Product manager warned publishers to be careful of where they get traffic, that some schemes promising traffic may not be valid traffic.
Session is ongoing. I have to go catch a train back home.
Thanks for the live blog, martinibuster; next best thing to being there!
I'd not mind having to pay for adsense support if only they would staff it with the right people and take away their pre-chewed answer collection full of mantras and outright wrong advise.
If ever I'd go to such a thing, it be to get them to clean up their act and stop staring at their own navel. E.g. "mobile" well no wonder from the makes of Android is it ? Seriously: sure it's growing all the time, but we know that without them telling us.
We're not children. Stop treating us like we are.
User generated content: it's not just an issue of moderation: something will always slip in and be there before a mod comes by and removes it/bannes the user/... If they come by and see it they get upset and overreact - one of the reasons I'm not doing any adsense anymore on user generated content that is not pre moderated. Forums: it doesn't work to start with, and risk an account over pennies ? No thanks.
Promoting Google+ (yeah, google would like that), facebook wants you to move your stuff over to them, pinterest would like all your pictures -oh they steal them anyway-, and quite a few more too. But we'd be crazy to fall for the scheme: We already depend on search traffic from the search engines - cause they value linking in such a way that getting good, real links is next to impossible nowadays. Now they want to control social media too. But the traffic from social media is very different from your normal traffic: these folks are like a bird that flew in through an open window in a museum: they leave stuff you don't want and are not interested in what you have - they just want out and go back to their usual junk.
Serious content is then ripped off by the communists that write for wikipedia and after they stole all they could, they then even change the references from your original to those that copied it from wikipedia "cause it's a better match" (well you just created a source loop ... of course it matches well).
The real hurt then comes from Google: they rate the content of wikipedia over yours in the SERPS.
One could wonder why we continue the fight.
Seriously: I think the intended audience of those events are not the readers over here.
[edited by: swa66 at 10:52 pm (utc) on Jan 29, 2013]
Basically this sounds the same Google spiel I have heard at our last two Adsense partner days in Sydney in 2011 and 2012.
THANK YOU for this, Martinibuster.
There's much useful food for thought here.
grateful for this thread today ... thanks.
a lot of very useful stuff here.
MB, Thanks a lot for all the info and the time spent putting this out here!
|...But also explained that lack of transparency is partly to head off scammers who are on the lookout for loopholes to exploit. |
We are not in 2005 anymore, Goog knows which ones of us are not scammers, never were.... With the amount of data they gather on minute to minute bases, that would sound a little like a misunderstanding.
Absolutely nothing I, plus for sure many others, knew years ago ... Corporate BS for those who want to toe the G-Line with loadsa AdWords Dollars.
Thanks for the mini-text broadcast MB, it is actually a very valuable post:-)
"Add more ads, join G+, make site mobile friendly so we can make money there too."
"on a lighter note, anyone here been banned? - oh wow, I had no idea what was going on."
sums it all up really.
cheers for useful post.
That's a mischaracterization. That was not the attitude of the product manager. In fact, the manager sincerely apologized to one of the publishers for the trouble caused by the suspension and the associated vague email.
The manager and all of the Googlers who took turns speaking were enthusiastic about sharing tips but more importantly they encouraged the publishers to interrupt them to ask questions or provide feedback. They were listening. This made the Learn with AdSense event more useful for publishers because we got to air our doubts and concerns and receive good answers.
The exchange happened in a Q&A where several publishers raised the issue of vague suspension notices that do not give useful indications of what caused the suspension. The product manager was under the impression that the amount of publishers this happens to was a "vanishingly small amount" and he was clearly startled and troubled to see so many hands go up.
As someone in this discussion mentioned, Google should know that a publisher is legit and have an alternate method of communication that is friendlier and clearer. The product manager acknowledged this was a problem but only after he backtracked from defending the practice after several publishers in the audience pushed back, insisting that Google needs to be more forthcoming.
There was nothing flippant in that Googler's attitude toward publishers. Google deserves praise for hosting these events because it is a positive step for them to dialogue with us to hear our side of the story. It is heartening that Google cares enough about publishers to even host these events. It's a positive signal from Google.
There's a huge difference between 'listening' in a coffee and cakes morning on one day of the year and listening during the other 364. I'm so far past G's cutesy little PR stunts that's it's a dot in the rearview mirror.
go and check out the current G image search thread for some further great examples of intense "listening".
|and he was clearly startled and troubled to see so many hands go up. |
Does this infer he/they have absolutely no idea of how many publishers are suspended nor for what reason?
Is the Gorg purely a machine-driven company with no one in control assessing what is actually happening to its publishers/partners and couldn't care less anyway?
