back to article Google-sponsored research helps ad-slingers find fanbois on social networks

Next time you post an image of your new El Reg prosthetic beak on the internet, be aware that marketers will soon have a tool to let them spot it, isolate it, and figure out what it's pictured alongside. In a paper to be delivered in Sydney today, academics from Carnegie Mellon University demonstrate a new approach to …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Sir Sham Cad

    Watch and bag

    So if an image of me is posted on t'internets and the software notices I'm wearing a watch and carrying a bag it'll offer me adverts for a) something I clearly own already and b) a luxury, high margin product version of the cheap watch and Primarni bag that reflects my actual spending power. "We noticed you drive a Fiat Punto, have you checked out our great deals on Ferrari 458?"

    Fantastic tech, don't get me wrong, but (I am not a marketing expert in any way so I likely am wrong) I don't see this having a major impact on how effectively I'm advertised at.

    1. ※

      Re: Watch and bag

      I read it as a.i. learning where and when to advertise, rather than specific individuals per se.

  2. Martin Budden Bronze badge

    Impulse buyers?

    Am I wrong in suspecting that the only people affected (sucked in) by online ads are impulse buyers? 'Cause I'm not one, and I ignore online ads.

    1. Havin_it

      Re: Impulse buyers?

      Well, that's a bit of a narrow assessment. There may be various reasons for responding positively to an advert:

      * It's for something you never knew even existed;

      * It's for something you never realised you needed/wanted until the advert convinced you as much;

      * It's for something that you instantly think looks desirable and will elevate your social status;

      * It presents a value-proposition such as an unprecedentedly-high discount on an item you wanted but previously considered too expensive.

      As for "ignoring" the adverts, may I submit that I bet you don't, not really or at least not all of them. Much as I dislike everything they stand for, every so often one does catch your attention, whether it then successfully converts that (through one of the above qualifications) into a desire to buy or not.

      All that said, I still believe the business of targeting adverts is pitifully primitive, and I can't see this latest wrinkle making much difference. I mean, if the wonks at Lacoste *need* the help of these clever algorithms to know that most of their apparel's most ardent fans are in the [image/context metadata] "PURE BANGIN MENTAL CASTLEMILK PO$$E FAK YUZE", then (a) they must be terribly sheltered and (b) what exactly are they going to do about it anyway?

      I see a lot of scope for positive feedback loops in this system too. How do they know it's not the latest viral of V-Hudge falling out of [or in] Nobu, or some teehee macro featuring Michelangelo's David doing the rounds, that they've just hoovered up 187,000 times because it featured a Prada bag? If one had a mind to, I suspect you could game it remorselessly.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    P.O.S. 51

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020