Nonsense with Google's AdSense? 85
OmnipotentEntity asks: "I usually come down hard on the side of Google, as I feel that they have a good philosophy and they follow it. However, a forum I regularly visit had a run in with the bad side of Google's AdSense program, and our AdSense account was terminated because of 'invalid click activity.' Some research by a fellow member of the boards turned up other people facing the same problems we ran into. These problems seem localized to sites hosted in Europe. I'm an American, so I have no clue about the European side of AdSense. Have any of our European webmasters ran into the same problems, or are these simply isolated incidents? Is anyone in America experiencing similar difficulties?"
Re: (Score:1)
Knock on wood (Score:1)
Re:Szczecin, Poland - no issues here. (Score:1)
Not from Europe but... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Not from Europe but... (Score:4, Interesting)
My site and.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:My site and.... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:My site and.... (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't give you details on the invalid clicks because it would make things a lot easier for people to reverse engineer the process they use to detect them.
You might have lost $100, but I think it's pretty clear that the amount of money Google could cheat people out of isn't anywhere near as high as the amount of money they stand to lose should Adsense's legitimacy be seriously questioned. Remember, advertising is one of Google's main cash cows. They need Adsense to survive. They don't need to scam a few people out of $100 here and there to survive.
The real question is - how can Google preserve the secrecy of their invalid click determination while still not screwing over people who haven't done anything wrong? Or, alternatively, how can they get the job done without having to keep it a secret?
I can't see any easy answers to those questions, which is why I'm hesitant to start accusing Google of screwing up. Do you have any ideas as to what Google can do in their situation?
Re:My site and.... (Score:5, Insightful)
My point is, there are less drastic ways of handling things than cutting us off at the knees with zero recourse. We don't even get paid for the VALID clicks we generated, and they got weeks or months of space on our site.
On the gripping hand, we agreed to the TOS... That was our fault...
Re:My site and.... (Score:1, Insightful)
This makes sense if they can detect them with near 100% accuracy.
There's nothing stopping them from warning people either, "hey, we see some unusual activity here, you should look into XYZ for solutions".
This makes sense if they have a relatively decent accuracy and a somewhat high false positive rate.
Judging from their behavior, I'd say that they have a very low accuracy in detecting these invalid clicks. And they probably have a h
Re:My site and.... (Score:1)
We would get a bunch of traffic from obvious junk sites, rreport it, and get a chipper automated email from Google Marketing telling us how awesome AdSense is and how we should definitely use it. It was only pennies at a time, but even then it was money wasted.
Clearly, they need to get on top of this issue somehow.
Re:My site and.... (Score:2)
That assumes they can be detected in real time. It's possible that Google detects them later in random spot audits of server logs or something.
Re:My site and.... (Score:1)
It really made me feel a lot less warm and fuzzy about Google. I'm even moving away from Gmail as a result. If they don't want my business, that's fine, but don't expect my support, either, after basically calling me a cheat and a liar with no grounds.
Chris
Re:My site and.... (Score:1)
I love that I have now seen someone on
Re:My site and.... (Score:2)
Adsense checks your site when you signup for TOS abuse, so if you pass that you're allowed to display Adsense ads. When they're about to pay you your first cheque they check you again for TOS abuse (and I also suspect they check the quality of the traffic - they can do some measures on how many sales are related to your traffic with adwords for instance).
A guild site to me, sounds like a bunch of kids urging eachother to click the ads from a internal forum / and or to "pay
Re:My site and.... (Score:2)
Re:My site and.... (Score:2)
It came as no real surprise when Google ditched my account. To them, they only saw 6 people visiting the site over and over.
I'm willing to bet that most sites getting screwed out of money fall into a similar category.
At last, a story to fit my username :-) (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't comment on the site in question, but in general AdSense and web forums are not always a good match. Forums often get a fairly small number of highly active viewers, which give rise to one of two phenomena: a) they don't click on the ads much (low clickthru rate), and when they do it sticks out statistically like a sore thumb, leading to possible (mis)interpretation regarding click fraud; or b) the more enthusiastic users take it upon themselves to click regularly on ads to support their forum, which will also raise a few red flags.
Forums can sometimes do well with AdSense if they have a high ratio of "read only" users and take steps such as not showing ads to logged in users.
Forums? (Score:2)
Omnipotent? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Omnipotent? (Score:2)
OmnipotentEntity asks: "How dare you doubt my power!?!?"
