Forum Moderators: martinibuster
For example, a click on an ad for digital cameras on a web page about photography tips may be worth less than a click on the same ad appearing next to a review of digital cameras.
[edited by: markus007 at 8:08 pm (utc) on April 1, 2004]
I launched a new site, ~100 pages or so, a couple of weeks ago and I regularly called in to see the type of Adsense ads being served. They were fairly relevant to the site as a whole, but not particularly relevant to that page's content.
Today however ads are spot on relevant for the first time on each individual page, but its too early to say what £difference if any I'm going to see.
(coincidence? today is the first day of google traffic to this new site too).
DoU
ASA, I hope the media bot will play a big roll in this new system. The regular Googlebot isn't crawling our sites as much as it use to. It seems like media bot is visiting all pages as soon as someone visits them. Please don't take this the wrong way, but some of us get traffic to pages that Googlebot has not crawled, but other SE's have. The only way those pages can serve up the correct advertisements is for media bot to play a big roll within indexing a page.
#1 Priority is to ensure that media bot is crawling correctly.
#2 - Wouldn't it be nice if media bot then fed GoogleBot the page so it could crawl it?
MQ
but newsletters and any mail sent via to and from GMAIL will include adsense advertising...
Incoming, outgoing or both?
Meanwhile spammer with adsense account decides to send mass mailing and calls it a newsletter out re cruises ( just buys list off the net ) and includes adsense code , now poor old joe public gets this unsolliceted email and sees cruise line advert so over period of time associates the cruise line with spam so has negative view of cruise line and any other adds seen on net for cruise line
That scenario has nothing to do with gmail. With gmail, any ad revenues go to Google, not to AdSense publishers.
[edited by: europeforvisitors at 3:03 pm (utc) on April 2, 2004]
Here's a snapshot posted in another thread.
[adwords.google.com...]
IMHO, Google's variable pricing is similar to what has existed in traditional online advertising (and offline advertising, for that matter) for a long, long time. Back in 1997 or 1998, AOL's rate card showed CPMs of $15 or so for chat rooms and $65 for targeted search results, and at one point About.com (then called The Mining Company) was claiming CPMs in excess of $100 for ads on some of its medical guidesites at the same time that it was selling general chat ads for $10 per thousand. Similarly, if an advertiser wants to buy space in the NEW YORK TIMES Travel Section, it will pay a different amount than it would for a general untargeted newspaper ad. With variable PPC, Google is just doing what other media have done all along.
There is one big difference, which is a lack of transparency for both advertisers and publishers, and a lack of choice of channel for advertisers.
MQ
There is one big difference, which is a lack of transparency for both advertisers and publishers, and a lack of choice of channel for advertisers.
Sure, but that's in the nature of the beast--"the beast" meaning "ad networks."
I'd love to see advertisers have the ability to include or exclude specific sites. Still, the new variable pricing is an improvement over the "one bid fits all" model that AdWords/AdSense advertisers have had to accept in the past. It should make advertisers more comfortable with the idea of content ads, and in the long run, it should benefit publishers who deliver quality content and audiences.
Sure, but that's in the nature of the beast--"the beast" meaning "ad networks."
This is true for many, but, if Google wants me to ever run my Adwords on content sites, I must have more choice in where they run. For now, the box remains unchecked.
The changes implemented yesterday are not enough, as there's absolutely no way to measure them. If I can't measure an ad, I won't run it.
MQ
