Google AdSense Adds Matched Content For Eligible Publishers

[engine]

This Allow Ads feature should appear in the Matched content units in the coming months, says google, as it rolls it out world-wide. It adds that it'll only appear for "matched content eligible" publishers. It's only for sites with multiple pages and high volumes of traffic, although it wasn't specific about the numbers.

Starting today, you can use Matched content units to directly generate revenue by allowing ads to appear alongside your recommended content. Google AdSense Adds Matched Content For Revenue Generation [adsense.blogspot.com]

[jetteroheller]

I have since matched content was offered a 600x300 block below the content.

600 width, because my content area is 600 width.

What's Your favorit matched contend block size?

[nomis5]

I'm still not clear in my mind what the purpose is of matched content. Any one have a sub-idiots guide to matched content. And why G keeps posting stuff in my Adsense account as if I have already opted in?

[AmpedSense Plugin]

From my understanding, matched content is supposed to show users more relevant stuff on your site, thus increasing time on site, page views, reducing bounce rate, etc.

I think it makes sense if your goal is just to have users browse your site. But if you want them to make money for you (buy something or click on ads), then I think it just detracts from your call to action.

[zdgn]

Matched-Content-with-Ads option appeared on the dashboard a while ago and I've replaced a few regular Matched-Content ones with them. And so far it's looking good.

Regular non-ad Matched-Content units have been nice actually to increase relevant engagement and retention nevertheless. The content that gets picked for a user in the carousel is interest-based, I think, so it's even better user experience in my opinion. MCUs don't count towards your ad limits, respond well to screen sizes and are especially great for footers, at least for me. YMMV of course. :)

[nomis5]

I think it makes sense if your goal is just to have users browse your site. But if you want them to make money for you (buy something or click on ads), then I think it just detracts from your call to action.

That's how it appears to me. But without a doubt I can do a better job at promoting my own website, on my own website, than G can?

And agreed, if that's the point of Matched Content, then it will detract from the call to action, which in my case is for readers to click on an ad, not a link to another page on my site.

I still suspect I'm missing something here but I just can't figure out what it is. Or is keeping users on my site (if that is what Matched Content achieves) a goal in itself?

[avalon37]

I love how Google frames this as for "eligible" publishers. As if being served the same lame Google ads is something earned. Google....newsflash Facebook and other options are crushing you. You don't hold all the cards anymore.

[EditorialGuy]

As the publisher of an information site, I think Matched Content is a great way to promote other articles on the site. If, say, Joe or Jo is reading about doughnuts, Matched Content is an effortless and visually attractive way to say "Look at these articles about muffins, doughnuts, and sweet rolls, too."

Matched Content ads, on the other hand, don't appeal to me at all. (But maybe that's just me--I'm personally sick of news and entertainment sites that are loaded with blurbs for "promoted articles" and such.)

[zdgn]

I still suspect I'm missing something here but I just can't figure out what it is.

If it helps, I think of Matched-Content unit not as an ad but a widget whose purpose is akin to "People who liked this page also liked...".

Adsense/Google's algos determine what a given user should prefer to visit next on your site, and depending on what page they visit via the widget, AdSense should serve them better suited ads (hence more potential revenue.)

I like this widget a lot, because given G's enormous data reach, their understanding of a user's intent is much more informed than mine ever could be, even for my own site's content. So I kinda trust G to know what a user should visit next on my own site than guessing that myself.

With Matched-Content-with-Ads option, they serve a couple of ads along with showing your own pages. It now becomes a pseudo ad unit plus a "similar pages" widget.

But, as with all things AdSense or anything... No harm in testing it out! I'd say go for it :D

[Maleda]

Does anyone know how what sort of traffic volume is required to be eligible for matched content?

[Rasputin]

I have 3 sites approved for matched content, the smallest only gets about 500 visitors a day, but another site with many more visitors that has not been approved, so I guess that 'quality' (however that is defined by google for this purpose) and their ability to identify related articles is more important than traffic.

@editorialguy, I wouldnt dream of putting irrelevant 'outbrain' type links on the page but (so far) the ads shown have been pretty relevant to the page and not at all offensive.

[AmpedSense Plugin]

>Does anyone know how what sort of traffic volume is required to be eligible for matched content?

The site of mine that got approved gets about 1k uniques / 4k page views per day.

[RedBar]

Does anyone know how what sort of traffic volume is required to be eligible for matched content?

I have only one site elligible and it is a widget trade directory site, all my other sites which are widget sites have not been approved ... Do I take it that Google really doesn't understand them?

I haven't tried it and have no intention of doing so, yet.

[LifeinAsia]

But without a doubt I can do a better job at promoting my own website, on my own website, than G can?

Most of us probably can. But for a lot of people who have static pages or are challenged enough just by adding AdSense code to their site, Google can probably do a much better job than they can.