The bigger you are... (Score:3, Insightful)
The better you are treated. Seems obvious, but there are a quite a few small publishers that don't make enough for Google to go to any trouble over. Fraudulent click activity? If the advertisers are getting angry, its easier just to say "We have banned the site in question." than to actually find and deal with the source of the problem. They need to be seen to strike a balance - and it's much easier to be harsh to someone that is only bringing your company $100 / week than someone who brings in $100k / week.
A touch cynical? Perhaps, but consider that: they have recently made some Big Changes(TM) to they way they crawl (aka Big Daddy(TM)); they have admitted a storage problem; and their stock has slipped recently. What better message to send to publishers that "We are tough on fraudulent clicks" to restore confidence.
I'm not bashing them. Seriously. Business is business. They run their advertising program, they determine the TOS and how they are applied. It's not like alternatives aren't avaliable (one recently launched at the Center of attention...). Anyway, it isn't all bad news. There is a publisher who netted over $1M from AdSense in three short months. Yes, you heard me, net. And this publisher isn't a corp, business or big team. Just one guy with a whole lotta pageviews. I bet he's treated very well by the folks at the 'plex...
So while ther may indeed be a problem/conspiracy/whatever, do consider that 1) they may actually be engaging in click fraud (eg "drawing undue attention to advertisements") or 2) they may be more of a liability than they are worth.
Re:The bigger you are... (Score:1)
And if they want to get rid of the low traffic sites, then shouldn't they just tell people that's the reason, rather than implying click fraud?
Remember the matra "Do no evil" (Score:3, Informative)
They could just be blunt when booting the smallest publishers, but that would be bad PR; and completely flying in the face of "do no evil" (something Matt Cutts recently reaffirmed [mattcutts.com]).
Saying "We cut small advertisers" = bad PR, "doing evil"
Saying "We are tough on click fraud" = good PR (to advertisers, Wall St, et al); "Don't be evil"
I should point out here that my point was interpretive, ie "Google is doing foo, hence you could say bar". The serious point is that under Google's TOS, clickfraud itself c
some hearsay... (Score:5, Interesting)
The commenter mentioned that AdSense had been placing a lot of high-CPC ads on his site, and shortly thereafter, he was banned. He suspects that Google's marketing department decided to push some big-revenue ads out there, and then the Fraud department, running their usual heuristics, noted spikes in big-revenue clicks. So they disabled many perfectly legitimate webmasters for something that Google itself caused. You could argue that this is fraud on Google's part, since these webmasters are deprived of legitimately-earned revenue. Worse, since they're banned for life from the program, in many cases their small businesses will be destroyed. And there is no appeal and no recourse.
In fact, there is absolutely no way to talk to Google about any of this, so problems like this only get worse. I suspect it may take lawsuits to get them to change their ways.
Google's mantra needs to add: "Do as little accidental evil as possible, and fix it when we do." But I don't see that happening soon.
It's OK (Score:2)
Is anyone suprised that a company with no management hierarchy and a powerful peer-review based merit system (aka cliques) is acting in an arbritary manner? Or that a company with no discernable means to talk to a human being unless you are a VIP treats customers like shit?
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2, Interesting)
Relying on one other business for yours is bad business sense.
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
Wal*Mart's suppliers would disagree with you.
~Rebecca
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
I will agree with you however, there are non-monetary costs involved which would make it not a good idea in general.
~Rebecca
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
I'm not saying t
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
It may be good for consumers (somewhat debatable, as quality is the first thing to go), and if you're the low-cost leader in your segment, it can be a good relationship.... Walmart pay
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
Re:some hearsay... (Score:2)
Why not? Google's makes billions of dollars a year, and apparently mistreats small businesses/individuals by taking away small amounts of money from them. It might only be $100 per person, but if they do it a million times a year, that's pretty strong incentive for a lawyer to launch a class action suit. All it takes is one person who's been so mistreated to contact a good (as in ability, not in moral compass) class action attorney and start th
Re:fark-u-google (Score:2)
Re:fark-u-google (Score:2)
Re:fark-u-google (Score:1)
Denial of revenue.
If somebody would go to sites with a script that makes click-through based ads not worth the investment, then that site would be banned, and any real revenue it could have generated for google is now gone.
I'm sure google is working very hard not to ban sites that could potentially earn them money.
