While TikTok Buys Ads on YouTube, YouTube is Buying Ads on TikTok

I just saw an ad for TikTok on a YouTube video. But at the same time YouTube is running ads on TikTok, reports Bloomberg, targeting TikTok content creators in "an effort to lure these valuable users to the Google-owned rival and capitalize on TikTok's uncertain future."

One of YouTube's ads even received over a thousand likes, with Bloomberg calling it that TikTok "is willing to accept ad dollars from one of its fiercest competitors promoting a message aimed at undercutting its business." YouTube is the latest TikTok competitor to try to capitalize on the app's looming US ban, which could go into effect in early April. Meta Platforms Inc.'s Instagram announced a new video editing tool in January, and X also teased a new video tab as part of an effort to win over TikTok's content creators...

Google would be one of the biggest beneficiaries of a ban in the US. Both its flagship video service YouTube and its TikTok copycat, YouTube Shorts, would likely see an uptick in traffic if TikTok goes away. Google also plays an unusual role in TikTok's potential ban because it runs one of two mobile app stores controlling whether people in the US can download the video app. It has blocked TikTok from its Google Play store since the divest-or-ban law went into effect January 19.

Ad swaps not buys, no cash exchanged

[iAmWaySmarterThanYou]

Back in the day when I worked for a few ad based companies we did this all the time.

Since it costs nothing to put ads into otherwise unsold ad space, not even opportunity cost, we would host ads for other sites in exchange for them hosting our ads. Not a penny changed hands, just an update in the database to put their ads into otherwise rotation at whatever the agreed upon schedule was.

Re:

[bubblyceiling]

Yup, the media and ad business is pretty sleazy

Re:

[OrangAsm]

Sounds like a bit of a reach. Around.

Re:

[geekmux]

Back in the day when I worked for a few ad based companies we did this all the time.

Since it costs nothing to put ads into otherwise unsold ad space, not even opportunity cost, we would host ads for other sites in exchange for them hosting our ads. Not a penny changed hands, just an update in the database to put their ads into otherwise rotation at whatever the agreed upon schedule was.

Yes, but did you advertise for your direct competitor?

Somehow I don’t see your old bosses approving “Get your ads for 20% cheaper than this loser!” as good filler. Free or not.

Re:

[dfghjk]

Not a surprise that your ethics and those of the companies you've worked for are one in the same.

But thanks for the insight, most people are too ethical to intuitively understand the everyday sleaze of people like you.

Re:

[doesnothingwell]

It's not very comforting, but predictable, that these assholes would find a way to make ads flow no matter what. Not serving our interests? Who cares, we can't let the public have a fucking moments rest from more lies and bullshit. Bill Hicks was right they should just kill themselves, just planting seeds. In an Ad meeting somewhere: Today we put arsenic in baby food, told the mothers it makes kids quieter.

Nebula runs ads on both

[bubblyceiling]

Meanwhile Nebula runs ads on Youtube & TikTok

Re:

[Z00L00K]

Tax deductions?

that's fine, but no more short content youtube

[The_Revelation]

As a YouTube premium member, the worst thing that's happened to YouTube is the inane shorts, and I'll continue to aggressively down vote any shorts and leave foul comments on any of these tool bag's short format videos. And I understand, the majority of the people on the planet are morons and derive great entertainment from mindless content, but why not make a special site for those special people.... Like Tik Tok?

Re:

[ChunderDownunder]

I worked around that by having 2 monitors - one in landscape for regular videos and one rotated 90 degrees for shorts shot in portrait.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Is that a solution? My brain doesn't want to look at videos like that. It keeps trying to see the stuff to the left and right of it like it normally would. This is not a problem on a small screen since I actually am looking past it at the same time, but for a big one it bothers me. I used to have a rotating display, and I did rotate it, and it eventually just got to pissing me off and I went to a 40" TV since I do not have budget to go above 60Hz at this time anyway.

I still hate looking at videos shot that

Re:

[Fly Swatter]

My workaround is to just skip portrait videos. But to each their own.

Just like ads, your brain starts to map them as if it was white space to ignore.

Reconsider That Strategy

[Kunedog]

I'll continue to aggressively down vote any shorts and leave foul comments on any of these tool bag's short format videos.

Both of those are engagement with the video, and there are theories that engagement is a large part of what Youtube and the algorithm care about, meaning you might well be helping those creators.

I'm not sure I agree with the theory, but it's plausible.

Re:

[ShanghaiBill]

Angry people are likelier than bored people to click on ads.

Social media companies have a disincentive to filter out trolls and divisive content. It's one reason (along with the changing political climate) they no longer do fact-checking. Lies are good for business.

Google Store?

[dwater]

Haven't people started using one of the other android stores?...or are the apps banned on them too?

Ouroboros

[larwe]

The online advertising market is a Moebius strip made of flypaper - incestous and governed by opaque algorithms, robot-based fraud, and completely fake metrics. As an example of this, download any "free to play" mobile game. Actually, download two of them. Each of them will probably give you incentives to watch ads for the other one. Assuming you never put any money into the system, who does this actually benefit? ONLY the advertising server, who gets a vig from both sides.

Re:

[dfghjk]

Interesting insight.

"...who does this actually benefit? ONLY the advertising server, who gets a vig from both sides."

Sure, in this instance. But in the market overall, there is "benefit" or it wouldn't exist. Most VC investments fail, that doesn't mean VCs don't benefit from their investments.

Re:

[burtosis]

But in the market overall, there is "benefit" or it wouldn't exist.

Speculation and gut feels dominate large sections of the financial sector. The idea that the market is rational is light years past ridiculous.

Re:

[larwe]

But in the market overall, there is "benefit" or it wouldn't exist.

I don't think you understand how advertising is sold. In the micro sense, it's people reading contrived/lying articles saying how they'll get mucho business from online advertising, and they put their credit card in and hope for returns. In the macro sense, it's a sales guy calling another sales guy and pitching a "you can't lose" proposition. There is no "benefit" except to the person selling the advertising.

Yay! More Circular Revenue Chains and Self-Dealing

[PubJeezy]

Yay! More Circular Revenue Chains and Self-Dealing! ByteDance and Google were both funded by Sequoia Capital. These guys are paying themselves for a useless service because it inflates the revenues of both companies which inflates the value of their investments.

This is gross. This is cartel economics.

What are ads?

[Vranitzky]

Ads? I have adblockers in Firefox and I use a cracked version of YouTube on mobile. Everytime I look at other people's phone with ads all over the place, I am disgusted. How can they out up with it? I've never seen an ad for ages. I'm glad to never have even tried tiktok, but from what I see around, it looks like it's trash. It's not so hard to avoid ads, people. Smarten up. Google has enough money. The subscription model is evil and should be actively boycotted.

The headline made me think of this BBC comedy:

[JackAxe]

French and Saunders. The scene where they're riding bikes wearing helmets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]