I've been approved for 2 of my sites (one gets ~7K page views/day, the other hass ~3K), but have not tried out yet.

[EditorialGuy]

@editorialguy, I wouldnt dream of putting irrelevant 'outbrain' type links on the page but (so far) the ads shown have been pretty relevant to the page and not at all offensive.

That's good to hear. Are the ads producing much revenue, despite being at the bottom of the page?

[IanCP]

I can remember way back in the olden days when the ads were all supposed to be relevant to your site's content. And mostly were.

Is this now some revelation of "back to the future"?

[RedBar]

And mostly were.

Yep plus they also implied we'd never see double or triple ad serving on the same page. This seems to be the de facto standard on some of my sites!

[EditorialGuy]

I can remember way back in the olden days when the ads were all supposed to be relevant to your site's content. And mostly were.

In the olden days, AdSense were contextual pay-per-click text ads--pure and simple.

Nowadays, AdSense is a full-fledged ad network with display ads (including CPM ads), so it stands to reason that contextual ads are just one piece of the puzzle, and relevance to the needs, interests, demographics, etc. of the audience is what matters for many ads.

Case in point: Go to any news site, and you may see ads for cruises or vacation destinations. What do cruises or other vacations have to do with the Democratic caucuses in Idaho or a FIFA football scandal? Nothing. But people who read the news take vacations, so why not show them ads for cruises and other holidays? If tracking data shows that they've been looking at tourism or cruising sites, so much the better.

[james_09]

Anyone else have access to the matched content unit, but not able to add ads yet?

[IanCP]

In the olden days, AdSense were contextual pay-per-click text ads--pure and simple.
Nowadays, AdSense is a full-fledged ad network with display ads (including CPM ads)

A cuppla weeks back, after being constantly nagged by AdSense I switched from text only to text/display. YES, yes, I should have known better.

Comparing March with same period in January? Traffic [page views/Impressions] up 12.25%

CTR down 41% and EPC down 27%

I shoulda known better I know. But I tested it anyway.

[clipse]

@James - yes, I too have Matched Content and no ability to turn on ads.

Google says they'll be rolling it out over the next 'few weeks'.

[molex]

I guess I'm not eligible. I am seeing nothing about matched content inside my site management section under my owned sites.

[Rasputin]

@editorialguy,
No they dont generate much revenue, adsense on these pages is up about 5% so depends whether you think small incremental increases are worth pursuing. cpc is also only about half the normal cpc for these pages, which is perhaps surprising.
More important, the matched content ads have had no impact at all on bounce rate / exit rate so I dont think they will be on there for long...

[Rasputin]

Should have read: "cpc on the matched content ads is also only about half the normal cpc for these pages"

[netmeg]

The whole "matched content" thing is probably a reaction to some comment systems (like Disqus, for example) allowing you to promote your own content in your commenting, and oh by the way, get paid for offering these "content-looking" ads. Google wanted to get their piece of that pie as well. I tried the Disqus model for a while, but eventually turned them off because there's only so much crap I will allow on my sites, even if I get paid for it. Some of it can be interesting, but a lot of it is crap and I don't think you have very much control over what displays.

[super70s]

They seem to crop your images willy nilly much of the time for use in those matched content ads, when a cropped image is used I think it looks awful myself.

Also sometimes they will pick some image that might happen to be the first image on your page, but not directly related to the page content (e.g., some custom ad banner you made up).

They need to give users the option of turning images off before I'll start using it.

[jetteroheller]

2 Days testing 10% of revenues.
Thats at
336x286, 2* 160x300 and 3 AdLink Blocks
with a 600x300 below the content.

[EditorialGuy]

A cuppla weeks back, after being constantly nagged by AdSense I switched from text only to text/display. YES, yes, I should have known better.

IanCP, we earn a lot more from CPM ads than from CPC ads (and quite a bit more from display ads than from text ads), so maybe you just need to try the display ads long enough to attract some placements.

As for Matched Content ads, thanks, Rasputin, for the revenue info.

[JS_Harris]

I run mine without serving ads because it suffers from the same problem other ad units do, the dreaded white space monster ad. Example: a vertical ad unit may occasionally show only 1 ad with larger text but this creates a lot of whitespace below the ad unit, or beside it. That looks funny if the ad unit is above other content, it creates a huge empty area which on my site is not acceptable.

I was sad to see that the matched unit had this problem too. I would disable the ability to supersize a single text ad if I could but alas...

On the bright side this can replace the guesswork involved with many similar page scripts.

[bumpski]

I was sad to see that the matched unit had this problem too. I would disable the ability to supersize a single text ad if I could but alas...

JS Are you setting the "background color" and "border color" of the "test ad style" to match your site?