| 3:00 pm on Nov 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
It may be, i know there are theories about having too much adsense on a page, so it would make sense that any text ads could be a panda food type thing. I think the true test is if it is of value to your users, if it is, I would maybe place it in an obvious ad section (ala google SERP), if not, ditch em and see what happens.
| 4:15 pm on Nov 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I've seen sites with it 'hit' by Panda, and others with it are perfectly fine.
Might be one of many factors or flags that are considered.
| 4:43 pm on Nov 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
"For our algorithms, ads generally don't play a big role."--John Mueller, Google (http://www.seroundtable.com/ads-google-algorithms-13110.html)
Webmasters don't have much control over Vibrant's ads. It's not possible to abuse them the way it is with Adsense. You can't position them above the fold or spam a web page. Vibrant controls where they are seen and how many are viewable. They are careful and generally don't cause a bad user experience.
| 5:07 pm on Nov 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I recall reading in the Quality Raters Guide that "Text Ads", "PPC Ads" or ads commonly identified as "Sponsored Links" are presented in a way to imply Sponsored Links = Spam. (Not verbatim, paraphrased from memory)
To be fair, later on the page, I seem to recall they also mention that not all sponsored links are spam. It has to do with the raters assessment of whether the page is deemed useful to the visitor or not.
While they may not be a Panda factor... somehow, I think they are factored into quality at one point or another.
| 5:28 pm on Nov 2, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|"For our algorithms, ads generally don't play a big role."--John Mueller, Google (http://www.seroundtable.com/ads-google-algorithms-13110.html) |
But ads do play a role. We never know what he meant by "big" but ads do see a mention at several places in their latest quality raters' guideline. The guideline isn't very clear on when should the presence of ads be treated as indicative of spam. But its usage at several places would have a strong influence on the rater's judgement.
| 1:06 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Thanks guys, appreciate the feedback on this. There are so many unknowns with the Panda. I like "potentialgeek's" response the best so far for selfish reasons ;-) I mean, I would like to make a little money for all the hard work I've done for the past 10 years. I do think the ads do have a hand in this Panda business, still can't nail anything down though. I personally think the in-text ads are the least intrusive of advertising options. Here's to hoping the Panda will let me keep them. I've already stripped most of my revenue streams to the bone since I got hit by the Panda. Just have to keep tweaking and see how things go I guess.
| 1:25 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|I think the true test is if it is of value to your users, if it is, I would maybe place it in an obvious ad section |
Well, here is the conundrum in all this about quality content and advertising.
Sure, Google is interested in a site that is useful to the visitor. But, let's face it. In most cases I would say people are creating useful websites to get something out of it. There are people pouring 1'000's of hours into websites that offer amazing free services. Are these creators expected to do all that work for absolutely nothing? Actually it's less than nothing, because they are paying for web-hosting services to keep the site going.
If you are creating informational/instructional websites that are not retail. Meaning having no sales on the site, then advertising should not be frowned upon at all. Of coarse, I do agree there are those who get greedy once they see money coming in and start adding more and more advertising until you cannot tell the advertising from the content. This I agree has to go and is going thanks to Panda. However, lets not swing the pendulum 180 degrees and go from too much advertising to allowing no advertising or extremely little. If in fact (there is no conformation on this) Google is penalizing for advertising than what is going to happen (I already see it happening in the SERPS) is big brand names and massive sites will be the only results when searching and mom and pop websites will disappear into obscurity.
The massive website with Millions of few per month, per week, per day even can easily get buy with next to no advertising at all because of the volume of traffic they have.
There are some incredibly useful websites out there created by the little guy. One person in their home sharing their expert knowledge on something that is incredibly useful to those who need the help. Should they be penalized for throwing up a little advertising here and there to make a little profit for their efforts?
Of coarse this is all speculation that stems from frustration.
The fight continues. I will not give up on a 10 year labor of love.
| 2:21 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Advertising isn't frowned upon (that would be shooting themselves in the foot, wouldn't it?) but too much in-your-face, over-the-top, never-mind-the-content-here's-the-ads type placement is obviously some kind of quality signal.
The key is to make your site appear to be a useful, interesting and engaging site that just happens to have a few ads rather than an obvious push for money that just happens to have a little content.
My policy on ads is similar to my policy on jewelry - I put on whatever I want, and then take off one piece before I leave the house, so I know I haven't overdone it.
| 4:14 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I myself dislike in-text ads like Vibrant media's immensely... a completely personal thing... because they interfere with my use of a page. It's not clear whether similar reaction from other users will affect Panda.
Additionally, ads from multiple sources can end up slowing page loads down quite a bit, particularly in combination with social media feedback buttons and many things that are being tacked onto a page.
All this beyond the file size of the page and its images. The layout of the rest of the page, IMO, enters into it as well... how cleanly separated all the content elements are and how easy the page is to look at and use.
So, it's hard to ask the question in isolation and simply single out just one kind of ad as a ranking factor. It's a combination of many factors, affecting the usability of the site.
| 4:37 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|I myself dislike in-text ads like Vibrant media's immensely |
I agree... the double-underlined ads that spawn those small rectangular windows that block the text I was just reading are a pain in the rear. It would be OK if they were based on an OnClick event versus triggered by my pointer going near them or passing over. I understand they go away in 2-3 seconds... and I understand they are supposed to be unobtrusive.
Its to the point that when I land on a site to read something and notice the double-underlined words, I will immediately bail out, close the website and go to the next choice.
| 5:01 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|the double-underlined ads that spawn those small rectangular windows |
Well, it's better than having huge graphic adds of some fat lady getting skinnier or some old lady getting younger or some flashy add that blinks at you. etc...
It is interesting though that many readers tend to move their mouse pointer around where they are reading to help keep their place. I have found I do that without even thinking about it.
I would rather have the text ads than the annoying large banner ads.