Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I've been with Adsense for over a year now and never clicked on my ads. I guess, I am too careful. But, accidents happen; other people accidentally do click on their ads. Whether these accidental clicks get people kicked or not is debate for itself, but Google should honestly loosen up Adsense rules.
Why?
There are websites on the internet that grossly violate Adsense rules by asking visitors to support them by clicking on their ads; other websites use image pointers to ads and other tricks to keep clicks coming. I've reported many of such websites; you have probably done the same. But, they are still in business, even after 3,4,5,6 months after being reported.
To be fair and balanced, Google should only kick publishers who grossly violate Adsense rules (e.g. ask their visitors to click on ads, etc). Small publishers (up to $10,000/month earners) who accidentally and non-intentionally make small mistakes should be first given a warning, and then suspension (but not immediate ban).
I believe that most people are in fact nice people - not crooks. To make mistakes is to be human. How many of you crossed the street without waiting for a proper traffic light? Even Google makes mistakes (as we could see from this latest exchange rate payment screw up). Let a small guy make a better life for himself and his family; if he/she makes small mistake, warn him/her and I guarantee you they will fix the error within 24 hours (and never repepat it again)!
If you have a static IP you can filter by that, or give yourself a special cookie and filter that way.
If we are going strictly by the book, then most of these people did in fact break the TOS for reasons of accidentally clicking on their own ads (however, accidental is never intentional).
I question the entire premise of this thread. Over the past couple of years, in THIS forum anyway, when we got to the bottom of an "I was banned" case, it was almost always because of some fairly serious TOS violation. Very few, if any, were banned because of accidentally clicking their own ads!
Also, ASA has stated in this forum that AdSense only bans publishers when they have confirmed that there has been an "egregious violation" of the rules ( I think that is an exact quote, but please correct me if not). I understood that to mean that someone would have to do something like putting up "Please click the ads" to get banned, and that accidental self-clicks did NOT count as an egregious violation.
Google doesn't need to loosen up the rules. If anything, they need to tighten up their enforcement of them. And for the record, I'm not an Adwords advertiser, and in fact have never spent a penny to advertise my site.
They were always fine with it.
Part and parcel has to do with the type of site site you have, which I am sure they check once you fire off your email. I doubt that a dealer selling crack has much clout when he tells the police someone stole his car.
But having said that it would make life slightly better if Google would spell out some rules for us old publishers.
Here are my pointers - please do add yours:
* No payment if there's any sign of fraudulent activity. Period. All earnings returned to advertisers.
* Yellow flag on such account if account older than one year - maybe six months. Warning letter sent on yellow flag.
* Three yellow flags and you are out.
* Account to be terminated after review by senior employee only.
Since there have been cases of reinstatement - it's obvious that the termination is not foolproof. A methodical approach to account status review will make sure that honest publishers get a chance to fix their problems and eventually grow into big earners.
But I think Google will only do this once their is fierce competition to get good publishers - once Yahoo / MSN step in with their programs it will become slightly better for us publishers.
I think Google should get much tougher and drive out the MFAs or as more players enter the market their share will be diluded.
We can't get YPN here in the UK as yet, but I did have a look at a preview tool that showed you what ads were served on various ad servers. I looked at both Google and Yahoo.
The Google preview was accurate in that it showed the same ads that the real Google tool did - 75% of them MFA's. Interestingly the Yahoo one showed NO MFA's (or MFY's if you call them that). I have no idea as to how accurate it is, but to me it's a signal that Google has let the problem get really out of hand, and really, really need to address the problem now.
I think Google should get much tougher and drive out the MFAs
Just today I found i an MFA/scraper site with a PR of 6!. It came complete with affilate ads laid out like a link directory (no content whatsoever) and a tiny bogus forum that had more to do more with soliciting links than than niche it purports to represent.I can't believe that this rubbish site has a PR of 6!
On top of that it also has a link exchange page (not the forum) where it dictates exactly to the letter what code MUST be when anyone exchanges links with it, ensuring that it receives a spiderable link and a PR vote. What it doesn't tell you is that the outbound link it returns is completely useless from a spidering point of view; hence no PR returned.
Google should really loosen up Adsense rules a little. Many publishers (including me) are really afraid of little mistakes, which can cause accounts to be blocked.
Regards!
Google should really loosen up Adsense rules a little. Many publishers (including me) are really afraid of little mistakes, which can cause accounts to be blocked.
Right, like the poor guy in the "Am I Stupid?" thread who wrote:
Hi, I started activating my Adsense ads in mid April 2006. When I was setting up my website with Adsense, I made some self clicks to understand the relationship between CPM, CTR and $$. It lasted for about a week. After that no more self clicks.
I'm sure advertisers would agree that Google needs to give such publishers the benefit of the doubt. After all, why get worked up by a week's worth of invalid clicks, even if the advertisers are paying for them?
