Just an ordinary citizen, am asking..

please DEFINE what you are talking about here...??

 Tell me one thing ...some blogs say that the if we are using the keywords in the reviews it enhance the app visibility and get more downloads and also helps in searches...but some blogs say that if we are using the keywords in the reviews is worth tell me is it useful or not.
https://www.sagipl.com/app-store-optimization/

When asked vauge and impressionistic questions about advertisers or advertising it's a given that most people of any age will respond with various criticisms. This is hardly a new or an earth shaking finding. What matters to most advertisers is not the general and highly predictable antipathy towards ads in general but how their consumer targets are respondeing to their specific product positioning stories.

Actually the study only spoke to men ages 25-40 which, by every definition, is the Millennial generation. 

Back to management again.

I too, am a fan of Peet's over Bux - and this has been a major sorce of frustration for me over the years, resulting in Peet's losing a TON of business from me.  You did not mention that the iOS version of Peet's app has been out for a couple years;  the ANDROID verison was just recently relased.  Poor marketing considering Android sales surpass iOS.  When I asked Peet's customer service dept. about this (nicely), they came back with a very weak response that showed no loyalty nor appreciation for a longtime, loyal customer.  Peet's has more to learn that how to develop an app;  they need to learn what customer service means to an organization that expects to grow and "compeet".  :)

Incorrect accusations abound in our society. The solution is to be very careful before making such accusations, and doing everything possible to rectify the situation if a mistake is made.

But I have to ask; ... Why haven't you commented before this, when false accusations were made against others? I guess selective ethics are better than no ethics at all? 

Rich snippets should improve the experience, not hinder - especially on mobile since the user gets more insight into relevance at just a glance. So I am not sure I understand how rich snippets are a problem. As for returning personalized results based on daily life action and workflow as part of the process, giv e Google and the other majors time. As they learn more from massive dataset comparisons, the functionality will improve incrementally. This is anything but a static business. As for Google losing its edge, that may happen. Someting else will rise up. This is tech.

The problem for Twitter, FB and all theses platforms is the line between clear incitement to violence as opposed to odious opinion and comments. Who decides, under what circumstances? Add in that the platforms don't want to spend on the large number of people needed to handle this (assuming they could make the right judgment calls consistently) so the companies want an automated method. I suppose the only way for now is the same we follow for broadcast media - if you don't like it, turn it off. Audience declines will get noticed.

But what about Kyle Quinn? Might he have been a victim of all this? Mistakes are made but who is responsible?  https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/08/16/professor-wrongly-identified-white-supremacist

Companies are brands and have the right to protect their image. There is no place for bigots, racists, white supremicists or hate anywhere.
Fire every one of these people, let Trump create new jobs for them, if anyone is crazy enough to hire them.
#ostracizedforrightreasons
#getoutandstayout

I'm almost humored by the reference to drop in ROI and the fact consumers lowered their rating.  The only consumers these days that seem to rate anything are the angry ones - so an 82 is actually pretty astounding to me.  That said - there are no more ads on Google than previously - as a matter of fact, when they redesigned their pages to remove the right rail, they actually now have less ads - they just added an extra position to the top.  So maybe the perception is more ads, but the reality is they reduced ad spots.  As for the drop in ROI - how about a mention to the fact that there is more competition now?  Google has always been the great equalizer for the small business, as it's one of the few platforms (FB is catching up quickly!) that caters to the small biz guy.  Where else could you go to target a 25 mile radius around your business and only pay when someone interacts with your ad?  Larger companies were slower to jump on board, and Google's dedicated staff obviously caters to them - but the platform has allowed for hundreds of thousands of advertisers to take advantage...  So yes, when competition picks up, your results may suffer if you aren't differentiated yourself.  Otherwise, the article to me is more for fun, as clearly nobody thinks Google is actually slipping...

People who are commenting on their article at M Live are disgusting and deplorable. ALL ingredients must be listed on packaging whether it is needed for dietary restrictions of any kind. Gelatin is made from animal marrow and that is what the complaint is about. Your cereal has animal marrow in it. JELLO is made from animal marrow. Next time, try Ko-Gel.

