Forum Moderators: martinibuster
talk about double standards! They need to get there facts before publishing!
eg
"SITE NAME REMOVED site received 3.5 million page impressions from 75,000 visitors last month, which puts him under the 20 million per month that Google suggests for Adsense applicants. He thinks it is a "strong possibility that Google is removing smaller sites from the program."
errmmmm since when?
...not to say the fact that on the very page I was viewing they were displaying Google Ads! lol ... in a very article that was having a dig at Google and adsense!
I am puzzled what is going on here and there ... maybe somebody could explain it to me?
Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if Google is accessing who is costing them too much time and money and then down the road will tailor the program to cut out that category of people. It would be smart business though maybe not very good PR.
Being a premium member, the Register has a different set of rules ...
The Adsense ads displayed on The Register are standard Adsense ads, not Premium ads.
Not very good reporting or background research by the writer, IMO. Their headline of "adds gagging clause to Adsense" is completely wrong, since that clause has been in the terms since the original launch of the program.
And if his account was suspended Tuesday morning, it is quite possible that is check had been sent for August prior to that.
<added>And the Register is no longer running AdSense ads on that page</added>
Apart from JenStar's and other's points here already, I have not seen any evidence of revenue per click moving from $1 to 5c over 3 months in this forum or even anything that suggested it was close.
Not-unexpected Register spin piece.
Wow, if my math is correct that is 46.6 pages or Adsense ad impressions per visitor. Seems kinda high...
Wow, if my math is correct that is 46.6 pages or Adsense ad impressions per visitor.
Not unbelievable - i'm sure "El. Reg" has thousands of daily visitors who will click through all new articles every day.
The giant search engine - increasingly criticized for exercising power without responsibility - had not responded to our request for comment at press time.http://theregister.com/content/6/33180.html [theregister.com]
Aah, how i loove this manipulative sentences ... pfffff ...
<added>And the Register is no longer running AdSense ads on that page</added>
Oh yes, they are running still AdSense - they are just rotating ads/banners and you don't see them all the time on all pages and all th time - Google has not dumped The Register despite the fact that it clearly violated TOS. So we little publishers are getting dumped due to some allegations of clicks that we didn't do, but here is big publisher that openly violates TOS (writes openly about stuff that is forbidden to write by TOS) and it is not being dumped. Can anybody explain it to me? Where is equality?
but because this is a very real threat to advertizing business
Threat? I don't think so. Wake-up call? Yep. But we're already seeing the rest of the advertising world change a bit. An article came across the businesswire yesterday about a group that is targeting affiliate programs (cpc, cps, cpl, cpm etc.) based on content, geo and in 100's of languages. I take this to mean that the industry will change but is not really threatened.
JAG
is the identical clause, word for word, as what appeared in the original AdSense terms dated from July 16, 2003.
No, the words "about the subject matter of this Agreement" used to be "about Google or any Google product or service" in the previous version (dated June 16, not July 16).
Still seems highly unlikely this change was for one particular user, when the meaning is essentially the same.
We can't discuss Adsense in any way, so this forum is redundant. At least we can now talk about Google in general, such as using it for search, which as Adsense publishers we were not allowed to do before 1 Oct!
You are right about the slight change, I missed that when I was comparing it, but it does mean the same thing - the change was likely more from a legal lingo point of view than anything else.
Be sure to read the thread of Brett's - some interesting insight into the Google issue, and why the article did have the spin it did.
After reading about this, I'll make sure that these issues get heard back at Google and within the AdSense team.
There is no doubt Google will get lots of bad press over time, not because the program is bad, but because this is a very real threat to advertizing business. With Adwords and Adsense Google is about to change the face of a whole industry.
AdWords and AdSense aren't a threat to the advertising business; they're part of the advertising business. They aren't even a threat to traditional advertising, because contextual text ads work for some things but not for others. To use an obvious example, if you're selling beer to twenty-somethings, it's more cost-effective (and more effective, period) to run clever commercials on TV than it is to buy AdWords. But if you're selling antenna kits to radio amateurs, AdWords/AdSense may be where you want to be.
The advertising and marketing industry is used to change, and it's pretty good at adapting to change. As sales promotion has siphoned away traditional advertising dollars, ad agencies have gotten into sales promotion and refugees from ad agencies have started their own sales-promotion firm. Ditto for direct marketing, collateral, Web design, and even Yellow Pages advertising. It won't be long until big ad agencies have subsidiaries or departments that handle PPC advertising, and new, specialized agencies will attract dollars from big-name corporate clients that recognize the efficiencies of direct marketing through PPC ads. But you'll still have TV commercials for Miller Lite beer and VW New Beetles, and ads in the THE NEW YORKER for Absolut vodka. Contextual text ads like AdWords/AdSense will simply be another tool in the marketer's arsenal, to be used when it makes sense to use them.
The surprise is that all this is starting from The Register. They have a history of "being boughten" (by their own "cash and carion/we can be bought" admissions).
It is also suprising by the register because they are so anti microsoft/pro linux/pro open source. That alone should put them on Googles side through thick and thin.
I really think alot of news outlets are scared to death of the power that Google is amassing via the news feature.
Makes sense. While they publically critisize Google's Advertisement programms, their Privacy / Toolbar and such their motives are selfish and they are in fact fighting against Google's strength in their competing area - news ...!?
I don't think the mainstream press is particularly worried about Google News. Frankly, NBC, CBS, AP or Reuters could clean Google's clock PR-wise (the other kind) if they set their mind to it. ;)
There is no doubt Google will get lots of bad press over time, not because the program is bad, but because this is a very real threat to advertizing business.
With Adwords and Adsense Google is about to change the face of a whole industry.
For many publishers, with a business model completely relying on advertizing, this is not a very comfortable situation.
umm.. actually google outsourced AdWords and AdSense to another company ("Applied Semantics" appliedsemantics.com for all the details). That has been some time ago that they aquired AS (april 03) and those guys had been doing that for some time before obviously.
Advertising being what it is (reactive and quick on it's feet) altered almost immediately when they first started using AdWords, and AdSense is a simple extension of that which other ad agencies have been doing for ages. Advertising companies picked up the adwords model almost at once and ran with it, in fact they still are (notice the rise of "button" ads now)
All google is in fact doing is utilizing tools available to them that they saw would work and went against the bombardment of advertising that other searchengines like altavista were doing at the time. I think it was a good call on their part.