Those who think that they should get tougher have not been a victim of click attacks. If I know what your site is, I will launch a click attack on it to see if you change your mind. Try explaining that to Google and report your findings here.
I've been the victim of several click attacks, and I'm still in the program.
If you notice an obvious spike in your clickthrough rate, you should notify Google. This will send a clear message that you aren't the culprit, since there wouldn't be much point in trying to cheat advertisers and then reporting the invalid clicks.
It's also a good idea to use AdSense only on sites that can pass the "sniff test." If a site doesn't have a "made for AdSense" smell (i.e., if it would have a reason for existing without AdSense), it will be more likely to get the benefit of the doubt in a manual review.
I think very few sites can pass this test. G will lose half its publisher network!
These days most new sites come into existence, keeping in mind advertising as a source of revenue and are most often than not, designed for adsense. (Not made for adsense, If you can see the difference :-) )
Maybe I am wrong but, I think not...
you shouldn't be so self-oriented. it's not about you sucking out the last cent out of your website by all means. it's about sustaining and regaining advertisers' confidence in the content network to feed you with click revenue the next time as well.
if any, google should enforce the rules. and as ever, why worry if you are a respectable publisher playing fair? i've never heard of anyone who got booted because of a few accidental clicks. and even then, chances to get reinstated would be fine. so what's all the fuss about?
and as ever, why worry if you are a respectable publisher playing fair?
Exactly. I've accidentally clicked my own ads, yet I never, ever worry about being booted and manage to sleep soundly at night.
These days most new sites come into existence, keeping in mind advertising as a source of revenue and are most often than not, designed for adsense. (Not made for adsense, If you can see the difference :-) )
Maybe, maybe not. But the "sniff test" isn't about whether the publisher hopes to earn a profit; it's about whether the publisher looks like a get-rich-quick opportunist or deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Consider two hypothetical sites, each about vintage cars:
- Site A has original (and genuinely useful) articles, photo galleries, hand-edited links to other resources, etc. for people who want to learn about, collect, or restore old cars. With or without AdSense ads, the site has value for the user (not just for the publisher).
- Site B consists mostly of template-based pages that use recycled Wikipedia articles as filler between multiple AdSense units. If you were to remove the AdSense ads, what would be left? Nothing that the user couldn't find at Wikipedia.
If both of these sites were victims of click attacks and received manual reviews by Google, would both receive the same benefit of the doubt? Site A would be likely to pass muster, but the "sniff test" wouldn't favor site B, whose publisher clearly is trying to make as much money with as little effort as possible.
Finally, here's something else to consider:
Google doesn't have to prove guilt before it can terminate its relationship with a publisher. Google can end that relationship at any time, for any reason, just as a publisher can quit AdSense at any time for any reason. So, even if Google "loosened up the rules," it could--and probably would--continue to dump publishers who didn't pass the sniff test in manual reviews.
Just today I found i an MFA/scraper site with a PR of 6!. It came complete with affilate ads laid out like a link directory (no content whatsoever)
I found one with a partial copy of one of my home pages. I emailed Google and the page was gone within a couple of hours.
But having said that it would make life slightly better if Google would spell out some rules for us old publishers.
How are the existing rules unclear?
If G changed its rules to something like "we might reinstate you for reason X" it would just give the fraudsters more rope. Best to maintain a hard stance, IMO.
Yes. Agree very much that they have to loosen the rules. Those who think that they should get tougher have not been a victim of click attacks. If I know what your site is, I will launch a click attack on it to see if you change your mind. Try explaining that to Google and report your findings here.
Those who are victims of click attacks should switch to programs with payment options that are click-resistant, such as fixed fees. If enough people express frustration with G that it cannot protect them against click attacks, it will be forced to adopt payment policies that are click-resistant.
I agree with things Toldan said in first post of this thread.
Google should really loosen up Adsense rules a little. Many publishers (including me) are really afraid of little mistakes, which can cause accounts to be blocked.Regards!
Thank you. As you can see, this thread has been hijacked by Adwords advertisers who expect to make a sale of $50 for every 2 cents they spend on content network. Small advertisers are really greedy, I thank god Microsoft and other big guys advertise on my site. I don't see them complaining.
gooneweb said:
Yes. Agree very much that they have to loosen the rules. Those who think that they should get tougher have not been a victim of click attacks. If I know what your site is, I will launch a click attack on it to see if you change your mind. Try explaining that to Google and report your findings here.
Yes, I would like to see them explain that to Google. In fact, I know two people personally that had been victims of click attacks. There was a huge spike in clicks on their site, CTR was 7-8 times normal average. They emailed Google and Google shut down their accounts. Then they appealed and Google said regardless of what happened they had to cancel their accounts because Google wants to protect advertisers. Google just did not care for these two publishers being "victims of click attacks", they shut down their accounts to protect advertisers. Now you can wine all you want, but when it comes between you and an advertisers, who do you think Google will protect?
