Forum Moderators: martinibuster
What I have been wanting and I think what a lot of people were expecting/hoping for after June 1st was a significant user experience improvement for visitors to my site that click on an AdSense ad.
By that I mean fewer ads that...
1. Lead to pages full of ads & links
2. Advertise green widgets yet lead to a general shopping mall site where green widgets are not to be found
3. Are otherwise misleading
I haven't noticed any significant improvement post-June 1st. If someone has noticed a significant improvement, please post. As I posted in the first long "June 1st" thread, I was skeptical there was going to be a significant improvement.
And as I posted before that thread, I had already begun focusing my time and energy more on non-AdSense income for the long-term. I'm going to continue that.
One day this week, I'm going to remove AdSense and replace it with YPN on 5 of the best pages on my best site. Regardless of how ugly it is, I'm going to give Yahoo 7-10 days to see if they can begin delivering some decent ads.
I'm going to start contacting advertisers directly and offering ads on my pages to replace AdSense on those pages.
My goal is to move away from AdSense slowly and eventually be completely AdSense free if there aren't significant improvements.
I still have hope for AdSense. I certainly believe Google can change things, my doubts are about their willingness. It almost seems as if Google is comfortable being the Internet's equivalent of those magazine classified "Moneymaking Opportunities" ad sections. If that's their objective, that's fine, magazines make money off those type ads. Maybe that's necessary for Google to make the payments on that private jumbo jet. But it's not something I want to be associated with long-term.
Over the past few weeks, when I saw junk ads on other sites, I started taking the time to send a quick message to the owner of the business. A few responded and thanked me for my email while saying their hired webmaster was in charge of the site and they weren't aware the junk ads were being displayed. I had hopes if more people became aware and contacted Google to complain things might change.
But that was a silly belief on my part. They know the problem. Solutions are available. They simply aren't willing.
By the way, one last point. Hurricane season is approaching. If a local hardware store placed an ad in my local newspaper advertising emergency electric generators for sale yet didn't have any generators for sale, readers would eventually complain to the newspaper and I have little doubt the newspaper would stop carrying those ads and be very critical of future ads placed by the hardware store.
FarmBoy
Ads have a far greater importance than you appear to place on them. Yes, of course they are there for people to make money from them, much the same as TV ads make money for the TV companies.
I for one have clicked on ads and bought home insurance etc. Was that ad useless to me? I don't think so.
Do you think there is no negative user experience associated with MFA?
That was one of the features/benefits touted for AS: ads that would be helpful for the visitor, rather than an irritation.
It's also a basic principle of enthusiast and trade magazine publishing, where audience surveys indicate that readers place high value on ads.
However, the June 1 accoust closings aren't about the user experience on our sites; they're about the AdSense user experience, or what happens when a user clicks on an AdSense ad.
well, those were around long before adsense, since they still haven't gone away then they must not be as big a problem as we think, or they are much harder to stop than we would imagine.
I've seen people surf right through them and never bat an eye, many times. I don't think they have as big a negative impact as we think they do.
everyone wants to talk about ads that enhanced their experience, so what would have happened if that ad wasn't there?
you'd be uninsured? you'd have no lights?
not so, you'd go through organic until you found something.
I picked out a few keywords this past weekend that were relevant to our eCommerce site and blogs and found that 45% of advertisers did not participate in the content network vs. Google search on those keywords. That is a big number! Additionally, there is a 20 cent minimum bid for the content network, yet on Google search we can bid pennies? Something does not seem right there.
Its not an advertiser shortage, its a trust issue. For too long advertisers have seen way to many arbitrage sites and MFA sites that scraped content and milked advertisers to the point where they do not trust the content network. Heck, ever have your own ecommerce site 100% scraped and then saw ad sense ads on the scraping site leading to your site? Want to talk about ticking off an advertiser and giving them general mistrust with the Google content side, it happens. How many publishers here had their content scraped and plastered with ad sense? I bet most honest publishers would say it happens a lot.
Think about it, Google has allowed very questionable sites run ad sense (arbitrage and MFA's) for years now. Advertisers see big bills and we see bad traffic come from all of those sites, how do we as advertisers view the content network? When we see huge bills come with no conversions what do we as advertisers fear the most? Click fraud and Google’s inability to catch it all. We do not worry about click fraud in Google main because we know Google would not and does not need to do that, but on a shady arbitrage or MFA it is a different point of view. Look at click fraud, do advertisers question Google about click fraud on Google main search? No, they only question it on the content network.
