Bloomberg: How Facebook Helps Shady Advertisers Pollute the Internet (22)
Bloomberg: How Facebook Helps Shady Advertisers Pollute the Internet
inb4 Bloomberg, WSJ et al are in Barcelona this summer: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...elps-find-them
Article includes reference to this forum,
Interesting that the URL indicates they originally wanted to title the article
"Ad Scammers Need Suckers and Facebook Helps Find Them"
but thought better of it and updated to
"How Facebook Helps Shady Advertisers Pollute the Internet"
Wonder what the thought process was behind that.
I guess all the news about election hacking and Facebook recently was bound to affect the affiliate industry sooner or later ... I do wish the author would have included at least some of the very positive stories about people the industry, of which there are many.
Originally Posted by cmdeal
And Bloomberg is smart enough to release this article during this time. RIP affiliate marketing and FB.
Originally Posted by kokofai
The article is so full of hate and biased.
What everyone has said thus far is all warranted. What strikes me most is that the author (Faux) disparages against affiliates (Gryn in particular), and yet openly admits that Facebook NEEDS affiliates to keep their bottom line healthy, all while avoiding the central topic of the free market; Faux's claims are therefore undoubtedly contrary.
Aside from the fact that the Faux makes a sweeping, baseless claim in the title by exclaiming that all affiliates are "Ad Scammers," some of his points are legitimate. Is it really scrupulous for us to charge recurring revenue fees if the buyer can't even read the fine print? Probably not, and I don't think any of us would want our face out there for those unfortunate buyers to see.
That being said, it's not technically illegal, and we're acting in our own self interest by maximizing our profits. There's nothing wrong with that according to contemporary western ideology. Gryn is correct in that we're just taking advantage of the system that was built by large capitalistic corporations. Faux seems to take more issue with capitalism than with what we're actually doing as internet entrepreneurs. When Faux writes about Gryn in that, "life is like the most beautiful game," he said, sipping a beer in the sun, speaking in unaccented English he'd learned in international schools," you can almost feel Faux's desperate envy, like a detached teenager who doesn't have the guts to ask the sexy blonde girl to dance during the last one of the year. In this regard it is without doubt that Faux's article is contrary and without a clear, objective point.
He brings up Russian hackers, but fails to elaborate. He meekishly states that Facebook needs us, even sponsors us, yet disparages us for being a part of their business model. He trys painting Gryn as a scapegoat in stating that (allegedly) all Poles associate success with "stealing or thievery," but conveniently fails to acknowledge that what we're doing is driven by the market. This we cannot control, and this is what is so ambiguous about Faux's article.
Make no mistake that this article will probably garner a good level of engagement. As the industry becomes more and more transparent (at least I think that's what's happening, but I hope it isn't!) there will be pushback from those that know what you do. You have to decide for yourself whether the opinions of others hold any value to you or not. For myself, and likely for most of you, they don't. We live life on our own terms, and while reputation is everything, we shouldn't let a contrary article like this distract us from the empires we are building.
smh bloomberg... Looks like rob gryn got baited into doing a feature interview, and then they turned it around into a smear piece.
I love how salty people get about marketing. All marketing is deceptive in it's nature. Nobody needs a deep fried chicken sandwich, craft beers, pepsi or designer jeans. There's never been a diet pill that has actually worked. Most all products in the world are basically junk. You're selling people an idea they want to believe in. On that very page with the post is an advertisement for low carb beer. That ad helps pay the authors salary. He's just a small minded hypocrite. He probably bought a genie in a bottle out of a magazine when he was 8 and feels the world has let him down ever since.
Originally Posted by wizler
It certainly would have been better to showcase some positive stories in affiliate marketing and to describe what affiliate marketing can look like at its best, but we also need to admit that what affiliate marketing looks like at its worst ... is not great and definitely needs improvement.
