and highly exaggerated.
as market saturates they will push to the limit of ad tolerance of the users they have.
it is about ti
Re: (Score:2)
What if I started a Facebook/Instagram type site with no ads, and with decent spam control, and charged $1/year for a subscription, paid for through Paypal or Amazon and accepting Visa Prepaid?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really, there's no need for intelligent users to pay even $1, when there are more than enough idiots clicking ads to make the whole thing free.
Same reason they don't charge admission to a casino.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the context of a pay-per-account service, decent spam control tends to evolve into "your e-mail/ip is blocked and you have to pay another dollar", and eventually into "your spam activity only ever reaches ~5-50 users, and you need ~20,000 per $1 cost to break even". Paywall spam filters are efficient because spammers rely on a model of spending hundreds of dollars to innundate hundreds of millions of users, and you can easily turn that cost into millions of dollars for the same volume exposure if your
So? (Score:2)
Just another reason not to update my app... (Score:2)
I still have the old brown-and-tan icon. I won't update it until this one stops working - which I am sure will be soon, since they now have financial incentive to get people on the new app.
Yay corporate-speak! (Score:2)
Isn't it great how corporations have their own language? Apparently the correct English translation of, "to make it easier for people to discover a business they care about," is, "so we can sell more ads and make more money."
Will they ever figure out that no one is fooled by this BS? So you want to make money. Fine. I get that, and I don't have a problem with it. But please please please stop lying to us about everything you do! You don't have to pretend you're doing it for our good. Just say you're