Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Invalid clicks! Click fraud! Account has been banned!
I didn't do it...nodbody saw me do it...can't prove anything...
I'm usually a fairly complacent guy, but today I found myself removing Adsense code from overall_header.tpl (PhPbb Forums) because it meant that the ads appeared on the login and "thank you" pages. I replaced the code with a CJ.com smartzone. Less attractive (both for my visitors and my bank account), but I can sleep easy at least! ;) (I didn't get many clicks from the forum anyway!)
But generally, the paranoia surrounding Adsense is bizarre! It reminds me of PageRank (which, as we're on the subject, is IMO a fantastic marketing hook - perhaps one of the greatest in the industry to date). Google really do have a knack of inspiring fear in the webmaster community! Fair play to them.
Is the paranoia justified though?
Seriously. Is average Joe Web-guy playing russian roulette with the big G, or is the herd just stampeeding because of a few horror stories?
Can your competition get you booted?
And the burning question - if Google can identify "invalid clicks"...why don't they just invalidate them? (posed by TonyDesigns in this thread [webmasterworld.com])
Europeforvisitors responded (in the same thread) that it's used as a deterent, and I'm sure everyone here can understand Google wanting to protect the integrity of their programme. But surely invalidating the clicks would deter the majority of the fraudsters? But the situation now seems to be a punishment, rather than a deterent.
Actually, I take that last paragraph back. I totally agree with kicking out people who break the rules - even "punishing" them as far as you can.
The issue (IMO) is the ability to identify fraudsters (and to a lesser extent, prove it).
It's this that leads to the paranoia, because we all know that Google doesn't have a foolproof system for identifying fraud.
So we assume that innocent people must get caught in the cross fire! And then we go on to think..."well, that could be me!".
Enough rambling from me and onto the discussion! :)
So the question is - "Is the Adsense paranoia justified? Can innocent parties get caught up in the cross fire (or is it all just scaremongering by people who screwed up and got caught)?"
And I guess a follow up topic - "What can Google do to improve the current system?"
Scott
(PS, TonyDesigns and Europeforvisitors - sorry for the quotes dragging you in here - your posts got me thinking about this and I didn't want to hijack the other thread! :))
My advice? Just read the TOS before implementation, don't try to break the system and don't get over excited by the scare stories. Stick to those 3 rules & you'll be fine.
As for fixing the system - no need, AFAICS it's working fine!
I have told many people - don't click your own ads, don't incite clicks, and be in compliant with the terms and policies. If you do those things, you don't have to be paranoid.
Have you accidentily clicked on an ad? Just drop an email to AdSense support saying when and the URL, and they will send you a nice letter back saying "thank you for letting us know, and just a reminder, please don't click on your own ads in the future...." No need to sweat it out for days, watching anxiously to see if an invalid clicks email will arrive.
So we assume that innocent people must get caught in the cross fire! And then we go on to think..."well, that could be me!".
If any innocent publishers have been caught in the crossfire, it has been a miniscule percentage. Many of those "innocent" publishers really aren't innocent when you start digging deeper, whether intentional or not. And that is precisely why I say make sure you are in compliance with the terms and policies, and if you aren't sure on something, check.
I do agree that by simply following the TOS is a sure fire way to a decent sleep. The only part of that I'm unsure of is:
5. Prohibited uses. You shall not, and shall not authorize or encourage any third party to: (i) directly or indirectly generate queries, impressions of or clicks on any Search Results and/or Ad(s) through any automated, deceptive, disingenuous or fraudulent means, including but not limited to through repeated manual clicks, the use of robots or other automated query tools and/or computer generated search requests, and/or the fraudulent use of other search engine optimization services and/or software;
What constitutes "fraudulent use of SEO services"?
I'm pretty sure everyone here uses SEO services to generate impressions / clicks. Optimising a page for a specific keyword does that. Inbound linking does that. Are these considered fraudulent or not? :)
OK, so that's in the extremities of paranoia, open to a wide range of interpretation! ;)
However, I do think the TOS needs some work though, if nothing else just make it easier to read (big blocks of text are just nasty!).
As for the system itself, as long as it works for those who play ball, I guess there is no need to change things! But I do think those who innocently break TOS should be given some leeway (although I do know that others would just take advantage of it).
don't get over excited by the scare stories.
I say bring back monthly updates and channel the paranoia into a neat 2 or 3 day period. :)
Scott
And when someone get suspended from AdSense, many of them end up here to complain about it.
Yes, and have you noticed that virtually all of the complaints come from new members? We haven't seen many (if any) long-time AdSense Forum participants complain about disabled accounts. If innocent AdSense publishers were being knocked over left and right like tenpins, you'd think more of the forum regulars would have become victims by now.
I think the whole "AdSense paranoia" scare has been overblown. Most publishers just add the AdSense code to their pages, sit back, and collect the revenues. Only a minority try to game the system or, for that matter, participate in communities like Webmaster World--which is another way of saying that most AdSense publishers aren't even consciously aware of "made for AdSense" sites, click fraud and other TOS violations, or "your account has been disabled" notices.
I was just about to leave on vacation and thought no more of it...a few days later while I was away I got an invalid clicks email from the adsense team, account disabled....I hadn't even accessed my adsense stats while away let alone clicked any ads....Anyway google were pleasant and understanding during all their correspondence with me....I did my best to help out by informing them about the recent copy right infringement.....Thankfully a week later my account was reinstated.
