Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Facebook Advertising

Facebook To Introduce Video Ads 180

Posted by Soulskill
from the just-what-everyone-wanted dept.
another random user writes "Facebook is reportedly introducing video advertisements to News Feeds this summer. Reports in the Financial Times (registration required) say that the clips will last for around 15 seconds, and the first one users see each day will play automatically. The first video will apparently play without audio, and restart if the account holder chooses to activate sound. Facebook is yet to officially confirm the move, but the report claims that the social network will gradually introduce video advertising to minimize user disruption. The company's most lucrative marketing partners, including American Express, Coca Cola, Ford, Diageo and Nestle, are expected to be the first brands to make use of the feature. Facebook is said to have implemented the strategy in a bid to take a slice out of TV ad revenue by undercutting the sector."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Facebook To Introduce Video Ads

Comments Filter:
  • by swschrad (312009) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:29PM (#43657997) Homepage Journal

    and is likely to result in my pulling the plug. screw 'em.

    • by i kan reed (749298) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:38PM (#43658097) Homepage Journal

      Anyone who sat through previous Facebook abuse will sit through this. They have a monopoly on your friends. That's a hell of a thing to overcome. I deal with it by only ever talking to the friends I'm quite close to and leaving everyone else to themselves in the modern social networking era.

      • by TWiTfan (2887093) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:46PM (#43658193)

        Anyone who sat through previous Facebook abuse will sit through this. They have a monopoly on your friends. That's a hell of a thing to overcome.

        Yeah, people used to say the same thing about MySpace.

        • Sure, in the long run, every element of culture is doomed to decay, and on the internet that process is a little more rapid. I didn't mean to imply that Facebook was eternal, just that people will put up with a lot until there actually is an alternative with all their friends.

        • Yeah, people used to say the same thing about MySpace.

          MySpace only had a small portion of a typical person's friends: younger people, more computer-savvy compared to the general population. With everyone else you stayed in touch by e-mail or occasional phone calls.

          Facebook, however, is now utterly entrenched in Western society. Everyone a person keeps in touch with is likely to be on it: friends from all walks of life, relatives both close and distant, professional colleagues. And many of those friends seem to have forgotten about e-mail and expect you to contact them via FB message.

          Leaving FB is a lot harder to do than moving on from Myspace or Friendster was years ago. I know for a fact that I'd lose contact entirely with many people if I gave up my FB account.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @05:02PM (#43658365)

            That says something about the value of your friends if they are only willing to use a crappy medium to talk to you. Would you talk to a guy who only talked to you through a bullhorn?

            • by hkmwbz (531650)
              It's not that they are only willing to use a crappy medium. It's that this crappy medium is the only place to keep in touch with all these people online.
          • by Luckyo (1726890) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @05:04PM (#43658379)

            Sounds like someone who's a facebook addict.

            As someone who doesn't have a facebook account, I can tell you that you're wrong, and you'll likely realise just how wrong you are in judging the importance of facebook when you actually leave it and see that all your friends, acquaintances, people you need to contact... exist here in real life and have email accounts and phone numbers.

            • But email is not one-to-many in the way that FB is. It is point to point, not broadcast. Understand I say this as someone who pines for Usenet daily, has no great love of Facebook, and wishes for something better. I'm also struck by the irony that I'm having this discussion with some faceless person on a web forum (no offense intended, it just runs a bit against the grain of your point).

              • by Luckyo (1726890)

                Use CC or BCC. Also use mailing lists. I routinely use email as a broadcast for a hobby of mine broadcasting messages to a community of approximately 100 people.

                • I used to run a pretty active mailing list of about 30 people in my home town (pre-Facebook), and we used it for many of the same things people use Facebook for now. So been there, done that. They're all on FB now, and for many things it's actually easier. It's not FB as a concept that is flawed, just this particular execution, exacerbated by some well-understood phenomena like network effects and first across the finish line.

                • by Obfuscant (592200)
                  This is nice for you contacting all your friends, but if your friends are posting on facebook instead of keeping their own list of friend's email addresses like you do, you lose out. You can tell them you miss them, but they'll be wondering why you never respond to poke or wall messages.
                  • by Luckyo (1726890)

                    Very few people on that list are friends. It's a list designed for managing certain sports-related activity across the city I live in.

