Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Hi I'm a newbie --- just joined this discussion group today.
<snip>
I found this site by clicking on an AdSense ad on my site (more on that later) and following the link to the AdSense Forum site, where someone recommended this site because it was: "more mature and had more posts" -- and right they were --- I'm now a member here and not there.
Clicking on "your own ads".
Now on to the part about clicking on AdSense ads on your own site. Frankly I'm astonished to have read that some AdSense affiliates are frightened to click ads on their own site! I'm now in my 3rd month with AdSense and I will click on ads that I've not seen before and/or I don't recognize (I don't click on the ones I'm familiar with) --- This has benefited both me and my advertisers. (not to mention getting me here)
I'm in the business of publishing information, reviews, news etc, <snip> and from time to time an ad on my site will introduce me to a player in the market I've not been familiar with before --- this often leads new relationships and new economic opportunities for both parties. In fact I'm now in contract negotiations with one advertiser --- this contract will be valued in the 10's of thousands of $ --- a contract the advertiser would not be getting if I had not clicked on his ad! My point here being; just because you own the site the ads are being displayed on doesn't mean you are an "illegitimate clicker". Now I suppose I should stress that I don't abuse the system, and click on ads just to drive revenue. But to not click on ads simply because they are on your site is doing (IMHO) a disservice to the advertiser.
Revenue from AdSense:
My total ad revenue has dropped since I stopped selling my own ad space and converted the entire site over to AdSense. However in real terms I feel my income has not suffered at all. I no longer spend time selling ad space and thus free up my time to do other things that sometimes, in the past, would suffer from "inattention". Moreover, because I'm in a small niche market, and the companies I previously would pursue for ad revenues were also the companies I often wrote reviews and articles on, I feel our editorial objectivity has been enhanced.
AdSense Colors
After 1 month of using the AdSense color scheme, I converted to a color scheme that blends the ads with the site color scheme and have noticed no net change in CTR.
Payments from Google:
Prompt and accurate --- what more needs to be said?
All in all I believe my affiliation with Google has had a positive impact on the site.
--- 'nuff rambling for now
Regards
Ken
[edited by: engine at 4:50 pm (utc) on Sep. 22, 2003]
[edit reason] Specifics removed. See TOS [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]
But to not click on ads simply because they are on your site is doing (IMHO) a disservice to the advertiser.
Your intentions may be great, and we all are curious about our own ads now and then, but it's specifically against Google's Terms of Service to click on your own ads, no matter how genuinely interested in them you are and how beneficial it actually is to the advertiser.
What you should do instead is right click on the ad and get the URL from it's properties. Then you can visit the ad without clicking on it and risking being canceled by Google. Or else it's supposedly possible to have Google block your IP if you send them a letter, but there's nothing on Google's site about that.
Your intentions may be great, and we all are curious about our own ads now and then, but it's specifically against Google's Terms of Service to click on your own ads, no matter how genuinely interested in them you are and how beneficial it actually is to the advertiser.
Wow --- that's a pretty draconian policy --- guess I had better alter my practices before the "AdSense Police" crack down eh?
Thanks for the tip
Regards
Ken
What you should do instead is right click on the ad and get the URL from it's properties. Then you can visit the ad without clicking on it and risking being canceled by Google.
Personally I mouse-over the ad, look at the URL in the status bar, and then copy it into a new window. This habit is so ingrained in me now that I find myself doing it for every ad on the net that I'd otherwise click on, even the search result AdWords on google.com. I don't think I've ever made anyone any CPC revenue :-)
I think Google's no-self-clicking policy is reasonable. It may be true that some advertisers appreciate it when publishers click, but I think most are expecting visitors who are looking to buy something, and it's not our place to decide who's who.
I'd guess that 99% of all self clicks are either accidental or maliciously self-serving
That's a pretty damning condemnation of your fellow webmaster's ethics. I should think (hope) that guess is wildly excessive.
Nevertheless I do very much appreciate everyone's comments and guidance on how to deal "attractive" ads I see on site.
Regards
Ken
That's a pretty damning condemnation of your fellow webmaster's ethics. I should think (hope) that guess is wildly excessive.
I should hope not. I would expect that my fellow webmasters have read Google's terms of use, and that the majority of the rest have enough common sense to realize that clicking ads on their own sites isn't consistent with the goals of AdSense.
I think there is a misinterpretation here --- what I was referring to was the staggering 99% of self clicks being malicious & self-serving.
I have trouble accepting that figure. I would prefer to think that most webmasters operate at a higher ethical standard.
Now I will admit to being lazy about reading the total TOS at Google (but who has read every clause of every agreement put in front of them --- come on, now be honest) --- but I think I do understand the spirit of AdSense.
And maybe this is as good a time as any to discuss just what it is that advertisers hope to accomplish.
When an advertiser purchases an ad (in any medium) the obvious desired effect is to increase awareness of their products/services and (if they are revenue driven) increase revenue, nes pa?
Why would a site owners patronization of the advertiser's site (and subsequently the money that changes hands) be of less value that that of a non site owner? Yes I realize that Google must set some basic ground rules here, and that perhaps the "no click rule" is easier to monitor than any other method --- but is it really in the best interest of the advertiser?
And although it is my intention to utilize the above mentioned methods of checking ads in the future --- I'm not at all sure I will follow up on as many prospective leads as I did, because I now need to jump through all of these additional hoops.
Advertisers do want to make it as easy for you to do business with them as possible, don't they?
