Rumor: Facebook close to introducing ads to mobile apps?

Facebook is getting more and more users via its various mobile apps for iOS, Android, Windows Phone and others. However, the mobile versions have been free of the "sponsored stories", otherwise known as ads, in the News Feed section of Facebook. Those kinds of ads have only shown up on the PC and Mac web site.

That will reportedly change very soon, according to an article on the Financial Times web site. The article, which cites unnamed sources, claims that the mobile users of Facebook will begin to see the sponsored stories in their news feed within a matter of weeks.

It certainly makes sense for Facebook to start getting some kind of revenue from mobile users, especially as the company has just filed for its public stock offering. If it can gain revenue via such news feed-based ads from their many mobile users, they can also expand their revenue stream, which is already generating over $3 billion a year.

Facebook began launching sponsored stories in the News Feed for its PC users earlier in 2012. There's no way to block such ads from the news feed and its likely that there won't be such an option for any of Facebook's many mobile app users.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 8 design choices explained in new interview

Next Story

Windows Phone gets new Vimeo video app

29 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I really hope they won't. The ads on the desktop/normal version of Facebook, I can deal with, but on my iPhone, it's just gonna take up way too much space for me to want to bother to browse Facebook on there.

And one more thing... this year we will pay $ 20 dollars, next year we will be paying $ 30 and by the time we realize we all paying $ 100 or it will come a monthly fee like everything else. This is how we encourage all this company and help them to be more richest than what they are, by allowing those little fees become something bigger in the future...

yea but it is free... and I am sure that if Facebook start charging $ 20 a year. we will continue to have the freaking ads. People lets be reality that is want it pays for the leisure of having Facebook for free. I am not a big fan of ads, but if i get it for free, who the heck care. I am so fascinating with people and the way that the react about silly thing like Facebook. we have a lot of those issues to worry about than Facebook.

For everyone bitching about "Spronsored" stories sliding into news feeds how about they offer a pay model where you don't get ads I'm sure you'll gladly pay the $20 a year to get no ads

well people stop complaining and I am with JB. what do you rather do... pay for the service or let ads be there and ignore them and continue to enjoy the Facebook for free. I will say second option... somehow Facebook needs to get pay for all the use we are getting from it. So stop complaining and just deal with it...

Who cares? They're providing a free service to hundreds of millions of people. Facebook is a business, not a charity. I'd much rather ignore ads than pay to use it.

"There's no way to block such ads from the news feed".

They obviously have not heard of Adblock! Also many other extensions built specifically to block this!

Am I the only one who really isn't bothered by it? They're in business to make money. It's kind of a no-brainer on their part.

bangbang023 said,
Am I the only one who really isn't bothered by it? They're in business to make money. It's kind of a no-brainer on their part.

Indeed, everybody these days seems to be in a bubble of ignorance. Oh, ads are bad. Well then how do you propose an online business make money? It's either ads or having to pay for the service. I'm sure most would rather choose ads over paying every month. Plus Facebook's ads aren't nearly as intrusive as the ads on MySpace were. Perhaps Facebook should offer a subscription service similar to Neowin's which would remove the ads.

DanielZ said,

Indeed, everybody these days seems to be in a bubble of ignorance. Oh, ads are bad. Well then how do you propose an online business make money? It's either ads or having to pay for the service. I'm sure most would rather choose ads over paying every month. Plus Facebook's ads aren't nearly as intrusive as the ads on MySpace were. Perhaps Facebook should offer a subscription service similar to Neowin's which would remove the ads.

People simply don't want the choice of how to pay ... but the choice of if they pay. This is why adblockers exist. I have never and will never use an adblocker, because I respect the need to make money as a business, and in all honesty, the sites I visit don't intrude on my screen with too many ads. Adblockers are just a way of stealing content if you ask me.

Spirit Dave said,

People simply don't want the choice of how to pay ... but the choice of if they pay. This is why adblockers exist. I have never and will never use an adblocker, because I respect the need to make money as a business, and in all honesty, the sites I visit don't intrude on my screen with too many ads. Adblockers are just a way of stealing content if you ask me.

I went a few years of being anti-adblocker for that reason... but recently, YouTube have just taken things too far.

bangbang023 said,
Am I the only one who really isn't bothered by it? They're in business to make money. It's kind of a no-brainer on their part.

Like you, I'm not bothered by it at all, and I completely understand why they are doing it

DChiuch said,

I went a few years of being anti-adblocker for that reason... but recently, YouTube have just taken things too far.

No they haven't. It's their site. They can do what they like. There's other sites playing videos for you to use.

Plus, not one single ad has ever annoyed me on Youtube. So no ... they haven't taken things too far.

