I wonder If We Tell Google Too Much About Ourselves

Does our chatter here at WebmasterWorld have adverse effects?

[Scurramunga]

Once upon a time I could swear that blocking poor quality sites led to better earnings. I remember after switching image ads off and reducing the number of adblocks on a page or sitewide I would always see noticeable changes. Over the years here at WebmasterWorld a few other members had also made similar claims regarding extreme optimisation measures if I am not mistaken. I remember many topics where WebmasterWorld members would extol the virtues of blocking poor quality advertisers. A couple of members even commented on how they beat the Smart Pricing Algo by resetting channels, although I must admit that I had never tried this as it was even too extreme for me. Other members have stated that they achieved positive results after having asked Google to switch off impression ads.

Nowadays I hear members discussing the futility of taking any action at all.

I feel more helpless than ever when it comes to optimisation. I guess Google has never really condoned the concept of publisher control. Their message has always been that the 'auction' process is best left to proceed unabated. I get the feeling that every time I try and opt out of something such as third party networks or block MFA's etc that I am being punished by their algos (In reality I am not being punished, it just that Google has made everything more robust on their side) Opting back in doesn't help either because the (earnings) bar has dropped, it simply means that I earn a little more by opting in rather than out. I know the critics amongst you will say that these tactics have never worked anyway and that Google knows best. Maybe the critics are right and I am trying to read too much into things. However, before you shoot me down, have a think about less extreme optimisation measures you may have taken over the years and consider whether they still work for you or not.

Assuming all or at least some of that hocus pocus tactics really worked, I wonder if the evolution and development Adsense/Adwords algo has been shaped somewhat by what has been previously said by publishers on WebmasterWorld and on other forums. I wonder if Google was quietly monitoring us during those discussions. Did we reveal too much about ourselves as publishers?

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

Did you reveal your true identity?

[Scurramunga]

Your question is obviously tongue'n'cheek

The premise behind my question doesn't relate to the Google's interest regarding the behaviour of a single publisher in as much as it does relate to group discussions.

[Karma]

As long we don't have the Google tool-bar installed and we're not using Chrome, we're safe ;)

We know that Google do indeed read these forums, and I personally wouldn't be surprised if some of the discussions here have impacted their algorithms.

Whatever happened to the Google rep anyway (AdsenseAdvisor)?

[Green_Grass]

yup, a lot of things that used to work , no longer do so. Same true on the adWords side. They do seem to try to find any loopholes being discussed and effectively block them. That is why a public discussion board is not really a good place to share tips. Better to find what works for you and keep it so.. selfish? maybe.

[Karma]

If they even worked in the first place ;)

[engine]

You can be sure that they monitor all areas where they might detect activity that they deem to be unacceptable and close any loopholes. In addition, don't forget they also get lost of great ideas for positive development.

Did we reveal too much about ourselves as publishers?

I don't know we can generalise like that. It's up to you to look after your own privacy and to watch out for slips that can expose details you may want kept quiet.

Secrets don't remain secrets for very long these days. If you find the edge, it's not going to be long before someone else does, too, and they may not keep it as close as you. Over time, it's bound to become sanitised.

Just take the opportunities as they arise, and keep moving on to the next.

[bumpski]

Yes!

Google says AdSense is slowing my site down!
[webmasterworld.com...] thread above is classic example of adverse effects.

Whatever happened to the Google rep anyway (AdsenseAdvisor)?

Webmaster Tools "Site Performance" no longer reports any website performance degradation due to any Google products. The current ASA clearly picked up on this thread and after several months "Site Performance" was fixed; just hide the bad data about Google products.

I guess for Google, the Adwords group certainly would not want advertisers to have this negative performance information (which is still available in the real Firefox, Firebug, PageSpeed tool).

But to me this shows a bit of disdain for publishers whose products are the true source of income for Google and Adwords. (Going back to the days of barter anyway).
Words conveying knowledge have true value (but you can't spend them!)

Finally I'm wondering if posts like this one really bring on the smart pricing!

[netmeg]

I don't think so. I'm pretty vocal about it when I'm pissed off at Google, and they most definitely know who I am. (Occasionally I hear from them after one of my rants here or on twitter) My earnings haven't suffered and my AdWords accounts are all in good standing.

The thing is (and I know I'm a broken record saying this over and over but it's really true) you just have to realize that AdSense is what it is. There was NEVER any representation of real publisher control. Basically you place the code and Google gets to do the rest. That's the product they introduced back in 20-whatever, and that's pretty much still the product we have today. We are not Google wage apes. We're not forced to sign up. There is *plenty* of money to be made when we put forth more effort than just placing code on pages, but we have to make that effort to get it; it isn't going to just drop into our laps.

Sure I would love it if AdSense gave me more control along with the ease of implementation, but that's not the program they offered when I signed up, that's not the program they offer now, and by now it's pretty obvious it's not the program they want to offer.

It either works for you or it doesn't.

