Bing Search Engine News Forum

I predict you are wrong, at least as far as Google is concerned. Blogger Splogs are a problem but I doubt Google will throw the baby out with the bath water. And it wouldn't even be logical to do so for a couple of reasons. For one thing, there are thousands of valid blogs hosted by blogspot that offer unique, firsthand content. Secondly, of the blogspot blogs that are splogs, very few rank for anything.

The splog problem is analogous to the MFA website problem. And I think Google will simply continue to take the same approach as always: filter out the spam and include relevant content in the serps.

"They should call it SPAMSPOT instead"

And they should call 95 percent of the sites that use adsense the "spamsense noncontent network".

""Ultimately, it is advertisers' money that is funding the search spam industry, which is increasingly cluttering the Web with low-quality content and reducing Web users' productivity,"

Or maybe Google gives them a free pass.

[cs.ucdavis.edu...]

The concluding section contains an analysis of problems at the different layers of the researchers 5 layer, double funnel model.

The layer 4 analysis says,

"For Layer #4 – syndicators, we discovered that a handful of ads syndicators appeared to serve as the middlemen for connecting advertisers with the majority of the spammers. In particular, the top-3 syndicators were involved in 59-68% of the spam-ads clickthrough
redirection chains that we sampled. By serving ads on a large number of low-quality spam pages at potentially lower prices, these syndicators could become major competitors to main-stream advertising companies who serve some of the same advertisers’ ads on earch-result pages and other high-quality, non-spam pages."

Does that sound like a classic case of "dumping" to anyone? I mean that in terms of classic international trade theory. A country, or in this case, a syndicator, dumps goods at lower prices (i.e., text ads) in other countries, or in this case, many blogs, as a strategy to hurt their main stream advertising competitors.

After the main stream competitors start to lose steam (or possibly go out of business), the syndicators are in a much better position to raise their rates and capture a greater (if not monopolistic) market share.

There was also a notable remark at section 2.3
"Although some spammers have abused the AdSense program [28], the abuse is most likely the exception rather than the norm."

then i went to look at Goo.... searched for the same thing, ended up om someones BLOG whos favorite book is "Lord of the Rings" hhmmmm

Then I searched Goo... for mydomainname.tld +blogspot
and found a link to a cached log of "PArsing and processing " data thrue guest books of some spammer whos server is located in FR but the main page is in RU lang. and where they are asking to transfer 1000K from paypal. In any event there is a list of PRoXIES and Botnet Effected machines(IPs), about 80 of them, so that will keep me busy with some research...

Exactly WHO is it that is most directly threatened by Google? I'm sure that had nothing to do with this, as we all know that they are pure as the driven snow."

the report clearly states its from
Yi-Min Wang
Microsoft Research

and

Ming Ma Yuan Niu, Hao Chen
University of California, Davis

That would be a bit spooky if the three principle researchers were from the three principle syndicators who make a profit from the spam.

It's as if they would be saying to the major media outlets..."here's our research on how we make money from spam"

The above is from the report. Not that I'm trying to imply anything(or maybe I am)but this looks similar to the structure of organized crime groups. Insulate the people at the top from the "criminals" that do the dirty work. That's why crime bosses rarely go to prison and it's why those who fund spam are rarely held responsible.

Definitely.