DanielZ said,

Indeed, everybody these days seems to be in a bubble of ignorance. Oh, ads are bad. Well then how do you propose an online business make money? It's either ads or having to pay for the service. I'm sure most would rather choose ads over paying every month. Plus Facebook's ads aren't nearly as intrusive as the ads on MySpace were. Perhaps Facebook should offer a subscription service similar to Neowin's which would remove the ads.

You make money by creating something tangible that people want and by selling it at an agreeable price. You DO NOT make money through subterfuge, which is how current online businesses work. Convenience for the seller to make money does not mean anything.

NONE of the online services give the users any control of their own data. Instead they deceitfully use user data, without explicit permission, to make money from it because the law permits such criminal activity with the use of loopholes, that are subject to change whenever they feel like, called "privacy policies" and "terms and conditions", which 99% of the population is never going to read or even comprehend.

I am 100% sure if people really want something like Facebook, Facebook would be able to survive as a non-profit and people would pay to let it survive, just like Wikipedia. Otherwise, it is just vaporware aka a junk .COM service. If Wikipedia was vapor, it would have died at "Hello, my name is ...".

**** ads and **** Facebook.

If you understand the big picture, you would see why more privatization is bad for everybody.

Edited by Jebadiah, Feb 7 2012, 12:58pm :

Spirit Dave said,

No they haven't. It's their site. They can do what they like. There's other sites playing videos for you to use.

Plus, not one single ad has ever annoyed me on Youtube. So no ... they haven't taken things too far.

I know they can do what they like, I'm not disputing that. I never claimed that "YouTube aren't allowed to do this", simply that the ads crossed a line for me-- between acceptable, and annoying-enough-to-block.

When they put self-refreshing ads on every page, video ads which appear not before the video, but next to the video and start playing midway through me watching-- (and sometimes, they only half load-- so I get sound playing in the background which I cannot stop, because the pause button and visual elements haven't loaded yet. I know this is a bug, but it contributes) then yeah, I think they've crossed a line.

If this day comes, which no doubt it will, I think it's going to be the day I ditch Facebook, or at least cut back my usage of it quite dramatically. I see enough ads on their website - I don't need that garbage pushed to my phone as well.

Nucleotide said,
If this day comes, which no doubt it will, I think it's going to be the day I ditch Facebook, or at least cut back my usage of it quite dramatically. I see enough ads on their website - I don't need that garbage pushed to my phone as well.

You see those ads? They're so effing tiny and non-intrusive ... if you feel they're an annoyance and intrusive in the slightest, you must be the most anal, obsessive person. You should count yourself lucky you only get those ads. Neowin has that tons more ads than Facebook, and yet you don't bitch about that.

Nucleotide said,
If this day comes, which no doubt it will, I think it's going to be the day I ditch Facebook, or at least cut back my usage of it quite dramatically. I see enough ads on their website - I don't need that garbage pushed to my phone as well.

It isn't hard to ignore the odd sponsored story in the News Feed. Facebook even confirmed that they won't be showing many to each user daily (I think they even said they would be showing just one a day, but I could be wrong about that).

Your comment is ridiculous. Facebook provide you with a free service. Would you rather them charge you to use it?

Co_Co said,
great...now im paying for the data to be advertised to...not likes its gigs but its the principle

You are? I can't imagine ads ever going beyond the limit set by even the strictest data plans, so you would never be 'paying for' them any more than you'd be paying for every line of text you never read when you browse the web normally.

If they can fix their broken app, then maybe it's a compromise.

Or they can spite all their users and put something like Admob in, in addition to sponsored stories. Speaking of sponsored stories, I don't recall seeing one ever.

shockz said,
Really thinking about ditching the entire network.

Because they're ensuring they can survive and stay on top? Adverts on their mobile services are vital, if Facebook would like to please shareholders (now they are becoming a public company).

It isn't hard to ignore the odd sponsored story in the News Feed. Facebook even confirmed that they won't be showing many to each user daily (I think they even said they would be showing just one a day, but I could be wrong about that).

Spirit Dave said,

Whhoooo ... oh nooooo ... I'm sure they'll miss you.

I'm sure they'd miss them if 10 million other people agreed

Callum said,

Because they're ensuring they can survive and stay on top? Adverts on their mobile services are vital, if Facebook would like to please shareholders (now they are becoming a public company).

It isn't hard to ignore the odd sponsored story in the News Feed. Facebook even confirmed that they won't be showing many to each user daily (I think they even said they would be showing just one a day, but I could be wrong about that).

Sorry I'm already assaulted with like buttons on other sites, ads on the full feed, pictures, etc... I think they make quite enough money already. Not to mention without us they'd have no reason to exist. I'm sure they make plenty of money selling the information we all provide on their site. I don't think it's too much to ask that they find a less intrusive way to display ads. Putting them directly into my feed is annoying and detracts from the information I want to see.