Hey guys, yeah, I was quite surprised how this turned out.. the original article was supposed to come out in a month and was a story about how I got to where I am in the affiliate industry. Then, around a week ago, they told me the editor is rushing it to press, due to the Facebook scandal and I started getting tons of Facebook related follow-up questions.
I had spent a few hours talking to Zeke in Berlin and then he visited me for 3 days during which we talked a lot, but very little about Facebook. It's a tad upsetting to get taken advantage of, but more so, it's disappointing to see how he vilified our industry.. I suppose the media has to do what it has to do to stay relevant.
Interesting thread on Hacker News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16687361
maybe rob_gryn should say away from giving interviews.
both major ones he did were a disaster.
forget the fame move in the background.
The article is attacking the whole industry like it's all about scams. I've made a lot of money with whitehat affiliate marketing and I'm sure I'm not alone here. Facebook helps shady advertisers? So why are they farming accounts and have to cloak?
its all about riding this wave of the Facebook issue and prob why it was pushed so fast out publicly. No doubt though that Facebook loves and hate us.
For anyone interested, here's our statement. Mind you, it's aimed at a broader audience.
https://Voluum.com/blog/faux-news-digital-marketing/
Originally Posted by rob_gryn
On first read, it's not obvious the statement on Voluum's blog addresses concerns of people who are quite outside of the industry. In other words, if you linked the answer to this person, would they have a chance of understanding where Bloomberg's article is misleading and where it is real? My feeling is to lean more towards the negative.
Originally Posted by rob_gryn
Originally Posted by john anthony
I was in Berlin and also met the author of this article while attending the event hosted by ZP/
Unfortunately, Robert just so happened to be the easiest and most credible person this author, Zeke Faux, could use to his advantage and resulted in a blow to the industry and Robert himself.
I would like to say that this journalist shared information with me that he had learned from engagements with other affiliates and reps at the conference, that I was quite surpised he was able to gain so easily. But as some affiliates do, they boast... brag... laugh... and too willingly share what, why and how they are doing things to make money -- after all, thats why I like to attend conference and learn from these less cautious individuals.
The blame is not solely on Robert, rather all of those who divulged too much information to an outsider and especially to one who held influence in the media.
Zeke even reached out to me about 6 weeks ago wanting to call me and ask a few questions to help him wrap up his story - that apparently was high value enough for him to convince his boss to pay for his trip to Berlin over 8 months ago. All of his questions were geared towards Facebook which I thought was interesting since I clearly told him in Berlin that I was not involved with Facebook (at that time). I declined to answer most of his questions but it was clear he had some sort of agenda.
I think as an industry and a community, we should definitely learn from this situation. And while no one likes to see negative publicity or all of us lumped together as a single group of scammers - you can't deny the validity of some of the information, even though it flowed from the perspective of an outsider with his own agendas.
Andrew
P.S. - Anyone have any creative games we can play with his email address and phone number? haha
Bloomberg: How Facebook Helps Shady Advertisers Pollute the Internet
“I think as an industry and a community, we should definitely learn from this situation. And while no one likes to see negative publicity or all of us lumped together as a single group of scammers - you can't deny the validity of some of the information, even though it flowed from the perspective of an outsider with his own agendas.”
Just to elaborate on this point. Affiliates really need to take a look at themselves and how they present themselves in public.
What attention do you think you will get if you walk around with “farmin’” hats, and blackhat “swag”?
You might think it’s cool amongst your friend group, and get a few high fives, but you are hurting the industry as a whole. As well as putting a target on yourself.
Do what you like behind closed doors, but don’t take others trying to build legit businesses down with you.
Believe it or not you will make less money if the rest of the world think affiliate marketing is scammy.
Sharpen up.
Meh. I'm definitely appalled, surprised, and bewildered that people would say some of the things they said to that reporter... but how do I even have any proof most of those quotes are real. Aside from Gryn, I didn't really notice names attached to most them. I think it's actually possible that the reporter just did a bunch of spying and lurking and kinda embellished the quotes a little
Home > General > Affiliate Marketing Forum