If Google really did decide to get serious and publicized it on the ad words side, we might give the content side another try, but until then, good publishers will not see that revenue. Advertisers also have the same perception about yahoo content network as well. So good luck if you try that out.
My opinion, the first major company to do a major housecleaning on the content site will see a very large revenue increase in advertising. Until then, good publishers will continue to suffer and see flat earnings for the most part. Yes, you might get my pay per action conversion but honest publishers sites will never see our dollar bid for keywords until Google cleans up more.
BTW, who are these people? I've not met many who like ads...
Oh, maybe that's why Google is trying to get rid of some of the worst offenders from their program? You think they realized that it is damaging their Google(tm) brand AS WELL as damaging the contextual ad paradigm itself?
Just a thought.
Maybe they place "high value on ads" because they believe that they have been hand selected and vetted by their fave publication, therefore are more "trustworthy".
It's because the ads are relevant to what they (the readers) are interested in. People who read POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY, for example, are interested in seeing ads for the latest cameras from Nikon and Canon, the newest lenses from Sigma and Tokina, the mail-order prices at Adorama and B&H Photo, etc. Similarly, booksellers who read PUBLISHERS WEEKLY are interested in seeing book-announcement ads from Penguin, Bantam, and other publishers. In other words, they're eager to see what's called "endemic advertising," or advertising that's geared to their needs and interests.
AdSense ads are most credible (and potentially convert best) when they fall under the "endemic advertising" heading, but that isn't what the June 1 account closings were about. Those closings were apparently directed at a specific business model, presumably the "thin content" arbitrage model, where the AdSense user experience (as opposed to the publisher user experience) was being compromised by users clicking on ads and being taken to junk pages--which is a whole different issue from the presence of junk ads on a publisher's site.
And that has nothing to do with June 1st. So-called junk ads are not the same as arbitrage. Arbitrage AdSense sites were the target. Not so-called junk ads.
As far as many publishers are concerned, the removal of arbitrage AdSense ads would go a long way to improving their users' experience as many are junk ads. I don't believe for one moment that visitors haven't been frustrated by arbitrage sites leading to nowhere. Far be it from being a scientific study, I have seen this frustration firsthand and after a while it does begin to speak in volumes. Let's face it, most of the arbitrage AdSense ads lead to brain dead arbitrag sites, even when something passing as an excuse for content is to be found. Or at least that's been my experience.
If Google's sole mission on June 1st was to remove arbitrage AdSense ads then I would say the the results have either been half baked, or there are other phases of this cull not entered into that we just don't know about. What would be the use of removing a percentage of arbitrage ads only to allow others to fill their place? What the use of shutting down sites because they do not conform to a minimum standard as a business model, only to set a precedent where the new bar remains barely a notch above the old bar?
Those have nothing to do with the arbitrage crackdown.
Based on numerous posts in the various "June 1st" threads, I think it's very obvious that a lot of publishers were hoping an improved user experience would be a result of the crackdown. And I imagine some are still holding on to that hope.
FarmBoy
What's the use of shutting down sites because they do not conform to a minimum standard as a business , only to set a precedent where the new bar remains barely a notch above the old bar?
If that is all they are doing, it doesn't seem like it would be very logical. For that matter, if this were a sweeping removal of all MFAs of all sizes types and stripes, it wouldn't be consistent with Google's typical mode of doing things.
It would be more logical, and fully consistent with Google's algorithmic/data-centric approach, to start small and learn from the initial experiment. They could be just culling a specific group of accounts, which is large enough to generate an interesting data set for them to study.
The June data will tell Google a lot about the immediate ripple effects of this initial culling -- which ads move up to fill the gaps, what happens to CTRs and eCPMs on various types of sites as the mix of ads change, what happens to total network revenues, etc.
If the short run data looks acceptable -- network revenues don't plunge too terribly as the catchy/misleading ads are replaced with humdrum mom and pop ads -- perhaps we'll see a further tightening of the criteria to kick out other categories of arbitrage accounts, or perhaps they'll kick out MFA accounts that don't engage in arbitrage, etc.
The potential long run benefits of maintaining a high quality network are apparent -- what isn't clear is whether the short term costs outweigh those benefits.
I'm going to give Yahoo 7-10 days to see if they can begin delivering some decent ads.
FYI. They just introduced Quality Based Pricing.
[webmasterworld.com...]
FYI. They just introduced Quality Based Pricing.