            • Sounds like someone who's a facebook addict.

              I don't care much for FB and rarely post there. I'd be very happy to leave if I knew my friends and family would follow to other means of communication.

              As someone who doesn't have a facebook account, I can tell you that you're wrong, and you'll likely realise just how wrong you are in judging the importance of facebook when you actually leave it and see that all your friends, acquaintances, people you need to contact... exist here in real life and have email accounts and phone numbers.

              Nope, I've already tried moving back to e-mail. The result is that people rarely respond, because they can't be arsed to log in to e.g. GMail often, whereas if one sends them a message via FB, they perk up instantly. Consequently, I've kept my FB account even if I use it increasingly less.

              A friend of mine who left FB entirely last year, with whom I still keep in touch because we both accept e-mail, has bemoaned instantly losing touch with most of his acquaintances. And then mutual friends of ours often ask where he is nowadays, oblivious that he'd like very much to stay in touch with them. He has sent them e-mails, but they just can't focus on e-mail communication.

              • by antdude (79039)

                Ditto. I had the same problem. People are tired of IMs, IRC, chat, e-mails, etc. outside of Facebook. I refuse to use Facebook (did have it for about three weeks before being kicked out for using fake datas). :(

              • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @11:02PM (#43661507)

                A friend of mine who left FB entirely last year, with whom I still keep in touch because we both accept e-mail, has bemoaned instantly losing touch with most of his acquaintances. And then mutual friends of ours often ask where he is nowadays

                If friend's can't be bothered to respond to your emails or telephone, then perhaps they are not your friends at all.

                • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                  Bullshit.

                  I don't think a lot of anti-Facebook people realize just how much Facebook has become integrated into people's lives and their methods of communication. It is EXPECTED that you have a Facebook account by now. Not having one makes you a social pariah apparently, and you miss out on a ton of things in you friends' lives that you probably won't hear unless you have Facebook. People aren't being rude - it's just a reflection of how society expects everyone to communicate these days. Trying to be differ

            • I also have no FB account anymoer, and I have to say that you're not as right as you might think.

              Sure, you get communication with people when you initiate conversations - but if you want to just keep up-to-date on what your friends are doing in life without having to pester them about, it's gotten much harder for the facebook-disconnected to do.

              • by oreaq (817314)

                but if you want to just keep up-to-date on what your friends are doing in life without having to pester them about, it's gotten much harder for the facebook-disconnected to do.

                I don't get it. My friends are the group of people that enjoy talking to me about their life. How can you call that "pestering"? Isn't "sharing your life" one of the things you do with friends anymore? It seems that the facebook friend status has become a (poor) surrogate for having friends instead of a way to keep in contact with "real" friends.

              • by pnutjam (523990)
                Yeah, but do I really need to know what those guys I went to high school with and those guys I worked with 4 years ago are doing? I can get ahold of them if I need to and they can find me if they need to. The people I care about talk to me enough to keep up to date and the rest fall by the wayside until we meet up again. At least we have something to talk about without sitting there thinking, I can't believe this guy is such a douche (based on their insane FB posts).
                Without FB I'm an riddle, wrapped in a my
          • by mlts (1038732) *

            It isn't that tough to leave. Google+ is getting just as entrenched via apps, web pages, "+1" buttons, and many other items. In fact, I know a number of people who keep both G+ and FB running because both are useful.

            If FB disappeared entirely, it can be completely replaced. Even if G+ didn't take over completely, messaging could go back to SMS or one of the IM providers, posts/walls could wind up on livejournal, cat pictures would move to Flickr or some other site, phone numbers and contacts could be sha

      • by admdrew (782761) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @05:06PM (#43658405) Homepage

        Anyone who sat through previous Facebook abuse will sit through this.

        It's reaching a breaking point, even among those who use Facebook heavily. I'm a self-described heavy user of Facebook, but recently removed it from my phone to avoid ads (and the stupid bullshit where the app would still try to pull my GPS location even with 'location' turned off - but I digress).

