| 2:56 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
So you're purposely manipulating your pages that allows content to show up seconds after Adsense ads?
| 2:59 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Something about deliberately drawing undue attention to the ads, perhaps?
| 3:00 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
It might come down to why the ads show before the content.
Or is it 'just' source ordering or a quirk of the page load time and rendering engine?
If you are intentionally (i.e. the first option above) delaying loading then you are certainly not going to pass the TOS. If it's something 'normal' but quirky then you will probably be okay.
I get 8% on a forum without any such techniques... there are other ways!
| 3:06 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Actually I always wanted to do that, but couldn't find a way ;)
So first Adsense ads load, then the real content, then the affiliate ads. And Google allows affiliate ads in connection with Adsense don't they?
[edited by: HuhuFruFru at 3:07 pm (utc) on Aug. 8, 2006]
| 3:09 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Everyone's clutching at straws here by the sound of it. I think we all suspect that Google won't like it, but I'm not sure there's anything specific in the TOS.
Email google and ask.
| 3:12 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|And Google allows affiliate ads in connection with Adsense don't they? |
Google doesn't allow any ads "in connection" with Adsense, but does allow affiliate ads (as long as they do not mimic Adsense ads) to coexist with them.
But isn't that drifting away from the original message?
You wanted to know if purposely holding back content until after Adsense ads load, is against the TOS.
I would say: "Yes."
| 3:19 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thank you for your helpful comments, I really appreciate it.
As I said I didn't do it on purpose, it is a side-effect of the new affiliate ads which don't mimic Adsense ads in any way. Maybe the thread title is a little bit irritating.
But do you really think I should ask Google? What should I ask - why the Adsense ads load so fast? ;) I mean it's not really my fault, is it?
[edited by: HuhuFruFru at 3:22 pm (utc) on Aug. 8, 2006]
| 3:27 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
| 4:02 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
And you think in the split second before they click away from your site they will catch a glimpse of your url and make a mental bookmark to come visit you again?
Weighing bookmarks vs. ad clicks: If you choose ad clicks you are loosing on the long run, it is traffic that you are selling after all, and without much of it your site is dead to advertisers.
In the rainy days when EPC is low, and everyone here is screaming with earnings drop, you will have your traffic to fall back on and keep you warm.
In the worst case scenario, if Google folds or kicks you out, with decent traffic you will have no trouble switching to another network, what's a 10k drop when you are earning 100k?
I know we blend to raise CTR, but no content and just ads for a few seconds is kind of extreme to me.
That is unless you have no confidence in your content, then the sooner they exit through an ad the better.
| 4:06 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Maybe, or maybe not. Consider:
- Google can shut down an account for any reason, at any time (just as a publisher can withdraw from the AdSense for any reason, at any time). If a site is delivering enough junk traffic to advertisers to trigger a review, who's to say that a Google employee might not give a thumbs-down in a case like this? (Google isn't a court of law, and it doesn't have to prove guilt.)
- Traffic that doesn't convert could lead to bigger "smart pricing" discounts for advertisers, in which case the OP may find himself starting another of the "My EPC has dropped to mere pennies" threads on this forum.
| 4:08 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|But do you really think I should ask Google? |
absolutely. we are no adsense support team and we are not the ones that decide to ban or reinstate you.
[edited by: moTi at 4:15 pm (utc) on Aug. 8, 2006]
| 4:14 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Two seconds is a loooong time if you count it out. That and the fact that your CTR doubled suggests to me that Google wouldn't like it.
This is an old trick from banner ads in the 1990s, and it was obvious even then that it was a deliberate ploy to force ads views. So IMO it's likely to trigger complaints sooner or later, at which point our opinion becomes irrelevant. If Google decides this constitutes "undue attention", you're history. If not, you're good.
| 4:49 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Appears to you have already asked Google. Odds are they watch the forums and you have "spilled the beans" so to speak.
If they can determine your site from these posts, it may actually get looked at.
| 4:57 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|If they can determine your site from these posts, |
There, that's better. ;)
All in good fun... :)
| 4:58 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"and people are forced to look at the ads and read them."
