| 8:19 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
thatīs interesting. I used to trick fastclick into serving adsense as defaults. I got a bad boy note from google though because inadvertently I ended up having two adsenses on the same page.
I think this would be more of a general problem. I believe that most publishers get better revenue from adsense than banbner networks. I also assume as a consequence that they will most likely show adsense and only if they have room show an ad banner. If so, then when the adsense default shows up it will be a second adsence.
I guess this would all work better if the site was barred directly from adsense, but then google would be mad that they did an end-around.
| 8:27 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It would be interesting to see how this would play out. You raised a very important loophole.
For example, banner network runs Google Adsense as run of the network for its banner. Publisher A selects the Google CPM ad as one of the RON campaigns to run in their site. Then, by using this new capability, Publisher A will give all the defaults to Adsense.
Basically, Publisher A will be showing 2 Google ads in one banner space: (a) the RON CPM campaign provided by the network; and (b) the Adsense defaults paid through CPC. It's double serving of Google, and the "best of both worlds" for the publisher.
Since the ads will be running in one banner code, how will anyone including Google track that Publisher A is running two instances of Google?
| 8:36 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Since the ads will be running in one banner code, how will anyone including Google track that Publisher A is running two instances of Google? |
It is tracked through URL the ads are shown on. When the ad networks started running ads throughout their network, many publishers got caught with double serving and received an email warning from Google. Now, most ad networks have an option available to disallow AdSense ads from appearing on a certain site's banner ad rotation.
| 8:43 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I guess this would all work better if the site was barred directly from adsense, but then google would be mad that they did an end-around. |
When a domain/site gets rejected from joining AdSense, AdSense puts a block on the domain that stops all AdSense ads from displaying, even if a valid AdSense code it used. I believe this would also block the ads, even if it is through an ad network, since it still must spider the URL to provide targeted ads.
Has anyone had experience with a domain rejected from AdSense then being able to show AdSense ads through a network ad service on that same domain?
| 8:47 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Not me. But I have heard of some being able to do it after being rejected by Adsense. Their fallback position was to simply select the Google ads in the network and show the Adsense as CPM.
| 8:48 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
And it makes perfect sense. Because who else will show the Google ads that Google places in the ad networks but those disqualified, never applied or booted out of Adsense. Otherwise, publishers in ad networks who also belong to Adsense cannot show the CPM ads offered by the network lest they be booted out of Adsense
| 9:14 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|who else will show the Google ads that Google places in the ad networks but those disqualified, never applied or booted out of Adsense. |
I am sure there are many, many people who haven't heard of AdSense, and are happily displaying the ads through ad networks on a CPM basis. And I am sure those ad networks are quite happy with them for displaying those ads, since it must be extremely profitable for them.
Does raise an interesting question over whether the ad networks could be in violation of the terms if they accept sites that have been rejected/suspended from AdSense. They technically should, since it is part of the terms, but I wonder if it would get persued at all. And what about fraudulent click problems - would this cause the entire network's AdSense run to be suspended? Or could the network just get a warning to remove a certain site.
Also, these banner ad networks are a part of the Premium partner publishers (at least the ones I am familiar with) and they do seem to have different rules to follow in regards to the AdSense terms.
| 10:20 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One thing needs to be clarified here:
When Google places an ad in an ad network (Burst, Fastclick, Tribal Fusion), they are doing so as an ADVERTISER - just like Toyota, AMEX or any company that advertises and pays the network to carry their ads. Google will have to follow the ad network's protocol for their advertisers. Google is treated just like any advertiser who wants to utilize the ad networks to reach the audience of their member publisher sites. The Ad Networks are not under the TOS of Adsense as we know it. Hence, Google ads through the networks are normally CPM (which is different from the Adsense CPC payment scheme).
Hence, it CANNOT be expected of the ad networks to screen their OWN membership based on who have been rejected or accepted to the Adsense program. They don't ask, they don't check, they don't care whether you violate the Adsense TOS or not. All they care about is whether the publisher violates THEIR TOS or not. In fact, they are happier if the publisher does not belong to Adsense and run the Google CPM ads that they show because they have a PERCENTAGE of that. They want their members to be able to run the Google ads through them.
| 10:47 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I am not sure if all of the premium publishers are being paid on a CPM basis instead of a CPC - unless they are paying a very high CPM rate, I would think it would be more profitable to run on a CPC rate.
I would still think that Google is concerned about their terms being followed, regardless of what third party is networking out the ads. And it would be hard for the networks to police each publisher within their network based upon the publisher's prior record with AdSense.
And I am still curious if their domain blocking is applied when AdSense is served through an ad network - this could solve many potential problems with sites running AdSense that were rejected/suspended from the program.
| 10:53 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Ad networks are very vigilant against fraudulent clicks, too, in the same way as Google. The networks have a responsibility to their advertisers -- like Google -- to provide clean performance results (e.g. clicks)
As to the networks screening out those kicked out of Adsense, I don't think they would care about that at all. Their relationship with Google is different from Adsense and its publishers. Google is simply one of their list of advertisers. They are not "premium partners" beholden to Adsense TOS
| 11:27 pm on Oct 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Re domain blocking, ad networks like Burst offer advertisers optimization capabilities where an ad can be seen by Publisher A but not by Publisher B. Filters are set up based on the advertisers' request.
If Google thinks they need to screen the network's membership base and allow their ads to run only on those who never applied to Adsense or whatever, I believe they can do so. It would then depend on the level of filtering that they want -- there's a difference between purchasing a RON campaign with optimization vis-a-vis running a targeted ad. Targeted ad, of course, pays a significantly higher CPM. However, with Google's CPM ads I've seen in the ad networks, the price is too low to even think there's any optimization going on. And I haven't heard of any publisher complaining that they've been optimized out of the Google ads. It seems like the ad is available for most, if not all, ad network members.