        Not having access to mobile Facebook has been a big personal change, but one I'm generally happy with. I do miss being a "part" of some friend interactions (typically sporting events or other immediately-topical events), but I also feel my smartphone usage is far less compulsive - no longer am I idly checking Facebook on my phone during my commute, "forcing" me to read my book, for example - and it's definitely reduced my "need" to know what's going on immediately at all times. I may have a little easier than others because I never got into Twitter, so my Facebook feed is the 'fastest' social networking I do.

      • by houghi (78078) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @05:14PM (#43658489)

        Friends don't let friends use Facebook.

      • by Culture20 (968837) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @05:43PM (#43658833)

        They have a monopoly on your friends.

        Yep, and FB has done work to make sure that the monopoly is more secure; they removed the "phone book" feature that used to list your friends contact info, and they changed everyone's listed email to a username@facebook.com email address. Good luck contacting all your old friends you've reunited with via FB unless you manually ask all of them for contact info.

        • Facebook does have the option to 'download your data', which should include a list of 'Friends' with the email addresses they have chosen to disclose.
          I hadn't ever used the functionality, so I am curious what the archive will contain when they have compiled it and I am able to download it. I would be sortof surprised if indeed I found only @facebook.com addresses in there, but if so, it's a real dick move by FB.

          On the other hand, the contacts in my Android contacts list do have info (email addresses and pho

          • by Culture20 (968837)

            I would be sortof surprised if indeed I found only @facebook.com addresses in there, but if so, it's a real dick move by FB.

            If it shows only the ones people chose to reveal, then those won't show up. About a couple years ago, FB quietly hid everyone's chosen email and replaced the listed emails with their FB ones.

            • I've downloaded the data and as a way of getting contact info of your friends, it is utterly useless.
              Basically just a list of plaintext names of which a whopping 2 had an email next to them. They were gmail addresses, though.

        • by coolmadsi (823103)

          A little while ago I was able to get all the emails addresses from Facebook, albeit in a somewhat convoluted way. I had to have a Yahoo email account, and link that to my Facebook account, and I was then able to import my Facebook contacts into the Yahoo account which, thankfully, had an option to just export that (to CSV I think). This was maybe a year or so ago, so I don't know if it will still work, but it was after they switched everyone to the @facebook thing.

      • by Ryanrule (1657199)

        You overvalue my friends.

      • by Tom (822)

        My solution:

        I'm on facebook. I use it for the messenger and practically no other part of my private life. It's a nifty way to be able to tell all your friends that you love/hate/miss them at once, without making real, personal, intimate contact with anyone.

        Also, it reminds you of everyone's birthday.

        The rest of the site could disappear tomorrow and I'd hardly notice.

    • and is likely to result in my pulling the plug.

      So pull the plug already... Some of us never even got into that squalid bathtub (social diseases, ugh).

      • by admdrew (782761) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @05:18PM (#43658549) Homepage

        For some it's really not that easy. Paul Miller's article [theverge.com] about leaving the internet for a full year is pretty interesting, and touches on some important aspects of social networking. Facebook enables casual long distance relationships that are often not realistic for many of us. I rarely talk to my best friend from high school on the phone or via text, but we do interact via Facebook pretty frequently. Without that social network link, we would've fallen out of touch over the years - with it, we're able to stay relatively up to date with minimal effort.

        Now, do my friends deserve *more* than minimal effort? Of course. But the reality of leaving one's hometown (or college town or longtime employer) makes it unlikely that I'm going to see/call/write those friends of mine on a regular enough basis to keep close connections going, something Facebook has made possible for me.

        For those of us with (even mildly) busy lives who have met many wonderful people over the years, social networking has been terribly useful.

    • by icebike (68054)

      and is likely to result in my pulling the plug. screw 'em.

      What took you so long?
      Years of abuse, leaks, privacy violations and lying to you are ok, but one goddamed ad an you are gone?

      I'm glad I never signed up for Facebook, and still pissed they mined my information from my airhead
      friends that sell me out to them by useing Facebook as their address-book.

    • by mlts (1038732) *

      You are not the only one. Bandwidth isn't growing on trees in the US. Adding streaming video ads that can't be stopped on iOS [1][2], and people will be starting to look elsewhere once the phone bills start rolling in.

