Look, I get it. The advancements in AI and machine learning are amazing. I’ve embraced Advantage+ Shopping, Advantage+ Audience, and broad targeting generally.
But not as an absolute.
Some clients tell me they get better results the old-fashioned way, using interests and lookalikes, and without Advantage+ AudienceMeta's AI-powered targeting option. Meta will attempt to find your audience for you based on pixel activity, conversion history, and ad engagement. You can also provide targeting suggestions that Meta will initially prioritize before going broader. More. They’ve seen terrible results going broad.
I don’t call them liars. I don’t tell them they just need to give broad targetingIn most cases, mention of Broad Targeting refers to the removal of all potential targeting filters: No custom audiences, lookalike audiences, or detailed targeting. Instead, rely only on location and letting the algorithm do the work. More a chance.
They shouldn’t force something that’s not working. I tell them to do what’s working, but be open-minded to broad targeting. It may not work for you now, but it may one day.
I’d say the opposite if you are committed to broad targeting. If it’s working, keep doing it. But always be testing, and allow the possibility that it may not be the solution in every situation.
Broad targeting may simply be most effective for bigger budgets. It may not always be ideal for lower ad spend.
While I know advertisers want to be 100% all-in on going broad, there may still be room for both approaches.
What do you think?