Yep, just what I've been thinking for years!
i suspect, that the amount of suspended publishers in the audience was unnaturally high.
what would active publishers want there? listen to the ole pr bull?
a suspended publisher would at least want to rant and learn ways how to be reinstated. what would one expect? google either sent canned responses to them or has abandoned conversation entirely. they long for personal contact. it wouldn't surprise me if many of them depend for their livelihoods on adsense. after all this is the last resort for those folks.
I suspect that every single AdSense employee is not privy to stats about suspended publishers.
|Is the Gorg purely a machine-driven company with no one in control assessing what is actually happening to its publishers/partners and couldn't care less anyway? |
I used to think this might be the case but I now believe they are trying to improve. I have a very good reason for thinking this way and it involves a phone call that I received last year from Google. Will they call everyone when they see a potential problem...no. But it meant the world of difference to me.
|what would active publishers want there? |
Any active publisher worth his salt who makes a living from AdSense would never miss the chance to interact with anyone from Google. As soon as you take the attitude that you can't learn anything you most likely won't.
I just want to clarify that the audience members who raised their hands were those who had their accounts suspended and reinstated. A guy sitting next to me said it would be worth it for him to be able to pay a hundred dollars just to be able to speak to someone in a situation like that. Others immediately nodded their head and voiced their agreement. The product manager seemed impressed by that level of desperation felt by the publishers, that they were willing to actually pay to talk to Google.
|...and couldn't care less anyway? |
Only if you close your eyes to reality. Attend a Learn with Google event first, then make up your mind. Anything else is being opinionated. No offense intended, and I apologize in advance because that is not my intention, I am just being frank. Making up one's mind without having been there simply seems opinionated. But you know, you're entitled to your opinion and so it goes. Though I would encourage you to consider that Google hosting these events are the physical manifestations, the tangible reality, of the fact that Google does indeed care about publishers doing well, particularly during a period of transition such as we are experiencing today.
I'm a skeptical person by nature, I'm nobody's fanboy. I have offered constructive criticism about AdSense. But judging by the effort Google expended to help publishers, my mind has changed. I am definitely heartened by their outreach to publishers and I think they want to seek ways to improve their relationship with publishers.
I'm not saying they are doing this out of altruism, the goodness of their hearts. But I think they understand that this mobile ad environment is moving faster than they and we are moving. And if this ad environment is going to be properly monetized, then both Google and publishers are going to have to make changes together to make this work. Google has to innovate new ways of displaying ads (which are in the works) and we are going to have to show alternate mobile-friendly layouts or develop layouts that are responsive design- and test, test, test for what works on mobile devices.
[edited by: martinibuster at 3:27 pm (utc) on Jan 30, 2013]
|Any active publisher worth his salt who makes a living from AdSense would never miss the chance to interact with anyone from Google. As soon as you take the attitude that you can't learn anything you most likely won't. |
I disagree: I'd go there to give them an education, not receive one. They want things in their interest, things I do not want to give them. Just look at all the bogus optimalisation crap they sent in the past, at the unsolicited advice to do things that are bluntly against the rules, ...
If you do not know for yourself that mobile is important, then going there isn't going to to learn you that fact, nor what to do about it - all they push is for you to add ads - without even considering that they need to give us tools and explicit permission to do it properly. E.g.: so you can dynamically choose the ad size based on the page viewport size e.g.
About support from Google: they have great support for the (for pay) Google Apps. I reported a bug that was annoying ONE of our users in a non-critical manner. I got at least half a dozen (international) phone calls from them and as many emails to keep me posted on the progress as they resolved the error.
Adsense support is very far below that benchmark. And I'd not be bothered if they said: hey we need XXX USD /year out of your account if you want real support. Go for it - do it - but give me real support when *I* need it. And stay way with any and all form letters - I can smell them from far and it's insulting if you use it unless I asked a FAQ. But if you do send it then be 100% sure it was the FAQ and not something else...
|The product manager seemed impressed by that level of desperation felt by the publishers, that they were willing to actually pay to talk to Google. |
I can totally believe the product manager was surprised and dismayed by the number of people reporting suspensions. Google has always made it difficult to get support or give feedback, so why would they know?
The PM's attitude is very encouraging, but unfortunately it won't just be up to him/her. Some companies develop the idea that non-transparency is always in their best interests, and resist other lines of thought because they think the value of non-transparency an established fact of doing business. And it may well be in their best interest in their case - I don't know; that's why I've never used Adsense. I decided a while back I'd rather struggle with lesser-paying ad networks (though some actually pay better) who aren't going to ban me for reasons unknown than be making a good living and suddenly one day BAM, I'm toast and I don't know why.
I think they could definitely afford to be more transparent in cases where the suspension is not about something the webmaster is clearly doing on purpose in violation of the rules.