I would never visit yor site if you "force" people to you your will...
Shame on you.
You expect your site to grow with this strategy?
I think this board should adopt some ethical stanards and stand for something, except only money.
| 5:08 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I think this board should adopt some ethical stanards and stand for something, except only money. |
Are you suggesting we don't want to be like G$$gle?
| 5:11 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
who is gregg?............ really
| 5:53 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I think this board should adopt some ethical stanards |
I think this board should adopt some ethanol canards, and thereby attain both oil independence and in-flight stability.
| 6:07 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If I had any reason to trust Google, I might email and ask what they think, but, as its my opinion they are a bunch of money-grubbing goodfornuthings with an agenda longer than John Prescott's lunchbreak, I can't say I'd recommend it.
| 8:34 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well that was helpful advice.
If you're like Alex and don't trust Google enough to ask them whether a certain implementation is allowed, then you'd better not bend the rules at all.
| 8:54 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ha! Funny Ronburk!
I don't think HuhuFruFru has done anything wrong. Is it his fault the ads show up first? It's just quirky that's all. The OP's title is wrong, he didn't find a way, it found him.
On my pages the ads show up last, and visitors have already scrolled to the bottom before they load. :(
| 9:26 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|If you're like Alex and don't trust Google enough to ask them whether a certain implementation is allowed, then you'd better not bend the rules at all. |
If you don't trust them, why do business with them in the first place?
|I don't think HuhuFruFru has done anything wrong. Is it his fault the ads show up first? It's just quirky that's all. |
Whether theh OP has done anything wrong is beside the point. If Google does not like the way you are serving ads, they can cut you off. Of course, it is even more likely if they think you are actually trying to do it, but the fact that it is happening in the first place is more than enough reason.
| 9:28 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|he didn't find a way, it found him. |
|On my pages the ads show up last, and visitors have already scrolled to the bottom before they load. |
| 10:20 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I don't think he did anything wrong either..
Is the fact that people notice the ad against TOS? If that is the case, then why show us a heatmap?
I have seen this on many sites (not just with adsense). Just type this in to googles search (with quotes):
"xml parse class php"
Click the first result.
That page has been doing it for a long time.
Many times, it is just due to server lag time, waiting on an include, graphic, frame, etc., that can cause such behavior. I have seen some sites do this on purpose to make sure the page is fully rendered before presented to the user.
| 11:44 pm on Aug 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
1. Obviously it's drawing attention to the ads and could be abused.
2. Since this thread is about real-world consequences and not about good intentions, it makes no difference that the OP stumbled across the effect by accident.
3. Speaking of real-world consequences, every websurfer would be worse off if this sort of thing became a commonplace AdSense optimization.
I'm not going to take a specific position because I haven't seen the website, but what's wrong with simply asking Google?
| 12:10 am on Aug 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
You may not have deliberately caused this "interval", however by trying to capitalise on it you are going against the 'spirit' of Google's TOS. Having said that I don't think that Google will even notice you, as there are may MFA Masters out there blatantly flouting TOS who are getting away with far more than you are. As others have probably mentioned the crunch will come when Google determines through it's conversion data, that your ads are not being clicked for the right reasons. That is presuming this "interval" is actually causing people to click on the ads.
There are much better ways of raising ctr and those ways relate more to targeting good content to potential buyers.
| 2:23 am on Aug 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes ask, if they say OK save the email and you are in double profit.
If they say no, correct it and go back to regular business.
If you don't ask you have your butt nine miles in the air.
And yes you could run the risk of getting smartpriced from the higher CTR if the clicks don't convert. Your rolling the dice on that one.
[edited by: Khensu at 2:24 am (utc) on Aug. 9, 2006]
| 5:00 am on Aug 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
This won't be legal.
First, they says ads have to be displayed along with content. Showing only ads with no content for 2 seconds would be against this rule.
| 6:43 am on Aug 9, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure if you had 0.5 sec delay between the ads and the content Google wouldn't care. But take this to the extreme (5 sec, how about 47612893 sec?) and you clearly violate "ads along with content" rule.
| This 31 message thread spans 2 pages: 31 (  2 ) > > |