Forum Moderators: martinibuster
We're now requiring AdSense publishers to comply with the spirit of our Page Quality Guidelines [adwords.google.com]. If you're an AdWords advertiser, you might already be familiar with these guidelines, which are intended to provide a better experience for users, advertisers, and publishers alike. If you use any kind of online advertising, know that these guidelines encourage publishers to, among other things, create sites with simple navigation and substantial, useful content.This new policy requirement doesn't mean that you can't use online advertising; it simply means that if you do, you need to be sure that the way you advertise meets with the guidelines, whether it's through AdWords or through any other advertising program. However you advertise your site, it can always benefit from significant and relevant content, clear navigation, and the other points in our quality guidelines.
The other noteworthy update: now you can place up to three link units on a page. As we've noted in the past, link units are a great way to provide relevant, user-friendly ads in hard-to-fit locations on your site. With the new opportunity to place three link units -- and the plethora of link unit formats -- we hope you'll find great ways of incorporating this unique ad format on your site.
opps... that was supposed to be guidelines and not guidelinks
Someone's gotta fill in the inventory slack with MFA getting the boot. No thank you.
We're now requiring AdSense publishers to comply with the spirit of our Page Quality Guidelines.
Okay - so I'm wondering how they will enforce this requirement?
- A massive manual review of all publishers sites?
- A quality review upon acceptance into Adsense?
if your ad mentions <'Free travel information,' your landing page should feature free travel information (versus links to other sites that do).
They are going after the template pages.
Sweet!
requiring AdSense publishers to comply with the spirit of our Page Quality Guidelines.
I'm reasonably sure I know what they mean by this, but the language they used leaves holes you could drive a truck through.
Those guidelines are supposedly called guidelines because they are NOT required for AdWords advertisers, just recommended. And requiring someone to comply with the spirit of something (as opposed to the letter of something) - that's pretty fuzzy.
And I am certain that this will be the summer of change. Why? Who knows, but the last three weeks have seen more changes to the Adsense program than in the past year. And I feel these are good changes.
guidelines because they are NOT required
@zett:
And I feel these are good changes.
On the blog:
We're now requiring AdSense publishers to comply with the spirit of our Page Quality Guidelines.
linking to the Google AdWords Landing Page and Site Quality Guidelines:
First and foremost, these are only suggestions, not requirements for your ads to run within our program
I am a publisher not an adwords advertiser, where's mine?
The other noteworthy update: now you can place up to three link units on a page.
Is it safe to assume Google has data showing good performance with link units?
On the pay per action advertisments, we can make text link ads that would lead directly to our sites when clicked on. We have a full campaign of text links for our advertisments running.
Hmmm. I've been trying to find a PPA advertiser with text link ads. That's good to know.
FarmBoy
The link: [google.com...]
Or am I missing something?
FarmBoy
Google's perspective would be, if it is milked at Google AdWords (where advertisers pay), the other end of the cow can do its stinking business in other networks. Other networks are already taking note.
now you can place up to three link units on a page.
I've been waiting for expecting the one ad link unit limit to be lifted. I never knew where they came up with a limit of one. But are we now going to see pages with three ad units and three link units on the same page!?
The new quality sermon is interesting. It's a bit fluffy, but I will say this. I've been redesigning one site and increasing its quality for the last few months, and each time I make the look and navigation of a section easier, my CTR jumps 10%.
Why doesn't Google offer more incentive to produce quality pages? Why not a case study? If it's going to say it's optional, the least it can do is provide data to motivate. After all, what is going to motivate publishers more than the bottom line?
Is the call to quality by Google a quality call?
p/g
now you can place up to three link units on a page
OMG. I can only imagine how those pages that are fond of "blending" will look like in the future... Soon we will see three ad units and three link units plus a few referral buttons on pages. Will there be room for any relevant content above the fold?
As I noted somewhere else, Google is increasingly becoming the "one step ahead and two steps back" company.
Recent type examples:
- Ban garbitrage sites to increase quality, but at the same time disable any click tracking
- Ban more garbitrage sites to increase quality, but introduce a new rule of "up to three link units"
What's next?