Account Cancellations (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Account Cancellations (Score:2)
Woah. Hey. I had all sorts of sympathy until I read this line. Right, so they didn't fill out all the account information to a company you expect to pay you money, and then complain when they can the account?
Re:Account Cancellations (Score:1)
Re: Account Cancellations (Score:2, Informative)
My AdSense account was cancelled with no explaination other than "invalid clicks". I tried and tried to get them to give me details, but the wouldn't. And, they would not reinstate the account either. This was my site (a US site) at www(dot)robotic(dot)com. I had earned $100-200 per month for each of several months before the cancelled the account. Lame... and disappointing as I was planning to use that money for orbiting brain lasers and beowulf clusters (see http://mirror1.spikedhumor.com/1209/SwitchLinux [spikedhumor.com]
Not quite European, but close.. (Score:1)
I don't make any significant amounts of money though, so I don't think there's much fraud that could occur
Re:Linux: A European threat to our computers (Score:2)
Made me laugh to read through it though. It should get +5 Funny.
Re:Linux: A European threat to our computers (Score:2)
It's Just trying to drive up adsense revenue at that site.
Don't humour them and they will go away.
Re:Linux: A European threat to our computers (Score:2)
No review? (Score:1, Troll)
If google is this fucked up, why keep using it. Sounds like some other company needs to step in and fill the void. I'm rather tired of googles "fuck you" attitude towards webmasters in these slashdot posts.
Re:No review? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No review? (Score:2)
http://www.google.no/search?q=alternative+adsense & sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&o e=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:nb-NO:off icial [google.no]
Another one that looks good (though I've not tried it)
http://www.clicksor.com/internet_advertising.php [clicksor.com]
Personally, I'm using Adsense on my site (http://www.mailtic.com/ [mailtic.com]), but I'm considering the alternatives.
Re:No review? (Score:2)
Only real alternative is affiliate marketing to amazon etc. But it's not the same kind of income really. There are no conceptual/automatic programs as good and as profitable as adsense to date.
YPN seems to be acceptable, but is currently only allowing US customers in their beta. MSN adCenter (when released) and YPN (when it's public) are imho the only real contestants in this market.
Re:No review? (Score:2)
Re:No review? (Score:2)
a) they have to approve every advertiser (sex, casinos etc florish).
b) they cant pay as good as adsense does.
This in return gives them (in my opinion, and most people think im a idiot, go figure)
a) less qualitative webplaces to advertise on
b) more webmasters that are forced to use them (ie, the ones banned from adsense
Creating a negative spiral. I dont
gmail.com (Score:4, Funny)
Re:gmail.com (Score:2)
Adsense moderation & measures utter stupidity (Score:2)
After some time, i logged on to check the adsense account. A little later that day, voila - invalid click activity, account disabled ! No responses except a pre scripted stupid, flat-face, cold text.
It seem
AdSense cancellation (Score:1)
might be your competitors (Score:1)
It's an interesting article, but the main reason I bring it up is because sometimes, as they say in the article, competitors are actually the ones going to sites and committing click fraud just to get the site kicked off AdSense.
Re:or similar (Score:1)
German site - no problems (Score:1)
happened to me too. (Score:2)
So Google Maintains a two tier system of dealing (Score:3, Interesting)
Combinded with the other comments so far, here is what we can
Re:So Google Maintains a two tier system of dealin (Score:2)
That seems hardly a sustainable 'business plan' from Google's perspective.
Re:So Google Maintains a two tier system of dealin (Score:2)
I don't think so. The poster you responded to didn't do anything fraudulent. He/she ran ads on a site. Someone tried to cheat. Where in the terms of service does it say "I will install mind control rays in my users' heads to keep them from doing that"? It's not there because it's impossible. The most Google can do and yet be fair is to just not pay the site for the script-ge
Don't know but I had some trouble with adwords (Score:2)
I could not once change the cost per click by targeting ads to keywords. What's worse, after people started clicking on my ads, costs increased, in one instance from 0.05
Europe? I'm in New York and they closed ours! (Score:1)
This time we've instructed ALL members not to click on Google Ads on our site, ever, no matter if they were interested in the link or not.
They never paid us f
AdSense (Score:1)
referrals fee (Score:2)
So I would expect Google to check more carefully just before the first $100, when you're about to cost them money.
Having said that, I expect before long there will be moves to legislate the internet ad industry, and that advertisers and Web publishers will oppose this.
It takes
Hmmmm (Score:1)