Video has been really important to Facebook in recent years, with the social media company pushing its live broadcasts and inserting videos in our feeds. The thing is, though, how long does the average user spend actually watching videos that pop up in our feeds, whether they’re an ad or just a clip of a friend’s kitten? Not as long as Facebook tells advertisers that we have. [More]
As dominant as it is and has been for decades, TV advertising is something of a crapshoot. Neilsen ratings are still the gold standard for every network out there, especially since they now finally track time-shifted viewing. But Neilsen still uses their own proprietary tech, and works on a sampling basis. In an age when every set-top box and most of the TVs they’re plugged into are themselves net-connected computers, there’s a more granular and accurate way to measure viewers and to advertise to them — and Google’s taking it.
We aren’t in the car business. We won’t pretend that we know how automakers should run things. However, the evidence shows us that maybe the current system of evaluating dealerships isn’t working out so well. It gives them incentives to lie and falsify data, not to provide good customer service. [More]
A bug in the popular metrics-tracking platform Sitemeter has boxed Internet Explorer users into a quiet little corner of the internet since late yesterday afternoon. Any site using Sitemeter now displays the following cryptic message to IE users: “Internet Explorer cannot open the Internet site – Operation aborted.” The bug affects IE 5.5, 6, and 7, but we have three ways—including use another browser!—to restore access to the full internet in all its horrible glory, inside. (Note: we’ve put in a fix so IE users can continue to read Consumerist without changing their settings.)
Say you want to staff your call center with friendly, high energy, intelligent people who want to help customers and who enjoy their job. How do you find them? Well, apparently you hire people, train them, then offer them $1,000 to quit.
We’re guilty of spreading disinformation; Sprint’s $3, seven-minute rule is the average customer service reps shoot for, over time. It’s not per call, as we’ve been trumpeting (out our ass, it seems) in our headlines. Kevin writes:
Remember how we said Sprint’s customer service sucks because they only let reps adjust bills by up to $3 per call? Well, that wasn’t no hooey-talk.
Why Sprint's Customer Service Sucks: They Only Let Reps Adjust Billing Up To $3 Per Call (As An Average)
Sprint has such shitty customer service because they don’t give customer service reps enough leeway to disburse billing adjustments, nor do they provide enough support, asserts our inside source.