I hate to say "I told you so." :-)
Seriously, it had to happen. I'm just surprised that it took so long.
I never asked them, have you? I imagine much depends on the surfer's ability to separate the wheat from the chaff. When the font size of the one ad component that is most effective in guessing ad quality is so small (domain name), it's unlikely the average user easily knows a good ad from a bad ad. Then again, maybe they're not fussed like we are. Put up a poll on your site and ask them. It's the only easy way to find out, isn't it?
I have asked (via a poll) - and I've received unsolicited feedback as well - less-than-useful, or misleading ads, definitely turn off the visitors to the other AdSense ads - I have been told that they ignore subsequent ads (even if they think they may be interesting and relevant) once they click a few and find that the landing page does not provide what was promised in the ad.
less-than-useful, or misleading ads, definitely turn off the visitors to the other AdSense ads
Didn't some guy named Pavlov and his doggies do a paper on this a long time back? Instead of our visitors getting a food pellet (useful site) when they press the lever (click on an ad), they often get punished (Useless, no nav, scraped MFA). Heck, even rats learn not to press the lever after a couple of times. Electronic fencing for dogs works long after it's been turned off. Fido had a couple of unpleasant experiences when he got to close to the propery line and he's learned never to do it again.
Hey google and ASA - Postpone hiring one PHD in math and hire one phd in behavioral theory... Have them research what happens when people click on those adsense ads and get to sites like the one I came to today. A bunch of scraped sentences, no other content and a bunch of adsense ads. (oh, and according to the whois, the domain was purchased 5/18/07)
It's like going to a local restaurant and expecting a decent meal. If you get lousy service, raw and burnt food, roaches on the floor and Montezuma's revenge that night... Will you go back the next day?
cg
In general, a good user experience is only the result of a good web site usability. In short, this means that visitors of your site are satisfied with the way they can use your site.
A good web site usability can come from several points, ideally from all of them:
1) Well written authority content
- Content quality matches expectations of the target audience
- Content quantity matches expectations of the target audience
2) Easy site navigation
- Site navigation is easy to understand
- Site navigation is consistent across all pages of a site
- Site navigation helps users to find a desired piece of information/content fast
- Content can be bookmarked
3) Technical stuff
- Site is fast (i.e. no delays in serving content)
- Site is reliable (i.e. always available)
- Site does not generate error messages (but if error messages occur, these offer a way to understand the reasons for the problem)
- Content can be saved to local hard disk
It should be noted that sites with a bad usability will attract fewer repeat visitors, they will get fewer word-of-mouth referrals, and they will get fewer organic links.
I would be impressed if you could show me any ads at all that actually add something to the user experience. Ads are of 0 benefit to the user. That doesn't mean that I think ads are of no value.
Zero benefit?
First, how do ads relate to "user experience" or (to be more precise) to "web usability"?
In a perfect world, the ads would be placed on a site with good usability and with great content, basically a site that the users would not want to leave light-heartedly. Ads on this site would focus on adding the missing pieces to the site, e.g. a site reviewing (but not selling) red widgets might attract advertisers selling red widgets. The ads for red widgets should then lead to an easy-to-use ecommerce site that sells red widgets. On another example, a site selling green widgets (but not reviewing them) might show ads for authority reviews of green widgets.
In other words:
1. People read about widgets on your site.
2. They see an ad related to widgets.
3. They recognize that it's an ad. (Very important!)
4. They have certain expectations prior to clicking the ad, probably to see additional stuff that they did not get from your site.
5. If they do not get what they expect, they will escape - either:
- through an link on the landing page (important for MFAs)
- by hitting the back button
- by entering a URL
- by opening a previously bookmarked page
- by closing the browser.
Here you can see whether your site's content was strong enough to pull them back to YOUR site. If they keep coming back, you certainly provide a good user experience.
6. However, should they get what they expect when clicking an ad, they will continue to use the landing page and (possibly) do a transaction. They may not remember your site at that point in time, but then again, they may do so. The user is happy, the advertiser is happy. With this outcome, I'd be happy too.
Zero benefit? I see plenty of benefit here.
That's why users of my sites frequently say in polls that ads are "a positive addition to the site". But I make it easy for them:
- I distinguish the ads from the content. My users are ALWAYS aware that they click an ad, i.e. quite the opposite of "blending".
- When I come across what I think is a bad landing page, I put it to the filter. I do not want to mess around with user expectations.
By following this scheme, ads can definitely lead to a more positive user experience (and thus to benefit for users).
