Cryto companies should be the first to quantify the impact, performing an analysis of leads and customers received per source before the ban goes effective, so as to extrapolate potential loss of users. That data would be nice to know to derive the impact that we are really talking about.
Regardless, crypto reputation should be enhanced by reducing scams, and banning publicity of some sorts may lead to more savi inverstors on the whole, being less exposed to being lured into scams.
Considering ICOs specifically, DAICOs could be part of the solution since it empowers investors (token holders) to control the flow of project financing. At least investors can cut down on losses if the project derails. That is better than a wishful bet on an ICO.
By the way, these companies that are to enforce the ban are no angels. Facebook is now involved in a scandal along with Cambridge Analytica in relation to a mass transfer of user data since 2014 onwards to profiles US citizens for targeted political campaigns.
Topic: How to deal with Crypto ads being banned on social media? (Read 234 times)
Why do they put a blanket ban on Crypto currency advertisements? There are a lot of legitimate Crypto companies with a
good reputation. Imagine them turning down a company like Coinbase and Trezor and Ledger for instance. Get some people
to sort the good from the bad, which would not be too difficult with KYC/AML regulations. They are making a clear statement
with this move and I would not be surprised if some government agencies were involved with this decision.
good reputation. Imagine them turning down a company like Coinbase and Trezor and Ledger for instance. Get some people
to sort the good from the bad, which would not be too difficult with KYC/AML regulations. They are making a clear statement
with this move and I would not be surprised if some government agencies were involved with this decision.
i like that most people in here are glass half full kind of people from what i read here i knew that banning bitcoin ads by google isn't a bad thing infact it will benefit bitcoin because of the scam ads but there also alot of legit ads being made by bitcoin it will unfair to them so i hope google will put some kind rules like doing some kyc or something however most people doesn't understand that point becasue of teh common attack on crypto currency world with no reason at all, they even used this google news to their benefits without reading through the lines ...
now the ICO s have again to advertise on nromal Bitcoin advertise netwroks like coinad.com or similar.
and i think this is a good think so they stop pushing facebook and co and but the ammounts abck to bitcoin network.
regards
and i think this is a good think so they stop pushing facebook and co and but the ammounts abck to bitcoin network.
regards
Let's not consider it an attack against Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies itself. It's more likely as someone mentioned above that they have been banned due to the amount of malicious software being spread because of these banners and advertisements. Facebook has always taken extreme measures against this sort of thing. Although, it's not a perfect solution I think it's an approach of the 'greater good' rather than an attack.
So we are seeing a new attack strategy from the corporate world to slow down Crypto currencies. They simply ban Crypto
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
I dont know if we can actually od something. I believe that some time should pass before we see green light again for ads.
It could be like this : that google will allow ads for those projects which will have a license number very similar to other industires when you can use ads if you have licenses like pharmacies.
There are a lot of websites im which people who are running projects putting their advertisements. Like coinmarketcap.com. You can see it if you like. And here at this forum, a lot of advertisements after the op.
So we are seeing a new attack strategy from the corporate world to slow down Crypto currencies. They simply ban Crypto
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
Actually, the banned ads are from the Scam ICO's and because of this even people are fearing to believe in many good ICO's and other good projects thinking that they might end up with scams. But the Social media sites like facebook and Google are taking preventive measure by banning the ICO ads on their platform. Expecting other sites also like twitter, WhatsApp, telegram to support this ban by which slowly Bad Coins will be removed from this market.
Literally at night, the crypto community was agitated by the shocking news - Facebook sharply updated the rules of its social network and Instagram advertising campaigns, starting to block commercial materials on the placement of primary tokens and binary options, as well as new crypto-currencies.
The reasons that prompted the administration of Facebook to take the path of counteraction to crypto-currencies are simple. This market is flooded with various kinds of scammers and while state bodies are trying to somehow regulate the crypto business, the owners of large search engines and, as we see, now also social networks, operate by their own methods, it's good not to ask or coordinate anything.
Facebook is far from being a pioneer in its noble desire to protect unintelligent users from "incorrect" advertising, because it's almost a year since Russian Yandex has been stubbornly fighting the penetration of advertising crypto-currency transactions into the contextual network of Direct. Only Yandex, went further, banning, according to the author's observations, advertising farms, ASIC-miners (specialized devices for the production of crypto-currency) and data centers necessary for their placement
The reasons that prompted the administration of Facebook to take the path of counteraction to crypto-currencies are simple. This market is flooded with various kinds of scammers and while state bodies are trying to somehow regulate the crypto business, the owners of large search engines and, as we see, now also social networks, operate by their own methods, it's good not to ask or coordinate anything.
Facebook is far from being a pioneer in its noble desire to protect unintelligent users from "incorrect" advertising, because it's almost a year since Russian Yandex has been stubbornly fighting the penetration of advertising crypto-currency transactions into the contextual network of Direct. Only Yandex, went further, banning, according to the author's observations, advertising farms, ASIC-miners (specialized devices for the production of crypto-currency) and data centers necessary for their placement
The only solution seems to me is this forum companies should start spending instead of offering bounties I would say facebook wasn't the best option as many didn't care clicking on it
Sticking to this forum would be the perfect choice as payment have also reduced it is affordable
Sticking to this forum would be the perfect choice as payment have also reduced it is affordable
We must admit things are really less in the hands of blockchain entrepreneurs and more in hands of swindlers. Only hackers have stolen $500 million in 2017, not to mention scam ICO teams or useless and unprofessional consultants demanding high retainers for nothing. The crypto community has to decide whether they are ready for regulators to come and play tough or for industry self-regulation.