Thank you. As you can see, this thread has been hijacked by Adwords advertisers who expect to make a sale of $50 for every 2 cents they spend on content network. Small advertisers are really greedy. . .
Who are all these Adwords advertisers who have hijacked this thread? Most of us have already said that we are publishers. We just happen to disagree with you. You seem to have trouble accepting the fact that some of us just don't run our businesses the way you do.
I know two people personally that had been victims of click attacks. There was a huge spike in clicks on their site, CTR was 7-8 times normal average. They emailed Google and Google shut down their accounts. Then they appealed and Google said regardless of what happened they had to cancel their accounts because Google wants to protect advertisers. Google just did not care for these two publishers being "victims of click attacks", they shut down their accounts to protect advertisers. Now you can wine all you want, but when it comes between you and an advertisers, who do you think Google will protect?
The advertisers, obviously, because the advertisers are paying the bills.
As for why those two people lost their accounts, it could have been for several reasons:
1) Their sites didn't pass the "sniff test" in a manual review, and/or...
2) The sites didn't earn enough revenue to justify the cost of investigating the source of the invalid clicks, and/or...
3) Google felt that the sites were likely to have ongoing problems with invalid clicks because of their topics and audiences. (Hypothetical example: A highly polarized forum on a controversial topic that attracts troublemakers and performs poorly for advertisers.)
But click attacks won't get you bounced from the AdSense network automatically. Also, Google doesn't want to dump publishers without good reason, because one less publisher means one less source of ad impressions and revenue for Google.
I am NOT an AdWords advertiser.
And gooneweb, it's not click attacks or self-clicks that get most people banned. From what I've read over the past few years, it's clear and signficant TOS violations. Some who have been banned have started out claiming "oh it must have been those clicks I made" or "it was that click attack" but that doesn't mean that is the real reason that Google banned them....
You need to read people's posts a little more critically to understand what's going on sometimes--just because someone says something is so doesn't make it true.
Now if Google will stop sending me e-mail pointing out the benefits of joining the content network . . .
Now if Google will stop sending me e-mail pointing out the benefits of joining the content network . . .
Some advertisers use the content network quite successfully. Have you tried tracking ROI from the content network, or are you just relying on gut feelings?
What ticks me off is the publishers who think that AdSense is either an entitlement program or that any money fraudulently obtained is just taken from Google's deep pockets. As an advertiser, my goal is to find the lowest bid price for the maximum return. What the publisher earns never never never is part of the equation when selecting a bid price. I have bids that run about a dime per click and some that run over a dollar per click. If I could get them to all run for a penny a click, I'd do that.
As an advertiser, my goal is to find the lowest bid price for the maximum return....If I could get them to all run for a penny a click, I'd do that.
Sounds like your attitude isn't much different from that of the "It's all about me" publisher crowd. :-)
One would think that, between separate bidding for the content network and "smart pricing," you'd be able to earn a decent ROI with AdSense ads. Still, maybe it depends on your niche. (I see many of the same advertisers month after month in my own niche, and Google's content-network revenues continue to grow, so AdSense is obviously working for some advertisers and topics.)
I've been tempted to look at content again. Attitudes seen here push that temptation away.
I couldn't agree more that some publishers have a misplaced sense of entitlement, but as you make clear later in your post, it's all about whether the traffic is ultimately profitable or not. Why distract yourself with the question of whether the webmaster sending you a ton of customers is secretly a jerk?
But I'll let you all get back to your advertiser bashing.
But I'll let you all get back to your advertiser bashing.
If you'd read the thread more carefully, you might have noticed a fair amount of publisher bashing. :-)
What ticks me off is the publishers who think that AdSense is either an entitlement program or that any money fraudulently obtained is just taken from Google's deep pockets.
Just like everything else in the world, there are good publishers and there are bad publishers (just like there are good advertisers and bad advertisers who try to game the system).
You shouldn't make a broad sweeping judgement of all publishers based on a couple of poster's comments. Just as I'm sure you wouldn't want someone judging your business based on the unfavorable types that happen to have the same business model as you.
Hey, I'm an advertiser as well as a publisher, but I don't use the content network. It's good to know so many publishers look at us advertisers with such disdain. It just confirms that I've made the right choice.
Now if Google will stop sending me e-mail pointing out the benefits of joining the content network . . .
I am glad you don't use content network, because you seem to be one of the guys who would send one complain for every click Google sends you. What makes you think that non-content network is better? For example, when I search Google for a little bit less boring topics, I get bunch of sponsored results and I click on them repeatedly out of boredom. I have also noticed when my friends search Google, they click out of boredom on their ads. What you gonna do about it? You can stop people from killing their boredom by clicking on sponsored results.