Hi everyone -
We are constantly looking at ways to safely improve the publisher network (for everyone), and have made improvements over the past year based on user feedback. A blogpost from December covers some of the changes we've made and gives some ideas as to what we're working on: [adsense.blogspot.com...]
Although members of my team cannot attend every 'Learn with Google' event, I have noted a lot of the feedback from this thread and appreciate everyone's response.
Thanks for the info MB!
I for one have seen AdSense support improve a ton over the past year. I'm no fanboy either (just follow me on the twitter) and I still have some issues I wish they'd fix (cough - adaptive ads - cough) BUT I've been pelting them with questions since they opened up support, and they've been pelting me back with helpful answers. Sometimes I don't get it on the first try, but then they at least go and escalate. This compared to the previous years, which were SILENCE.
It's probably a PITA to put on these seminars, and I don't think they're spending time, money, and sending out personnel for some fake PR benefit.
If you don't perceive value in it, good news, you don't have to go. But if you haven't gone, you needn't slag it for others.
I went to one of these events about 2 years ago. I'm not sure I would go again but I'm glad I did go. There was a lot of stuff that wasn't new to me, but I've been with AdSense since June 2003. Thanks martinibuster for the updates from the meeting.
|Although members of my team cannot attend every 'Learn with Google' event, ... |
That surprises me. I'd think traffic quality was an important enough issue to make it worth having someone from the Ad Traffic Quality Team at every one of these events.
Haven't had one of these events close to me yet though, so I haven't attended.
|I disagree: I'd go there to give them an education, not receive one. |
IMHO, that's the wrong attitude for any business relationship. Relationships in business should always benefit both sides, and if you approach a business associate with the attitude that you have all the answers (and they know nothing), well neither side benefits.
FWIW, I'm a long-time AdSense publisher. I was at the Learn with Google event yesterday, and some of the topics on the agenda seemed to include pretty basic stuff. But, I still picked up couple of tips in the general sessions that were valuable to me.
In the one-on-one sessions, the Googler who worked with me had some useful usability suggestions. Suggestions, that should make for a better user experience on some of our pages and hopefully also increase Adsense revenue. She had some other suggestions (placements and ad sizes) that I hadn't really considered before. They're not drastic, won't interfere with vistors seeing what they came for, so we'll test them.
There was even a session where a group of publishers was asked to give feedback about their experience with Adsense and DFP.
|I disagree: I'd go there to give them an education, not receive one. |
IMHO, that's the wrong attitude for any business relationship. Relationships in business should always benefit both sides,
I benefit from the relationship: they give me money. Just like my consulting business customers send me money. In exchange they get in the case of adsense advertising space. But none of my customers gets to say how I run my business.
As a consultant I'm quite used to tell others how to do that (and in the case of adsense - here it goes for free:
- Improve adsense "support" (I think it's a wrong name, but that's not important) dramatically - you're not listening (enough) and you're only listening to the really big publishers in most cases.
- improve your technology, Google is a technology company, now show it:
- start to adapt to your own "mobile" mantra and make ads what work in dynamically sized entities.
- You want a maximum of 3 ads: fine: just insert an ad in the first 3 divs with the right class on them: done. No more violations. You want ads not to show along certain content: well Google knows what content is where: just do not show the ads. Done, no more violations, no more enforcement (cost money!). You're a tech company, act like one!
- stop using vague terminology and get us info on what it is you do not like about our traffic, our "invalid" clicks, etc. Not just that you withhold payment for a click every few days - but that you tell us WHY . Why was the click invalid - I didn't do anything -> so it's something a visitor did - well tell me who and what they did, maybe I can prevent the entire thing. If I only knew what it was that you did not like, It would not reoccur if I can help it: I benefit, you benefit (my customer), the advertiser benefits (your customer). What a better win-win can you imagine ? We've a relationship that goes back years now - you can trust me just a little bit.
Martin. Nice summary I was there as well.
Didn't see it in your notes, but in the final session with the director speaking, he mentioned possibly an indicator to note senior adsense sites. Her called it a "tenure" indicator or some other way of noting - "hey if there is a problem with this site perhaps it was an honest error..." let's not shut them down.
Posted a pic of my beer cheese and asparagus afternoon google supplied snack on the Google+ Learn with google G+ page.
Swa66 - someone did ask for more detail. The response made sense - if they tell you what they are looking for, what violations, then the fraudsters work around it.
Huge problem with adsense factories "in china.." therefore, the "tenured" publishers.
For those of us who began PRE-ADSENSE days - wrote websites because we saw a need or had experience in the subjects we wanted to share - any bone is appreciated.
Welcome to WebmasterWorld rentlaw, thanks for sharing what you heard. :)
I had to leave a tad early to make my three hour train ride back to Massachusetts. Thanks for expanding on what was said at the session! ;)
| This 71 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 71 ( 1  3 ) > > |