before anything lets ask ourselves what were these advertisements? first two things that comes to my mind based on the ads that i have actually seen on these platforms are advertising for ICOs which we all know are a joke fund raising to become rich, and lots of phishing sites which were abusing names of popular websites like Binance, blockchain.info, bitcoin.org,... to spread malware or steal passwords.
so the way i see it, this was a very reasonable ban. most people hold the platforms responsible for the phishing ads and when they lose money.
so the way i see it, this was a very reasonable ban. most people hold the platforms responsible for the phishing ads and when they lose money.
the ban was totally right , people lost money investing in shitty platforms or ponzis because a colorful ad showing in some social network site or other platform
this is the right thing to do and shouldn't be considered as an attack , you don't see ads for the top coins like bitcoin , ETH ,LTC and still they are in the lead cause the investors kinda know what they are doing without the need of ads
so in short banning the ads don't affect crypto , it just affects the scammers behind them
I mean do you really want to see Craig Grant face in a youtube ad ??
this is the right thing to do and shouldn't be considered as an attack , you don't see ads for the top coins like bitcoin , ETH ,LTC and still they are in the lead cause the investors kinda know what they are doing without the need of ads
so in short banning the ads don't affect crypto , it just affects the scammers behind them
I mean do you really want to see Craig Grant face in a youtube ad ??
So we are seeing a new attack strategy from the corporate world to slow down Crypto currencies. They simply ban Crypto
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
Yes, social media has begun to ban encrypted currency advertising. Over the past month or so, facebook has been banned, and for the past few days, Google has banned the use of encrypted currency advertising. I tried to post messages about the cryptocurrency on Facebook, and my account was blocked. currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
I don't know why everyone is taking this news as negative. This is actually one of the best news to come out in a very long time. Just think about all the new users who wont get scammed or hacked due to clicking on a fake search result. Also the scam ICOs wont be able to promote themselves to new users.
Why should legitimate Crypto currency businesses suffer,
because a small group of people decided to use the technology to scam? Do not stand up for scammers, stand up for the
legit Crypto currency projects that needs a voice. Let's find alternatives, if the wind is too strong.
because a small group of people decided to use the technology to scam? Do not stand up for scammers, stand up for the
legit Crypto currency projects that needs a voice. Let's find alternatives, if the wind is too strong.
The thing is that even though the malicious crypto ads don't represent the majority of our market, they did represent the majority of the ads that were being displayed. Google legally and financially had no choice other than to follow this path, and yes, it's unfair to a certain extent. On the other hand, this will cause other platforms to emerge because of the high demand for platforms to advertise on due to Google's and Facebook's absence. People shouldn't underestimate the capabilities of a 'free' market. One major platform quits, two or three pop up looking to scoop up that potential ad revenue. Granted, Google is indeed a very large player, but we won't be missing anything. Seriously, if I typed in blockchain for example, Google showed me ads for blockchaln, or bl0ckchain, etc. It's dirt we get rid of, and that's a positive thing, obviously.
a new attack strategy from the corporate world to slow down Crypto currencies
They have no incentive to maliciously oppose the growth of cryptocurrencies. This victim complex is getting awfully tiring.The most likely reason for this is to reduce the effort of moderating crypto ads and weeding out the massive amounts of scams and dodgy ads that were on their platform.
When all other payment systems gave WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back.
Actually, some people (including satoshi, it appears), didn't want the extra publicity that Wikileaks brought Bitcoin. They didn't go out of their way to serve Wikileaks - Wikileaks just needed to find an alternative payment system to use.Clearly there's no need for a "push back", because I don't agree with the actions of every single group that ever advertises cryptocurrency-related services on social media. I only agree with actual useful actions.
There are no victim complex here. Some people are in principle against one-sided authoritarian decision making, no matter
where it occur. They have the money and power to "force" their decisions onto individuals and groups and you just have to
STFU and take it from behind? We have a voice and we should be heard, no matter what and who you are. We might be
farting against the wind, but we should stand up and be counted. Why should legitimate Crypto currency businesses suffer,
because a small group of people decided to use the technology to scam? Do not stand up for scammers, stand up for the
legit Crypto currency projects that needs a voice. Let's find alternatives, if the wind is too strong.
I was thinking that if the ICO is legitimate anyway then it will trend by itself and by the words of netizens and doesn't need ads from social media. Right?
So we are seeing a new attack strategy from the corporate world to slow down Crypto currencies. They simply ban Crypto
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
currency advertisements on their platforms. We have always been very "creative" with our "FU" response to these attacks,
so what is our "push back" strategy to counter this? There is obviously no discussion on this matter and just another
one-sided decision from centralized authorities that are being forced onto people. When all other payment systems gave
WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back. How are we going to deal with this?
Do they have competition and what alternative is Bitcoin friendly? Let's have a open discussion to resolve this matter.
its all about scams, facebook belive the cryptocurrency boom/bubble has led to scams and wild price fluctuations that have cost a lot of people, including unsophisticated investors, a lot of money. Scams are illegal, check: https://www.recode.net/2018/1/30/16950926/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-bans-crypto-advertising-bitcoin-james-altucher
a new attack strategy from the corporate world to slow down Crypto currencies
They have no incentive to maliciously oppose the growth of cryptocurrencies. This victim complex is getting awfully tiring.The most likely reason for this is to reduce the effort of moderating crypto ads and weeding out the massive amounts of scams and dodgy ads that were on their platform.
When all other payment systems gave WikiLeaks the finger, we provided the alternative and we pushed back.
Actually, some people (including satoshi, it appears), didn't want the extra publicity that Wikileaks brought Bitcoin. They didn't go out of their way to serve Wikileaks - Wikileaks just needed to find an alternative payment system to use.Clearly there's no need for a "push back", because I don't agree with the actions of every single group that ever advertises cryptocurrency-related services on social media. I only agree with actual useful actions.
Jump to: