-
This this is the wrong frame, one that has long been maintained by ad tech companies who claim to speak for creators & publishers, but only speak for themselves. Pro-Privacy changes only hurt *because* the marketplaces have been redefined using privacy violating metrics. nathanbarry/1402298075930980361Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 52 Retweets
❤️ 104 Favorites
Mood -6 🙁
-
Take a step back. These privacy invasive metrics are not the baseline for marketing success in any marketplace other then digital display, apps and email. Marketing has been successful, small businesses have been successful, in every other venue and period of history.Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 2 Retweets
❤️ 26 Favorites
Mood +8 🙂
-
Marketing and traveling music acts have all found ways to succeed just fine in the past. The normal counter argument here is that the invasive-tracking digital economy supports a larger scale of companies and creatives. But does it? How do we define that exactly?...Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 2 Retweets
❤️ 18 Favorites
Mood +7 🙂
-
See, if you define in scale of businesses. Then sure. But if you define it in share of wealth, seeing as how starting a business is traditionally defined as a path to greater income, it's not so clear, because income inequality has been unstoppable. pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-in-income-and-wealth-inequality/Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 11 Favorites
Mood +10 🙂
-
By redefining marketing as requiring new metrics and invasive tracking, add tech firms sit in the middle, justify themselves, and take revenue from both sides. Their 50-70% share up run invasive tracking is less money to publishers, but also less running advertising for buyers.Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 2 Retweets
❤️ 14 Favorites
Mood +1 🙂
-
*to runOn twitter.com
Mood 0