| 5:27 am on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I submitted a spam report for the first time to Google about six weeks ago. This particular spammer has about 300 listings in the top 700-800 search results for about 400 keywords in my areas. For the top three keywords in my area the spammer has 30-40 listings in the top 100 for each particular keyword. I can’t imagine searchers looking past the top twenty search results once they see all this mess.
Google’s response was they preferred to deal with the spam through future changes to their algo. Adsense’s response was they saw absolutely nothing wrong with the mirror doorway pages. Each of the pages contain a sentence of text plus two row’s of Adsense. Adsense recommended I report it to their search function.
Bottom line is I’m sure the spammer appreciates Google’s approach to the matter. I’ll give the spammer credit though, they are the best I've seen.
| 6:18 am on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Google’s response was they preferred to deal with the spam through future changes to their algo. Adsense’s response was they saw absolutely nothing wrong with the mirror doorway pages. |
And this is precisely why merchants are moving away from using adsense. I've found way too many of our own ads on non relavent spammy sites.
| 6:30 am on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Good to hear your spam report met with some response, as opposed to the 10 000 webmasters have posted from this forum that have recieved nothing...
| 6:35 am on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"Google's response was they preferred to deal with the spam through future changes to their algo. Adsense's response was they saw absolutely nothing wrong with the mirror doorway pages. Each of the pages contain a sentence of text plus two rows of Adsense. Adsense recommended I report it to their search function."
That doesn't sound encouraging at all. I recall our good friend Matt Cutts indicating recently that Google WebSpam Team is paying more attention to spam reporting.
[edited by: tedster at 7:45 am (utc) on Sep. 13, 2006]
| 6:42 am on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"Paying attention to" is open to interpretation.
Over the past few weeks I've reported a few absolutely useless sites with garbage content and AdSense ads. Today I checked all of them, and the ads are still there.
I don't want to hear a speech. I want to see results.
| 7:41 am on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Can't they just get a team together that is hunting spam all day long? They can read the spam reports en push the 'delete site out of index button' manually. If the team has 5 members they can do a lot: 5 members * 1 site per quarter * 40 hours a week = 800 sites a week.
After a while we should see good results and big spammers are history in no-time.
| 10:34 pm on Sep 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
This is the third time I've mentioned this on this site:
To see evidence that Google is already well aware of sites that are made for AdSense, go to google.com, put the word "adsense" in the search box, and hit Enter. When you get the search results, look at the ads on the right side of the page.
Google makes a lot of money from MFA sites.
I could be wrong, but as far as I know, no Google employee (some of whom are paid to monitor some of the forums on this site) has ever replied to a thread on here complaining about MFA sites.
| 6:13 am on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
There is the spam monster, I discussed here.
It's easy to find by "Klimaxanlage"
I reported it July 7, it disappeared after some days
I reported it in August, it disappeared again
I reported it 2 days ago, it increased from 8300 to 10100
| 6:21 am on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The only results I can see right now are three threads here -- so I guess it's gone again, at least on some DCs.
| 7:05 am on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I did some Googling and found this to be interesting and somewhat encouraging:
Feedback: Webspam in 2006?
| 8:37 am on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The Pragmatic View
One of the problems is that G is clearly making big money from MFA sites. Anyone who is using G can see that they are still a significant percentage of the results. Non street wise searchers arrive at a likely looking link, they open it and see no content, just Adsense ads. They then have to consider starting again or just clicking one of the ads, which will mostly look really relevant to their search. Guess what they will do? (I have done it myself).
The spammers know that it pays not to have content on their sites. They know that less content means more Adsense clicks. I think they also know that if G were to take swift and drastic action against them their profits and hence their stock price would nosedive.
Don't be evil :(
| 3:06 pm on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Heck, that's what I think about Google Adsense on Parked Domain Page... RIPOFF. I really like Google, but I despise that practice as we ALL know those parked pages are a HUGE fraud source and Google knows it. They contacted me back and said it is ok for those parked pages to show Adsense AND that Adwords users cannot opt-out of their ads showing on those pages. That really burns me up. Advertisers should have the right to NOT show on fraud, crap pages like that. Heck, how long will ANY names be around if spammers buy them up only to slap YOUR ads on them, and click away.....
| 6:19 pm on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Those are excellent points. I absolutely agree with you.
What makes this so frustrating is that other than the issues described in this thread, I see Google as being a great bunch of people that are doing really great things that really do make the world a better place.
Heck, I'm so happy with the results of the AdSense ads on my site that I bought a couple of Google T-shirts.