- Allow ban by account, but reduce the number of filter slots to 3?
- Introduce better statistics, but allow to fully customize the ads for perfect blending? (cough)
What have those star chefs been cooking lately?
They have made it clear that:
Webmasters can drive traffic from adWords to pages with adSense on them. They are not AGAINST arbiitrage which could result.
However the adWord ads should not be misleading and the landing page must have relevant and substantial content. ( interesting integration between adWords and adSense side of things).
They also donot have a problem with webmasters with small ecommerce sites, using adSense to defer a part of the adWords cost. ( see their example in the blog). This is another example of acceptable arbitrage.
These changes should keep dishonest and MFA type of publishers on their toes. They would never know when the axe could fall. Makes the whole thing very risky. They might no longer give out ' earned money' after banning.
I am happy at the clarifications. It is a substantial communication from G.
Some very big sites are now linking to such sites while running adsense at the same time. THis was against the rules before inknow, so is there a new change in the policy? that would be big news (as I suppose the folks in Adsense looking the other way and letting large sites getting away with what little guys can't).
They also donot have a problem with webmasters with small ecommerce sites, using adSense to defer a part of the adWords cost. ( see their example in the blog). This is another example of acceptable arbitrage.
If my understanding of arbitrage is buying adwords to produce higher adsense revenue, could you please explain your statement in relation to ecommerce sites in comparison to any other type of site.
Webmasters can drive traffic from adWords to pages with adSense on them. They are not AGAINST arbiitrage which could result.
They seem to be saying arbitrage is fine if the landing page has quality content on it
[edited by: Scurramunga at 10:39 am (utc) on June 6, 2007]
A small ecommerce site may not carry the full range of products and may serve only a niche. Visitors that arrive thru. adWords may exit thru adSense resulting in revenue for the site owner.
For ex. A book store may sell only latest fiction. The adWords visitor may be looking for 'text books' or 'rare books' and on finding that the store does not stock them, exit via adSense to a site that does have them. At times, a large no. of visitors may not find what they are looking for creating an 'arbitrage' opportunity for the ecommerce store. This may be bad for sales and may call for a better targetted adWords campaign but that is beside the point.
Ofcourse, it does mean that the adWords tarffic is low cost on a/c of a better QS on the landing page and the advertisers may be paying much higher on account of more competition leading to expensive keywords.
This is just an example. May not be deliberately done by the webmaster but Can happen.
Well, this is G's problem and they are sure to address it for the long term. A smart algo for flagging a/c's and human reviews can easily fix this problem.
For ex. A book store may sell only latest fiction. The adWords visitor may be looking for 'text books' or 'rare books' and on finding that the store does not stock them, exit via adSense to a site that does have them.
This is the adsense model that I work by. However, I don't use adwords as my site was established before adwords.
[edited by: Scurramunga at 10:55 am (utc) on June 6, 2007]
A smart algo for flagging a/c's and human reviews can easily fix this problem.
A far as I know, AdSense is not allowed on the gambling sites themselves, not sites that have a link or two to gambling sites, but a page full of nothing but links to gambling sites and carrying AdSense on it would probably get it owner in trouble.
OMG. I can only imagine how those pages that are fond of "blending" will look like in the future... Soon we will see three ad units and three link units plus a few referral buttons on pages. Will there be room for any relevant content above the fold?
I was reading lens reviews on a respeccted German photo site yesterday and clicked two AdLinks by accident because they were blended into the content so well. The site had useful information, but AdSense had obviously become the tail that wagged the dog, and I'd never link to the site or encourage others to visit it.
Google should be allowing fewer units on the page, not more.
However the adWord ads should not be misleading and the landing page must have relevant and substantial content. ( interesting integration between adWords and adSense side of things)....I am happy at the clarifications. It is a substantial communication from G.
I agree.
Now they need to address the people who put up misleading AdWords ads that lead to pages that don't contain AdSense ads. Otherwise, half of the problem will still exist.
FarmBoy