      I remember in the time frame when people started leaving MySpace to FB, where at first, it was the more educated people who went, then as they left, virtually everyone else followed suit. I'm starting to see the start of the exact same migration to G+.

      [1]: Well, if you had a jailbroken pho

      • I have a bit of a following on Facebook (mostly political ranty-type stuff, nothing that amazing IMO). Still, more than a few people have told me that my FB posts are their daily news feed, for whatever that's worth. And I kind of despise Facebook for many of the reasons already described in previous posts. Yet I think "social networking" (ugh) has its place and its utility. I like Google+ better. I have wished vocally, on FB, that we would all just migrate together. Last month I decided to just jump

    • It's interesting that there was a long discussion previously about how people would not allow "bitcoin-ware" (games support by bitcoin mining - http://ask.slashdot.org/story/13/05/02/1850202/ask-slashdot-would-you-accept-bitcoin-ware-apps [slashdot.org]) because it would cost them, primarily in terms of electricity usage.

      At the same time, these ads suck bandwidth and power - notice the fan running on your computer when you have many ad-hungry tabs running - and they don't complain.

      Ads, and selling your personal data a
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dragon-file (2241656)

      screw 'em.

      See you say that, but I don't believe you. Maybe because every time facebook does something like this people say screw them... and go right back to using them in a month.

      I haven't used facebook in over 5 years and nothing they are doing is making me regret my decision.

    • by slick7 (1703596)
      Just think, TV commercials without the TV and people wonder why I don't watch TV.
  • Facebook will allow you to add your own content to your ad... I mean news feed, but only once per day without paying per word.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:32PM (#43658023)

    Let's go to a site that requires registration to read an article about a site I don't use that's going to annoy its users attempting to take market share from a medium I watch less and less.

  • by UltraZelda64 (2309504) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:32PM (#43658027)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5mIm4bPBWE [youtube.com]
    ^ That's what I think of Facebook.

  • This is great. I thought my news feed was messed up, because it had been weeks since I'd seen a story about Facebook sucking even more.

  • Teevee (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:33PM (#43658043)

    Facebook is said to have implemented the strategy in a bid to take a slice out of TV ad revenue by undercutting the sector."

    More like mimicking TV and the number one thing about it that made the internet seem like a potentially worthwhile alternative.

  • I must add the obligatory "there are ads on the Internet?"

    Also, having not read the actual "story", I asked myself: "There were not video ads before? Who knew!".

    Seriously, Facebook (like Google) is an Ad Platform. Not news, move on.

  • When Joe User exceeds his monthly data plan, he has to pay more just for the privilege of viewing a video ad...to access his own Facebook page.

    • When Joe User exceeds his monthly data plan, he has to pay more just for the privilege of viewing a video ad...to access his own Facebook page.

      If you're exceeding your data plan, Twitter less or lay off the porn (I would suggest that you might be "pirating" copyrighted intellectual property, but that's all a bad set of words here).

      Seriously, lay off the porn.

  • by Talonius (97106) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:36PM (#43658083)

    Oh, we're sorry. You haven't NOTICED the text and graphical based ads here. Since we know that can't be because you have no interest, we wanted to make it easier for you to see our advertising!

    Reminds me of the project managers where I work. "Oh, reality? Fuck that, we warp it to what we think it should be!"

    • by dgatwood (11270)

      The ads are already reaching my maximum tolerance now that they started blowing text ads into the middle of my news feed that look like normal posts, but they're not quite annoying enough for me to spend half an hour writing a Safari extension to banish them. But video ads? You get to show me exactly one, Facebook, and then it's worth the half an hour to block all of your ads. All of them.

  • People are going to get pissed off at having their data get used by auto-playing video ads when they use FB for phones. Those using FB on desktops will probably figure out some way of filtering out the ads (maybe disable flash, or whatever they use to serve ads).
    • People are going to get pissed off at having their data get used by auto-playing video ads when they use FB for phones. Those using FB on desktops will probably figure out some way of filtering out the ads (maybe disable flash, or whatever they use to serve ads).

      But if you disable flash, how can you play Zynga games?