As for ASA - the previous one got transferred out, and last I heard, they didn't have anyone permanent to replace her. It's kind of a thankless job.

[Scurramunga]

Thanks for those replies. As most of you have worked out my initial question was not one regarding privacy from an individual publisher perspective but rather a question regarding whether or not public discussion results in the closing of loopholes .

Bumpski, that is an interesting example which you cite and I think it goes at least some way in proving that that Google does monitor forum chatter. I fully accept that Google Adsense is plug and play and doesn't come with a control stick, but to me that to me only supports my hypothesis that Google eavesdrops and mends it's algos accordingly.

[dibbern2]

Did we reveal too much about ourselves as publishers?

Too much? I don't think so, unless you view the publisher/AdSense relationship as somewhat adversarial.

I respect those who see it that way, but am not in their camp. It just is what it is. I doubt very much I'll ever understand more than just a glimmer of how it works. And like some machines, I'll be happy to leave it chug along.

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

Bumpski, that is an interesting example which you cite and I think it goes at least some way in proving that that Google does monitor forum chatter.

No proof was required. We have known this for years through the presence of ASA.

[londrum]

i think adsense publishers are the internet equivalent of burger flippers at mcdonalds. as long as you carry on flipping the burgers they're happy, but google doesn't give two hoots about our new recipe ideas.

[Scurramunga]

No proof was required. We have known this for years through the presence of ASA.

Yes and by extension if one believes that if even just one of the aforementioned optimisation strategies ever worked, it would be reasonable to deduce that the chatter on this and other forums inadvertently provided ASA(s) with useful information which would have resulted in the closing of loopholes.

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

Absolutely!

(Perhaps it should have been ASS or AdSense Spy)
:)

[AndyA]

If anyone from Google AdSense reads this thread, please fix the security warning displayed on Internet Explorer when logging out of AdSense. There is apparently a file that isn't secure, hence the warning. This has been going on for months.

Thank you.

[BillyS]

I don't think so. I'm pretty vocal about it when I'm pissed off at Google, and they most definitely know who I am. (Occasionally I hear from them after one of my rants here or on twitter) My earnings haven't suffered and my AdWords accounts are all in good standing.

Agree with netmeg, I could care less if Google knows who I am. I have nothing to hide.

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

By a strange coincidence ...
[webmasterworld.com...]

[Scurramunga]

Agree with netmeg, I could care less if Google knows who I am. I have nothing to hide.

With respect to you; that this is not what I was asking. I am wondering if my original question was unclear or misinterpreted.

[ken_b]

Scurramunga

If I understand your OP correctly, you are wondering if by talking about various ways of managing or manipulating AdSense using the tools and input/ideas/tips provided by Google and other members here ... are we helping Google find and close loopholes and/or weaknesses in the system that work to our benefit.

If that is right, my answer is maybe, no, probably, oh what the heck, of course that happens.

Does that mean we are "telling too much", I don't think so.

It's just part of the progression of the system development and trying to keep it as viable as possible, for both publishers and Google, while at the same time trying not to "throw the baby out with the bath water".

In the process, some methods that were helpful when used in what Google may have thought was an appropriate way could easily be used much more aggressively by some publishers in a manner that may have been clearly not what Google had anticipated. So they remove the option for all or come down hard on those they suspect of abusing it.

The last choice almost always leads to some "collateral damage", which is just a polite way of saying some innocent folks get screwed over, unintentionally of course.

If I misunderstood your question, ignore this whole post :)
.

[AdSenseAdvisor]

I wonder if the evolution and development Adsense/Adwords algo has been shaped somewhat by what has been previously said by publishers on WebmasterWorld and on other forums.

To clear up any misconceptions, we don't use the conversations on this forum (or any others) to create loopholes for the algorithms. If you've found ways to optimize that are within Google policies, we're all for it. Legitimate optimization tips helps the whole network and brings better value to advertisers.

While we're not using your feedback to shape algorithms, we DO love your feedback in this forum on how AdSense can improve - and thankfully, you all aren't shy on that front ;)

Your input was especially crucial when developing the new interface and I'll be monitoring your suggestions to share with the product team for future developments. So post on!

Whatever happened to the Google rep anyway (AdsenseAdvisor)?

Back in action :)

[Scurramunga]

If I misunderstood your question, ignore this whole post

Ken_b, apologies, it looks as if you haven't misunderstood after all. Interesting reply, thank you. I guess it is fair to say that the natural progression of events, the introduction of new programs such as IBA, third party networks etc are all adding to the complexity of the content network and adding more variables and causing publishers like myself to postulate further on what is only flimsy anecdotal evidence at best.


ASA.thanks for your reply. I think I can safely generalise and say that from what I have observed most regular/contributing publishers here at WebmasterWorld have only ever espoused legitimate optimisation within the TOS. It might not always follow the practices prescribed by Google (ie. clean filters, image ads etc) but ultimately we do understand the importance of maintaining value to the advertiser and preserving the integrity of the program.