We strongly contend that "search" and the "micro-moment" (which Google takes credit for coining the term) are fundamentally at odds with each other. The daily quest for instant gratification via a smartphone is best served by offering consumers and brand exactly what they want, exactly when they want it.

There are not 2 sides. There is the nazi side and all who join them in any way, shape or form are part of them. No doubt there is a deserted island somewhere they can all go and build it by themselves without government interference. 

John, it looks as if we agree----again. A question. You mention what I take to be a DVR delayed ad zapping rate of 90% in Australia. Is that the current average for all dayparts and channel types---broadcast and cable? If so, I'm a bit surprised as the corresponding figures for the U.S. are considerably lower ---like 55-75% depending on definitions for primetime with broadcast TV on the higher side.

Banning groups that support and encourage genocide is not "enforcing a political view."  

G'day Josh and Ed.

Ed, that is what I meant by "as long as the ad content is shown".

It is fine for a broadcaster or content creator to aggregate all of its audiences (linear TV, time-shifted TV, streamed,  and on any device) as long as it is used only as a 'gross aggregated audience' for the purpose of PR, sales decks at TV markets such as MIPCOM etc.

In no way could such data be used as post-analysis for campaign performance.

Here in Australia we have and AdEx system from which we get verification or channel/date/time that an ad ran (by key number) which we then meld with the minute-by-minute audience data to perform post-analysis.

That is, if the ad ran in the linear programme at (say) 20:17 on a cable channel, and then again at 22:17 on a cable "+2" time-shifted channel then you COULD add both audiences for the purpose of GRPs (but not reach).

In the case of somebody recording the programme and watching it (say) 4 days later but they skipped through the ad break we would NOT add in the audience for what was the original 20:17 ad as it was not seen.   Typically this knocks out up to 90% of that original audience.

In the case of the broadcaster making the programme available online via a catch-up service, if they don't carry the broadcast ads then we add nothing to the campaign.   Further, the broadcaster may have different breaks in the online catch up, so if a 30-minute programme on broadcast (using round numbers here) was only 24 minutes on catch-up we'd and a person watched the entire catch up, they'd only count as 0.8 of a person due to the shorter duration.

Once we've sorted all that out we can then debate the 'value' of each of the exposures.   For example it is possible to say the DVR catch-up is ony 90% of the 'value' of a linear ad so only credit 90% of its audience number, and streamed on a mobile is only worth 50% then those adjustments can be made as well.

I stress that all this is done at the gross exposure level (GRP) and doesn't flow through to reach - which I think is the more important metric overall  Well it doesn't yet, but we're working on it.

Oh then I suppose we should add in a 'creative' factor to weight the likelihood that someone exposed to the ad pays attention and gets message takeout.

Pretty simple really.   NOT!

The latter is really just 'theory' at the moment, and there are very few media agencies that have the time and resource to perform such post-analysis on campaigns.   And I suspect that there are even fewer advertiser who would be prepared to pay for it.

Cheers.

I cannot avoid commenting on this:  "Writing above a third grad reading level"

Thank you Wayne for being consistant, a Never Trumpster.  I would rather he wait and measure his wording than jump out and make false claims and accusations as practiced by our former president.  If you would at least take the time to WATCH all coverage and video from that terrible night, you'll see, like our President said, there are two sides to this story.  One side had their permits to march, the other did not.  Both sides are not what I consider to be America.  I condemn both.  But in the MSM, I have yet to hear anyone condemn Antifa tactics for the last 6 month.  They can hurt people, cover their faces, destroy businesses, BUT they are just peaceful nice folk trying to get thier message out, right?  Thanks for your time.  I'll wait for the trolls to come and make a comment about my writing style, or the fact i use many single sylllable words.  Was told long ago, when writing copy, make it understandable to a 6th grader.  Hear that Trolls?  I guess you'll understand this then.

When some folks complain about foul language or excess violence or sex on TV and their effects on viewers and society, the reply is always heard, "Just change the channel."  Same on Twitter, just block people whose messages you don't want to see.

The dumb version of the AI device makes as much sense to me as the real ones.  Both USELESS and invites invading my private spaces.   it's just a F.A.D.   (For A Day)

Google's noise about needing to moderate results for perceived (by them) questionable material isn't comforting.  And their massive screw-up on that pro-diversity, anti-PC memo certainly doesn't help their trustability.