      • I actually saw my first auto-play HTML5 video/audio ad a few weeks ago on my Linux machine(without flash). Even advertisers are starting to understand that Flash is dead, sadly.
    • by ThePeices (635180)

      "This can only end poorly for FB"

      You say it like its a bad thing.

  • Ha Ha, Facebook addicts, Punch The Monkey, Punch It!

    You can quit any time you want, right?
  • I'm introducing Adblocker and NoScript to my Facebook News Feed this summer!

    • by admdrew (782761)

      Unfortunately, neither of those really work entirely (or at all? I have both and am not able to see any effects on FB), since the ads are pretty well integrated into the platform. socialfixer [socialfixer.com] is an answer, but it's not ideal (nor is there a mobile analog that I know of).

  • by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:44PM (#43658175)

    I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.

  • Here we go... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SeaFox (739806) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @04:51PM (#43658247)

    The new, more obtrusive, more bandwidth hogging ads are coming.
    Next will be the increase in frequency and length of ads.
    Then the exodus will start.
    Then there will probably be a site-wide remake or relaunch to try and get people interested.
    By then a new social networking site will be getting hype and half their user will already have an account on it as well.
    Then they stop using their Facebook account and start referring people to the other site who contact them on FB.
    Then Facebook becomes another ghost ship of abandoned profiles like MySpace.

  • Since this announcement, Facebook stock dropped 2.5%.

    This advertising move is called "pulling a Myspace".

  • It works with youtube ads, so I can't imagine having a problem with these.

  • and this will finally convince more people to start using adblockers. Good.
  • it'll be just like a porn site, only without the porn.
    • it'll be just like a porn site, only without the porn.

      You must not have any teenagers on your friends list.

  • This is good news! #1: Piss of the sheep; maybe they'll look for greener pastures once the video ad bandwidth usage starts costing them. #2 Yes! "Compete" w/TV advertising dollars by undercutting them (race to the bottom), devaluing the ad industry on the way. #3 NarcissistBook's stock took a hit on this news. A trifecta.

    Really, best news I've heard all day!
  • "... the social network will gradually introduce video advertising to minimize user disruption."

    Bullshit. Video ads are INHERENTLY disruptive.
  • by Dorianny (1847922) on Tuesday May 07, 2013 @09:31PM (#43660827) Journal
    Am I the only one that's relieved that for once, facebook announced a way to make money that does not involve selling or abusing peoples personal data?
  • at least there's juggalobook
  • A lot of apps are like this: Free and full-featured but with ads. Buy the 'premium version' and remove the ads.

    It works for the apps - it will also work for Facebook.

  • http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/apr/28/facebook-loses-users-biggest-markets [guardian.co.uk]
    http://www.geek.com/news/millions-are-leaving-facebook-every-month-due-to-boredom-1553510/ [geek.com]
    http://technorati.com/social-media/article/facebook-deserted-by-millions-of-users/ [technorati.com]

    Summary, their oldest markets, i.e. US/Canada/Europe have reached "peak Facebook", and numbers are going down in those older markets. E.g. in the Technorati article...

    > Data released by analytics firm SocialBakers suggests that people are
    > leaving Facebook in their millions.
    >
    > It reveals that the social network has shed 6 million US visitors in the
    > last month, which represents a 4% fall. The UK fares no better having
    > lost 1.4 million users last month, a drop of 4.5%.

    > Worryingly for Facebook this is far from a blip. In the last six months the site
    > has lost 9 million users in America and 2 million in the UK. There's a similar
    > picture across the developed world, with usage falling in Canada, Spain,
    > France, Germany and Japan.

    Yes, the numbers of well-off North Americans and Europeans leaving will be more than offset by the influx of third-worlders. But that guy or gal in the call centre in Mumbai, or the peasant in Asia, is not worth as much to advertisers as the westerners that they replace.

  • I see lots of people logging on to check FB from work, which is tolerated in my office as long as it's not excessive. Video ads would kill that. It's the same as email - gmail presents a nice discreet screen, the ads are unobtrusive and it looks enough like work. I'm happy using that, but say Yahoo email? No. Loads of flashing animated ads lighting up the page? Ridiculous, and not subtle.

Swap read error. You lose your mind.

Working...