Why isn't there an ad network that lets you inject ads server side? That would solve a lot of problems.
VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
41–50 of 404 posts
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use an ad blocker. I also pay for content. Content creators have the ultimate choice in how they monetise their work.
I'd really like to pay for more content. But publishers always resort to dark patterns like forcing you to call to cancel when you can sign up online, or promo prices for a few months only to jack up the price later with little warning. I makes me very hesitant to hand over my credit card.
I can agree that in almost all cases these days I will only pay online with a couple of trusted payment processors. If I can't pay using my preferred method I will often forgo the content/item.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that straightforward though; these networks all pile in on each other, layers and layers deep, and in real time. It is very difficult for a publisher to work out who they are dealing with. The only network ads I had running on my news site were from Google Adsense, the seemingly reputable choice, but I found ads and trackers from all sorts of networks were infiltrating through that little window. The only re…
>It's not that straightforward though; these networks all pile in on each other, layers and layers deep, and in real time. It is very difficult for a publisher to work out who they are dealing with. Then the publisher should stop working with networks that do this. That's not in our control as users, only the publisher can do that.
The problem is pretty much all networks do this.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#44> A single VPAID ad absolutely demolishes site performance on mobile and desktop, and we, the publishers, get the full blame from our readers. The site is responsible for including ads; "publishers" should get the full blame from their readers. The publishers themselves can complain to the ad network they use, but readers are right to just blame the publishers.
I agree... I know nothing about the web advertising industry or how it works with bidding and so on and I don't think I am alone. So if a site has ads then as far as I am concerned the buck stops with the them: I have no knowledge of the ad setup or what deal the site has and I don't care either - the site owner takes the responsibility and if I have a negative effect (hacked/malware/slow load or whatever) then I won…
I don't think it's a fair comparison, but I get your point. I am not saying the user should know to blame the advertiser instead of the publisher, I'm saying it really sucks that the publisher is the one getting thrown under the bus and blamed for what is the advertiser's fault and it sucks for us publishers.
The suggested solution to "figure it out" and "find other advertising networks" doesn't work because almost all of them do this shit.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#45> A single VPAID ad absolutely demolishes site performance on mobile and desktop, and we, the publishers, get the full blame from our readers. The site is responsible for including ads; "publishers" should get the full blame from their readers. The publishers themselves can complain to the ad network they use, but readers are right to just blame the publishers.
It's not that straightforward though; these networks all pile in on each other, layers and layers deep, and in real time. It is very difficult for a publisher to work out who they are dealing with. The only network ads I had running on my news site were from Google Adsense, the seemingly reputable choice, but I found ads and trackers from all sorts of networks were infiltrating through that little window. The only re…
We now only host ads we have sold direct.
Thank you. I turned off ad blocker for your site (one is still networked to the bad guys, though...)
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use an ad blocker. I also pay for content. Content creators have the ultimate choice in how they monetise their work.
I use an ad blocker and don't pay for content and really don't feel bad about it. I'm doing everyone a favor by saving them bandwidth and not counting me and lowering their click-through rates. I was never going to click your ad, or buy anything that started from an ad on the banner of a web page in the first place.
I also consume a lot of free/ad supported content. I also don't feel bad about it. I suppose my point was that if a content creator feels that their content/product is worth charging for they should charge for it rather than trying to get a third party to pay for it.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's not that straightforward though; these networks all pile in on each other, layers and layers deep, and in real time. It is very difficult for a publisher to work out who they are dealing with. Then the publisher should stop working with networks that do this. That's not in our control as users, only the publisher can do that.
The problem is pretty much all networks do this.
Maybe there's a market there? An ad network content providers can trust.
Even well known news websites have ios app store redirects that stop content from being viewed.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#48> A single VPAID ad absolutely demolishes site performance on mobile and desktop, and we, the publishers, get the full blame from our readers. The site is responsible for including ads; "publishers" should get the full blame from their readers. The publishers themselves can complain to the ad network they use, but readers are right to just blame the publishers.
It's not that straightforward though; these networks all pile in on each other, layers and layers deep, and in real time. It is very difficult for a publisher to work out who they are dealing with. The only network ads I had running on my news site were from Google Adsense, the seemingly reputable choice, but I found ads and trackers from all sorts of networks were infiltrating through that little window. The only re…
If Google started getting significant complaints from large publishers about the crap being served over the network, perhaps they'll limit the garbage possible to serve through adsense.
It's this crap that's destroying the web and making people's devices unusable. Until it stops people will continue installing ad blockers. No amount of guilt trip adblock walls will stop that.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#49I recently had a similar problem, browsing a reputable news site (newstatesman.com), I accidentally clicked an ad and got taken directly to a page containing explicit pornography. I complained to the site and they said they do what they can in terms of blacklisting ads, but they don't have enough time or staff. I can't believe there's no ad network that will take a stand against abusive advertising and actually vet t…
You would think some of the most profitable companies in the world could afford to hire a few interns to put eyes on any and all ads before they go out.
Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks
#50I'm a bit shocked about the state of advertising. When I was making websites (~early 2000s), there were a lot more options to choose from, it seems. Now you basically just have Google and this opaque network of algorithmic auctions. Back then, you had a bunch of small business ad networks that you could choose from. I found you could also choose more different formats. OK, there was no video (thank God), but you coul…
One alternative to the current situation would be for sites to serve their own ads (from their own servers). I wonder why this isn't done at least from big sites? There's no way to prove that you've served a particular number of ads to real humans. That's why all these ridiculous brokers and third-party fragments of javascript exist: it would otherwise be trivial for the publisher to defraud the advertiser.
That's only 1 of many reasons. Another big one being it's a lot more time-consuming and costly to run your own ad sales team, you always have to worry about filling all ads in all countries, and the average CPMs you get may not be nearly as good as the ones without any headaches from big ad networks (well, headaches from the advertiser acquisition perspective).