Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Thanks for participating in the survey a few months ago. Here is feedback from one issue you specifically ranted about. (ok, they didn't say "ranted" they were nice)
The feature, will be rolled out over the course of a few months, will allow review of ads placement-targeted at your site. You can ensure they are relevant for your users and also tell advertisers why you blocked them.
I don't usually post emails like this, but I came here and didn't see anyone talking about it.
This is what has been asked for repeatedly by publishers including myself! Woo Hoo! A level playing field!
Thanks G ;) and you RonS for the good news.
FarmBoy
A few months later, Google will introduce AdSensErtise where publishers can pay Google to advertise their sites to potential advertisers.
FarmBoy
Like I might have a RON campaign from company Y via another agency. It might crop up int he ad review center. I will not be able to decide unless I know how much they are paying so would have to reject.
If they want to compete to replace graphical campaigns as opposed to just competing with Adsense text, at least for me, they need to open up.
I'd like to see total control and google should display list of all displayed ad just like TF does. I can then remove all unwanted ads.
I'd like to see total control and google should display list of all displayed ad just like TF does. I can then remove all unwanted ads.
That isn't going to happen, because AdSense contextual ads are selected and served in real time from a constantly changing pool of ads (and bids).
Yes, they change and more are added from the pool of ads, but this way you could weed away to your heart's desire.
Could be a bottomless pit, but that should be the publisher's call.
YM
Just for laffs, it might be in Google's self interest to allow publishers to maximize return on their ad space with ads they feel are appropriate for their visitors.
I have 15,000 pages of inventory and get comments about ads that I never see so I can't filter them. I need to be able to see the ads that are running on my site(s) and determine if they are appropriate for my audience.
For instance if I ran an animal rights site, my visitors (or my regular membership) might not be interested in ads for steakhouses in their town, or for fur coats. Capish?
If publishers were actually able to out-guess the contextual algorithms in restricting certain ads from appearing, that might improve ROI across the network.
I don't know if it would work or not but sheeeesh, open your mind! :D
As for opening my mind, it isn't my mind that you need to open; you need to convince the folks at Google that the AdSense network and advertisers would be better off if publishers had supervisory control over the contextual ad-matching algorithm.
Were you ever a politician? ;)
I can see the future now. About 3 months after this is rolled out, publishers will be complaining about not having enough quality advertisers interested in their sites.
"We regret to inform you," Google's email said in response to publishers' complaints, "your site sucks."
have you ever wondered why image ads don't work with adsense?
If they want to compete to replace graphical campaigns as opposed to just competing with Adsense text, at least for me, they need to open up.
well, yeah, they need to show me the banner, they need to show me the bid and i give feedback. kind of negotiating the terms for an ad placement and google taking their share of the business. time to professionalize the system. one thing is for sure: advertisers need to pay way more than the pennies they do now for their image campaingns on the content network. no branding for free on my sites!
[edited by: moTi at 10:11 am (utc) on Dec. 11, 2007]
If you block an advertiser you have to provide a reason why you are blocking them. Google then sends that reason to the advertiser.
This could open a can of worms. But it's probably still worth the risk, because of how many blocks are currently preventing ads from being seen.
I've asked for this new Google plan in the past, but I'm a little surprised Google is actually going for it.
Until now there's been a "firewall" between advertisers and publishers. We have lived in two separate worlds. No communication, etc. Completely impersonal.
When you start the new platform, where you reject/accept, and give reasons why, some people will get pi$$ed off. In some cases it could even lead to sabotage if rejections are flippant.
But let's hope those are the rare exceptions and for the most part everyone conducts themselves in a professional manner. After all, in the real world, there is communication between advertisers and publishers, submission of ads, discussion of rates, brokering deals, etc.
It's easy to imagine if Google opens the door to communication between advertisers and publishers, further communication could be taken out of Google's control, leading to side deals and even direct advertising, i.e., taking Google completely out of the equation. Which of course is currently a TOS violation.
Not everyone is going to be content to discuss ads by email within the confines of Google's new system. You can bank on that--especially when the amount of money involved is significant.
p/g
When you start the new platform, where you reject/accept, and give reasons why, some people will get pi$$ed off. In some cases it could even lead to sabotage if rejections are flippant.
Google is probably expecting civil reasons. Then Google will provide feedback to the advertiser on what the publisher wrote and how they should change the ad, probably not word for word what the publisher wrote.
When you start the new platform, where you reject/accept, and give reasons why, some people will get pi$$ed off. In some cases it could even lead to sabotage if rejections are flippant.
Somewhat similar on the opposite side when you look at affiliate programs like CJ, Doubleclick, Linkshare, etc.
If you (the publisher) apply to an advertiser's program and they reject your site, you're given a handful of reasons why. But you're never really told the exact reason (i.e. too few page impressions, very low ROI or conversion history, etc.)
Maybe Google will sanitize your reason before sending it back to the advertiser. The best way to do this is to prevent publishers from typing in their own reasons, but instead provide a drop-down list like:
- Advertiser link/creative inappropriate
- Advertiser keywords do not match
- Advertiser product does not fit website theme
- Advertiser is an industry/niche competitor
Of course that last item Advertiser is an industry/niche competitor would be analogous to a Competitive Ad Filter for site-targeted ads.
In addition to having this filter I still believe that we should be able to set minimum CPC or CPM for our sites.
Without those tools I'm not going back to AdSense. I just dont need $0.05 unrelated ads on my websites.
That isn't going to happen, because AdSense contextual ads are selected and served in real time from a constantly changing pool of ads (and bids).
Nonsense a la crapola, fastclick's (now valueclick) ads are also selected and served in real time from a constantly changing pool of ads and what do you know.....you can review (and see the price) and filter out the ads you don't want on your site.....easily!
[edited by: Web_speed at 11:01 am (utc) on Jan. 8, 2008]
Ann
So why bother with AdSense when you can get what you want from ValueClick?
Exactly!
I do bother though with posts that try to smoke screen the truth. Like the reasons you have listed as to why ad filtering can not be done on a real time ad auction system. Utter rubbish...
The only way to hand select advertisers, product choices, ad text, linking options and banners, etc. and how much is paid out and the terms is with PPA/affiliate programs. Don't like the percentage or terms or return days or linking choices? Replace with a better merchant, that kind of system is all free choice.
Targeted by site is a different story entirely; it would have to be a different system, not run by crawling and an algo.
reasons you have listed as to why ad filtering can not be done on a real time ad auction system. Utter rubbish...
[edited by: Marcia at 11:50 pm (utc) on Jan. 8, 2008]