We all have to compromise to some extent. I can't help but think that Google is constanty working on solving problems. And in all fairness, their not revealing everything is often a good business policy.
| 7:21 pm on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Make sure you all read the adsense TOS. If you find a site that violates the TOS, report it to google. At that point Google has to take action. Also, in the adsense TOS it mentions that adsense sites have to follow webmasters guidelines. We have been reporting scraper sites to the webspam team and the adsense team when we see blatent violations.
| 7:19 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Take a look at
doesn't that first sample look like an MFA site? I have some pages like that and they get very high CTR of about 40%. Google removes them *manually* within days after they've been indexed so talk about double morals...
| 7:56 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I totally agree with your last post. AdWords advertisers should be given the ability to opt out of parked domains without opting out of all content sites. One of the reasons I stopped advertising via AdWords was because of the parked domain I'll be damned if I'm going to help fund the enemy.
| 8:08 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I too think we should be able to opt out of parked domains.
I use the following tactics to deal with them:
1) Lots of negative keywords for referrals that I see coming only from parked domains.
2) Putting the parked domains in my comp-ad filter ANYWAY even though I know that they may be ignored by the ad placement algorithm, as a signal to G that those domains suck like a king-size catfish in a sewage works. Please excuse my British.
| 8:36 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well, obviously Google gets a lot of money from MFA sites. All they care about is that those site were not present (buried down) in their search index.
Those site funnel all traffic from yahoo and msn to Google ads. Why would they shot themselves in a foot by killing them.
| 8:59 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Why would they shot themselves in a foot by killing them. |
Maybe to keep to their motto of "do no evil"?
| 11:23 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I have noticed that when I dig into the code on the spamming site I usually find a lot more violations and then I get a better response from GoogleSpam/Google AdSense/ It usually take a week to 10 days and the site is then missing from Google results where I found it before.
| 11:49 pm on Sep 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I think they also know that if G were to take swift and drastic action against them their profits and hence their stock price would nosedive. |
Any loss of revenue from the disappearance of nickel-and-dime (or penny-and-tuppence) MFAs would be offset over time by more business from legitimate advertisers. The greater risk for Google is letting the MFA bottom-feeders define the meaning of "Ads by Google." If that phrase becomes a synonym for "spam" or "junk," users--and higher-paying advertisers--will be turned off, and Google's profits will suffer.
Google has shown that it's capable of taking the long view, and that it's willing to sacrifice short-term revenues for long-term growth. (Need proof? Look no further than the imposition of tough "quality scoring" of landing pages from Google Search ads, which has removed some advertisers from the AdWords pool.)
| 12:37 am on Sep 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I totally agree with Lorel. In the past I have reported spam sites in the index. Nowadays the SERPs of most of my niches are clean enough that reports are not necessary anymore (Yes, it happens :)). Every spam report I wrote Google which rule was violated, how I checked and where they could check it themselves. Often I also included a reference to my site--in case of scraped content/snippets to show them where the content was scraped--or my email address. Most spam reports were submitted from an IP address with an easy traceable reverse DNS record. (not something like dialup.123.456.isp.net).
With this approach, my success rate has been very high, I estimate above 60%.
Imagine the Google engineer (Matt Cutts and friends) sitting on the other side. He receives numerous spam reports per day. Many spam reports are just from e-business owners who want to hurt the site of their competitors and spammers who want to frustrate the spam report system. the Google engineer has to sift through the submissions and decide which ones are genuine and which ones not. Having a detailed description of the violation and a trace back to the submitter adds to the probability that the Google engineer will take the submission serious and take action.
| 9:44 am on Sep 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Any loss of revenue from the disappearance of nickel-and-dime (or penny-and-tuppence) MFAs would be offset over time by more business from legitimate advertisers. |
Methinks you may be underestimating the contribution that the income from these sites makes to Google'$ coffers. ;)
| 12:36 pm on Sep 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The more specific you are on the adsense TOS, the quicker they will take action.
| 3:57 pm on Sep 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Methinks you may be underestimating the contribution that the income from these sites makes to Google'$ coffers. ;) |
I have no doubt that income from those sites is useful to Google's bottom line, but untapped markets are likely to be even more tempting--and ultimately more profitable.
| 4:11 pm on Sep 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Maybe it is just a coincidence, but whenever I report sites it only hurts my sites.
The other day I reported several sites with stolen content from my sites and what happened? The scraper sites are still there but my site is gone? Do they get it all ass backwards?
| 2:02 am on Sep 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Google's response was they preferred to deal with the spam through future changes to their algo. |
They have no other choice. Eliminating spam by hand makes as much sense as adding and deleting sites to your index by hand, ala DMOZ.
You can delete 1000 spam sites today without changing the algo, and 10,000 sites (203fsad.info, 3492fsd.net, 45dfwer.biz...) will crop up tomorrow exploiting the same loophole in the algorithm.
| 3:54 pm on Sep 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|You can delete 1000 spam sites today without changing the algo, and 10,000 sites (203fsad.info, 3492fsd.net, 45dfwer.biz...) will crop up tomorrow exploiting the same loophole in the algorithm. |
I don't think anyone was suggesting that they don't try to fix things with their algo. However they should manually delete offenders who are reported until the algo is fixed.
| 4:05 pm on Sep 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
They do try to ban a few manually, the issue is that these site bounce all over the web via different service providers and different urls.
| This 33 message thread spans 2 pages: 33 (  2 ) > > |