Regards
Ken
You would do well to read the entire TOS and the FAQ which is incorporated by reference. Otherwise, you may be in for a rude awakening that Google won't reverse and then that will also cause you to realize that putting all of your eggs in one basket isn't a very smart business decision.
The AdWords advertisers that post here have been very clear that they don't want publishers clicking on their links and I don't blame them at all.
Why would a site owners patronization of the advertiser's site (and subsequently the money that changes hands) be of less value that that of a non site owner? Yes I realize that Google must set some basic ground rules here, and that perhaps the "no click rule" is easier to monitor than any other method --- but is it really in the best interest of the advertiser?
It's definitely in the best interest of the advertiser not to click on your own ads.
a) There's a conflict of interest on the webmasters part. Every single webmaster will rationalize "it's ok to click on this ad, because I'm genuinely interested in it." Why would a webmaster do this? Because we are paid for it. We are the only "users" who are inherently incentivized (and incentivized well) to click on our Google ads and that's why it's not allowed for us specifically.
b) The advertiser does not want to pay you for your curiousity, no matter how beneficial you think it is to them. They want to pay you for your visitors in the hopes that a genuinely interested visitor will purchase the item from them. They pay for each click. They pay a lot for each click. They will stop paying if they realize they aren't getting what they are paying for.
c) Laziness in reading the Terms of Service (or even the FAQ) for a service that will bring you a relatively large source of revenue is not an excuse. You're being paid to do something that you promise to do. At the very least you owe the payee to know what it is you're promising to do.
EDIT: Coming back to this thread I realize I sound a tad condescending. That's not my intention. However adwords advertisers read these forums and I want them to be 100% confident in Google's program and it's partners. Anyhow, please excuse me if I seem like I am a stick-in-the-mud when it comes to following Google's rules to the letter, but it's really for everyone's benefit.
EDIT: Coming back to this thread I realize I sound a tad condescending. That's not my intention. However adwords advertisers read these forums and I want them to be 100% confident in Google's program and it's partners. Anyhow, please excuse me if I seem like I am a stick-in-the-mud when it comes to following Google's rules to the letter, but it's really for everyone's benefit.
Point taken. And, jaxomlotus, I agree that the need for trust and confidence in a system is paramount. If there are instances of malicious abuse, perhaps the blanket policy of "no self clicks" is the best way to assure that this confidence and trust is not eroded.
I did not see your post as condescending, and I took no offence, so there is no need to apologize.
However I can't say the same thing for Blue_Fin's entire post.
You would do well to read the entire TOS and the FAQ which is incorporated by reference.
Here we have complete agreement, and I have "mended my ways" taken your advice and read the TOS in it's entirety. However ....
then that will also cause you to realize that putting all of your eggs in one basket isn't a very smart business decision.
That's a rather presumptuous statement. What's leads you to believe that AdSense, or for that matter advertising, is the sole source of revenue on our site? In fact advertising represents the smallest of revenue flows in to our company, by a wide margin. I might add.
I offered my observations as a stimulus for philosophical debate on the highest and best use of the AdSense medium for the advertiser, not as an invitation for ill informed "cheep pot shots"
Regards
Ken
...but yeah there is a fine line when it comes to determing the fraudulent from the genuine clicks for sure.
What's leads you to believe that AdSense, or for that matter advertising, is the sole source of revenue on our site?
My comment was in response to
My total ad revenue has dropped since I stopped selling my own ad space and converted the entire site over to AdSense.
Speaking of TOS, it's against the WebmasterWorld TOS to give specific details of your site - you should edit your first post. :)
I suppose you're right, John, and would be happy to, except it's not apparent to me how to do this. I did reference this page [webmasterworld.com...] However I do not see the "owner edit icon" on any of my posts. (with the exception of this one --- I just edited this post as a trial ) What am I missing?
Regards
Ken
As already mentioned, you should really remove the specifics in your first post - don't understand the lack of an owner edit glyph though. Perhaps a mod can do it for you.
Interesting and useful post though - thanks for sharing your experiences.
TJ
As already mentioned, you should really remove the specifics in your first post - don't understand the lack of an owner edit glyph though. Perhaps a mod can do it for you.
Done --- thanks for the tips
Regards
Ken
Really says a lot about TOS fatigue in the general computing public. If you want a guarantee that 99.999999% of people will never read what you write, title it TOS.
Yes it does. A TOS may be the driest (boring) reading on the planet. Often users (me a culpa) just want to get on with the business at hand, and skip the TOS. This can (and my case is an outstanding example) lead to additional time wasted by both the user, forum participants (thanks for your patience guys) and help desks.
Our site has extensive help files and TOS docs. Nevertheless our tech support team is still inundated with questions on (what to us) seems to be the obvious. I know of no easy answer to TOS and help doc fatigue, except to endeavour, -- I know myself well enough not to make promises here ;-) --- do my bit in the future.
Signing off for now, gotta go back, somewhat humbled, to the "salt mines" of ecomm.
Regards
Ken
You're LEGALLY obliged to read our TOS, if you choose not to, you should at LEAST know this:
* blah important point 1
* blah important point 2
* blah important point 3
* blah important point 4
Don't know what the legal responsibility would be in this case.
SN
You're LEGALLY obliged to read our TOS, if you choose not to, you should at LEAST know this:
That line would practically render the TOS invalid before the courts. Your essentially acknowledging that only the following points are important.
Just a note, TOS is certainly there for us to read, but more importantly it's there as legal protection. So whether you read it or not may be up to you, but don't even think about a legal claim against the company if you dont (while they still hold a full deck against you should you break them).
Your essentially acknowledging that only the following points are important.