But this was a perfect world view.
How does the current state of Adsense ads look like in terms of web usability?
a) Blended ads. With blended ads, users do not know that they are clicking on an ad. They are tricked into clicking an ad. The user interface changes (bad!), and probably their expectations (prior to clicking the ad) are not fulfilled. BAD USER EXPERIENCE.
b) Just more ads. Well written ad copy leads users to build up expectations, and again, seeing a site with just more ads (instead of the promised whatever) leads to BAD USER EXPERIENCE.
c) Thin-content MFA site. Users have a certain expectation prior to clicking an ad. If the landing page has a worse usability compared to your site, the user might wonder what is this all about? And go somewhere else altogether.
The cumulated learning effect from these experiences leads users to more cautiously click on links. This harms the overall business model of online advertising. (Remember the animated "catch the monkey ads" of the 90's? People stopped to click the ads because they knew that they would be disappointed by the landing page.)
- When I come across what I think is a bad landing page, I put it to the filter. I do not want to mess around with user expectations.
Ah, but your 'partner', Google, doesn't really provide the tools to allow you to monitor and control the quality of the user experience on your site - it's up to *you* to find the offending advertisers, and at present, you can only catch what *you* can see - since G may serve up different ads for different users in different markets, you may not see the same 'user experience' that other site users see.
AdSense makes it easy to put ads on your site, but AdSense does not make it easy to control the user experience related to the ads served up on your site.
Not putting those tools directly in the hands of the one party most concerned about the quality of the 'user experience' - publishers - is one reason we're having these discussions. Publishers are pretty much at G's mercy when it comes to ad content displayed on your site.
There are aspects of the AdSense system that make it very appealing to publishers, and aspects that make it a PITA - based on the responses on this forum, lack of publisher tools to control which ads / advertisers / etc. appear on your site seems to be a major source of frustration. Placing AdSense on your site seems to be a Faustian bargain: monetize your site, surrender nearly all control of the ad content and the advertisers in your AdSense placements.
I can't imagine any traditional publisher that would give up so much control over the content of their ad space: a magazine or newspaper would never do it - there's always some level of editorial control over the ads. Unless you're talking about the classified ads section in the back of the magazine/paper, of course. Is that what AdSense has become?
thanks for pointing out the lack of tools. I could not agree more.
can't imagine any traditional publisher that would give up so much control over the content of their ad space: a magazine or newspaper would never do it - there's always some level of editorial control over the ads.
I have worked for some time at a magazine (traditional print stuff). My experience is that there is surprisingly little control over the ads that appear. Sure, they check that it's not blatantly illegal, but other than that, the publisher does not care. The reason is simple: the ads are usually very expensive, which acts as a natural barrier of entry.
You just don't place an ad that you quickly slapped together in MS Word on an ad space that costs you, say, 20.000 Dollars. Big name brands do this, because they do have marketing budget. Any smaller company can't and won't do this. (This also tells you something about the potential effectiveness of print ads - but that is a different topic.)
I have worked for some time at a magazine (traditional print stuff). My experience is that there is surprisingly little control over the ads that appear. Sure, they check that it's not blatantly illegal, but other than that, the publisher does not care. The reason is simple: the ads are usually very expensive, which acts as a natural barrier of entry.
Point taken. I was trying to point out that most traditional media would not farm out near-total control of ad content policy on the publication's pages to a third party - there is likely some kind of manual review of every ad placed. In effect, publishers are giving up near-total control with AdSense (and other contextual programs). Great for Google, good for AdWords advertisers. Where's the AdSense publisher in this relationship?
In any case, I think the real issue is the take-it-or-leave-it nature of AdSense (which is fine, I understand the nature of the relationship, EFV!) -- it's just that G could do a much better job publisher-relations-wise (and gain powerful allies where now they have some unsatisfied publishers) if they would provide some simple tools to allow those publishers to control the stuff that appears on their sites, and then mine the data provided by the motivated publishers - some have suggested using the aggregate competitive ad filter data as an indicator, so G might use any publisher control mechanism as a feedback tool to help them to weed out the worst stuff.
The top-down approach isn't working for everyone, that's for sure.
The FTC Act prohibits unfair or deceptive advertising in any medium. That is, advertising must tell the truth and not mislead consumers. A claim can be misleading if relevant information is left out or if the claim implies something that's not true. For example, a lease advertisement for an automobile that promotes "$0 Down" may be misleading if significant and undisclosed charges are due at lease signing.
