[mapt]

This is essentially fraud. Your company was made aware that it was selling a product with wildly different characteristics than advertised, and chose to cover it up.

There are defensible business reasons for this, in having a contract already in place at the old CPM, so being unable to double the CPM and half the views mid-contract... but still pretty much fraud.

[dietr1ch]

Sounds like even more fraud. Here you can apply the new filter to historic data or create a new metric version and keep the old version to avoid breaking continuity in what's measured.

[pjc50]

It sounds like the customers demanded the fraud remain, for their own internal Potemkin purposes.

[dredmorbius]

Possible, but not substantiated by the GP comment, which makes yours purely speculative.

[butlike]

> In less that a day business mandated us to remove the filter.

How is that not substantive?

[voltaireodactyl]

My impression is that the question is whether “business” in this instance refers to the Yellowpages company itself, or the companies that make up their customers base.

[dredmorbius]

Yes, and my read is that "business" was internal to Yellowpages.