My guess is the disgruntled geezer was angry his site was pulled by the host and decided to click away on my ads til the adsense fraud flag was raised....Or he pointed some kind of clickbot at my site...who knows....I was just relieved to be reinstated.
So innocent webmasters can get caught in the click fraud cross fire...Yes there are muppets who click away on their own ads til they get finger arthritis...They rightly deserve to be closed down.....But it's a little smug, complacent and/or naive to think you may never fall victim to the tactics of a sneaky competitor.
Paranoia? Perhaps but replacing AS would be very hard to do, they provide such targetted ads so fast on brand new pages, i think it is great, and we make money.
While it is not a sole revenue stream, it is still a good revenue stream, and who wants to lose that.
Having said that I do not lose any sleep over it because it is just simply something I cannot control apart from sticking to their TOS etc.
Yes, and have you noticed that virtually all of the complaints come from new members? We haven't seen many (if any) long-time AdSense Forum participants complain about disabled accounts.
Haven't seen any long-time forum member complaining about disabled AdSense account. Reason?
They just quietly stopped to participate in the AbSense forum discussion.
Ditto.
But it's a little smug, complacent and/or naive to think you may never fall victim to the tactics of a sneaky competitor.
When you get a fraudulent clicks email, it is not the final verdict. You can argue your case, and as foxtunes said, you can get reinstated. But I have seen a lot of evidence (both in the forums and privately) of publishers being suspended who definitely deserved it, despite saying they didn't deserve to be suspended. Worrying about being suspended won't make a difference, so why waste time on worrying?
I found myself removing Adsense code from overall_header.tpl
Marketing Guy,
You know you can put the same code into the topic header and forum header and get the same results without it showing up on the thank you and login pages. That would make it TOS AOK.
When you get a fraudulent clicks email, it is not the final verdict. You can argue your case, and as foxtunes said, you can get reinstated.
I've had the "invalid clicks" e-mail a couple of times, and my account has never been disabled. There was also another occasion when something like $1,300 in extra clicks got rung up on my site in a single day. (I reported the inflated revenue to Google the minute I noticed it.)
So why wasn't my account disabled? I'm guessing it's because my site passed the "smell test." The site existed before AdSense came along, it's full of content that has value for readers, and it just doesn't look like it was thrown together to make a quick buck. IMHO, the best defense against an "account disabled" e-mail (aside from not violating the AdSense TOS) is to have a site that is clearly legitimate, professional, and valuable to users. Your protestations of innocence will be a lot more convincing if every page isn't built around a high-value keyword and padded out with obvious filler material.
So why wasn't my account disabled? I'm guessing it's because my site passed the "smell test". The site existed before AdSense came along, it's full of content that has value for readers, and it just doesn't look like it was thrown together to make a quick buck. IMHO, the best defense against an "account disabled" e-mail (aside from not violating the AdSense TOS) is to have a site that is clearly legitimate, professional, and valuable to users. Your protestations of innocence will be a lot more convincing if every page isn't built around a high-value keyword and padded out with obvious filler material.
I was wondering if someone would define the "Smell test", and this does it very well - thanks! I guess that this shows that a human at G takes a look at the site, and tries to come to some common sense decision before hitting the deactivate button.
...for Google to get a sense of the smell, you have to assume that Google actually look at a site before suspending it, or at best get someone to look at it after you protest your innocence.
As far as I know G have maintained that they are seeking to have everything scalable and they wish to avoid human intervention.
I have no idea whether they actually look at suspended sites, but it has been mooted here before that smaller accounts (put in your own definition of a small account, but my guess would be under $1000 a month) are unlikely to be commercially worth Google's time in trying to sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to bad clicks.
As far as I know G have maintained that they are seeking to have everything scalable and they wish to avoid human intervention.
Sure, they like to automate things when they can. But since we know for a fact that they spot-check sites for QC reasons, it's only reasonable to assume that they look at sites when invalid clicks raise a red flag. (That doesn't necessarily mean they look at sites when a warning e-mail--as opposed to a "your account has been disabled" e-mail--goes out; perhaps those are generated automatically.)
it has been mooted here before that smaller accounts (put in your own definition of a small account, but my guess would be under $1000 a month) are unlikely to be commercially worth Google's time in trying to sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to bad clicks.
Yes, and I'm one of the people who have speculated that Google may look at revenues or profitability when making the "dump or not" decision. But revenue or profitability could easily be just one factor (along with the "smell test," among other things) in determining whether the publisher should be given the benefit of the doubt.
You know you can put the same code into the topic header and forum header and get the same results without it showing up on the thank you and login pages. That would make it TOS AOK.
No I didnt know that! :) When I first started messing around with customising PhPbb, I followed a few support articles on the site, which focused on overall header (although it was probably intended to add navigation and such, not ads).
With regards automation of banning accounts, I've always guessed that the automated part would simply flag accounts for manaual review (eg, unusual change in CTR, impressions, etc). It would seem to be a huge can of worms to entirely automate a banning process! ;)
Scott
It would seem to be a huge can of worms to entirely automate a banning process!
You think that, I think that, any reasonable person would think that....
... but whether Google think that is something that none of us will ever find out!