I doubt the FTC would take any action on misleading ads on AdSense because the damages are so minimal, but who knows?
If a politician were to get a burr under his saddle over Google and privacy issues or some other matter, the misleading ads practice may become an issue.
FarmBoy
misleading ads practice may become an issue
Good point.
Even if Google doesn't plan to do more than just kick out a narrow group of accounts that rely heavily on arbitrage, it would be prudent to go further, and crack down on advertisers that rely on misleading users in order to achieve high CTRs.
Certainly, things have gone way past the point where they can claim ignorance.
While the damages from any one misleading ad may be too small to attract attention, at some point the FTC and others (think class action trial lawyers) may notice what's been going on, and go after Google, given its high visibility and deep pockets.
>Where's the AdSense publisher in this relationship?
Laughing all the way to the bank?
Before I sound like 'other people' here it goes:
Die MFA die die, and
Give us publishers more toys now!
I was trying to point out that most traditional media would not farm out near-total control of ad content policy on the publication's pages to a third party - there is likely some kind of manual review of every ad placed. In effect, publishers are giving up near-total control with AdSense (and other contextual programs).
A better comparison would be to a TV network, which doesn't consult its affiliates before running national ads.
Still, what does any of this have to do with the account changes that took place on June 1?
Where has the conversation shifted from a better user experience to an FTC investigation of Google?
It hasn't as far as I know. But I think a comment on the legal aspects of advertising is appropriate when it comes to considering things that might force an improved user experience.
Besides, prior posts concerned an analogy to traditional media and their lack of misleading ads. Their concern for FTC enforcement is a factor in the absence of misleading ads in their venues.
A better comparison would be to a TV network, which doesn't consult its affiliates before running national ads.
That's not true in the U.S., not for ads or for programming. There have been a number of occasions when local affiliates have refused to air network ads or programming because of content/message concerns.
To say it a different way, the affiliates were concerned about the "user experience" of their viewers.
Still, what does any of this have to do with the account changes that took place on June 1?
Again, a number of people were hoping, and still hope, the June 1 changes would have a positive effect on user experience.
This thread is about the user experience aspects. There is another thread about post-June 1 earnings, a thread about post-June 1 filter cleaning, etc. They are all valid threads/discussions.
FarmBoy
Still, what does any of this have to do with the account changes that took place on June 1?Again, a number of people were hoping, and still hope, the June 1 changes would have a positive effect on user experience.
This thread is about the user experience aspects. There is another thread about post-June 1 earnings, a thread about post-June 1 filter cleaning, etc. They are all valid threads/discussions.
Summary of what I'm trying to get at in all my prior rantings:
I suppose this may be seen as 'off-topic' - perhaps I should open a new thread about this subject. Over and Out.
Thanks for that: clear and balanced.
I hope that ASA et al read and inwardly digest it...
Rgds
Damon
I would just like to point out that when you entered your business relationship with Google, you choose to accept the terms of the contract. Under these terms they get a certain real estate (that you select) on your sites, and they pay whatever they think is appropriate for this service. There is no obligation whatsoever to tell you how the amount is actually calculated, or why certain ads will be displayed or not displayed. I mean, you knew that, right? What is so unfair about this setup?
And, yes, of course, you are free to not run AdSense and leave the program. I guess, it's 'take it or leave it' for any of us.
Seriously, I am 100% with your opinion on this. The Google Adsense program is becoming more and more of a joke. I just don't get it that the competition is apparently sleeping a deep and thorough sleep (or is it coma?).
I hope that ASA et al read and inwardly digest it...
I thought it was a great leap foward when ASA acknowledged the arbitrage thread the other day and a greater step foward when he/she said that the people at the plex were looking foward to reading our feedback on WW. Yet once again we experience that all too familiar silence from ASA that we have all been so used to.
I think that ASA and colleagues are right to lurk for this rather heated debate, in general.
We don't want ASA to step in with a definitive "Right, that's ENOUGH! You're all FIRED!" comment, just for starters, even though I'm sure that some WW people have some of the most borderline non-mom-and-pop AS sites out there.
Rgds
Damon
[edited by: DamonHD at 10:59 am (utc) on June 6, 2007]
Same ads with slightly improved landing pages and reworded ads BUT nothing that helps my sites, even in general.
I just put 12 of the same old tired, spammy ads (fleas) back in the filter. very disappointed as I too watched June 1st deadline come and go with income actually falling.
*sigh*
Maybe next go around I will see a little difference.
Ann
