Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We’re dropping Google Ads

groundup.org.za

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 617 posts

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#471

Post by sah2ed »

joshuamorton wrote: post #467
protomyth wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patreon has a rather large problem for poorer people. Patreon's insistance on taking the money on the 1st of the month is a pain because that is rent day for most people. A service that allowed a person to select a day (e.g. 12th) or better yet pick a day the way a lot of people get paid (day after third Thursday of the month) would be preferred. [edit] To give a concrete example. Suppose someone on Social Security w…

To be completely honest, if this is an issue, that person probably shouldn't be using patreon at all.

You observation was already covered in the very first sentence:

> Patreon has a rather large problem for poorer people.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#472

Post by QuadrupleA »

It would be interesting to do a study, for a busy site with a big enough sample size, counting ad clicks locally and then comparing with Google's reports. I imagine you could attach your own javascript events etc. to do your own comparative statistics, and see if Google is cheating.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#473

Post by eli »

davidgerard wrote: post #425
eli wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful what you wish for. I bet the Verizons and Comcasts of the world have some ideas for monetizing web content. Buy the "sports package" and you get ESPN on your TV and access to sports blogs on the web.

It's entirely unclear that will be affected by adblocking, however - they would do this anyway if they thought they could.

If ad-supported blogs are a viable alternative, then there were always be ad-supported blogs. If it isn't, well, some of them will probably go on with tip jars. But some won't.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#474

Post by user5994461 »

icantdrive55 wrote: post #258
Ironchefpython wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the problem turns out to be, people don't want to pay, not even that tiny amount. No, the problem is it didn't work with adblockers. I really want to pay for the content I read, I just am not willing to risk being outbid on the chance to view a page without spam by someone trying to deliver malware. My current solution is to buy pre-paid visa cards to pay for online news subscriptions, which is a huge pain, but nec…

"My current solution is to buy pre-paid visa cards to pay for online news subscriptions, which is a huge pain, but necessary after finding out that newspapers will continue to charge even expired or cancelled credit cards. Even after I explicitly cancelled a credit card to try to stop recurring billing, the credit card company will helpfully keep accepting those charges." 1. I haven't resorted to pre-paid Vias cards,…

Some banks have a e-card option for internet payment.

The most extreme can give you a unique card number with an expiry date of your choosing, whenever you need one. That does wonder against shady practices.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#475

Post by ballenf »

jcbrand wrote: post #326
matt4077 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if it's valuable and nonexcludable (usually isn't)... That right there is the problem, though. You are right that most information is "non excludable" (if that actually is a word). But that doesn't mean it isn't valuable. That's an illusion, conceptually very much like clean water: almost free, but vital. The stuff the wire services collect and sell (and that everybody republishes) does cost quite a lot to produce,…

> reading the news with annoying ads, or not reading the news? False dichotomy. Firstly, ads don't have to be annoying. Secondly, news doesn't have to be financed by ads. There are lots of smaller and independent news sources that don't rely on ads for funding. The news organisation linked to in the article is a case in point. They make their money from donations. Another one is insurge intelligence ( https://medium.…

I'd put up with annoying ads if I knew they weren't tracking every click and mouse movement.

That data will soon enough be used to determine things like interest rates and hiring (already is in China).

I can deal with stupid ads and have done for decades reading print journalism. Unless they're animated, modal or otherwise unnaturally annoying.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#476

Post by PaulHoule »

When I started with Google ads, Google was classier than other ad networks. Other ad networks were stuffed with free ringtones, sketchy supplements and other scams.

Then at some point Google gave me the option to opt out of various objectionable topics and soon Google ads got as bad as the others. Maybe Google bought the bad ad networks, or partnered with them or something.

Quite a bit of subtext is largely unexamined. AT&T and Verizon, two of the biggest advertisers, have pulled out from YouTube. AT&T is the biggest pay TV provider in the US now (DirecTV) and Verizon wishes you would watch Go90 so they could sell ads against it. Both of them benefit if ad spend goes elsewhere than YouTube.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#477

Post by Ajedi32 »

MichaelGG wrote: post #464
Ajedi32 wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think perhaps you're underestimating the amount of effort that they do put into keeping their ads clean. A few highlights from [their 2016 report][1]: > we disabled more than 5 million payday loan ads > In 2016, our systems detected and disabled a total of 112 million ads for “trick to click,” 6X more than in 2015. > We disabled more than 68 million bad ads for healthcare violations, up from 12.5 million in 2015. >…

On mobile, the ads I see are almost exclusively fake virus warnings, "clean your phone" and other crap like that. Complete with flashing yellow and red images.

Are those Google Ads though? Google is indeed a dominant player in the advertising market, but they're not the only one. You could be seeing ads from a different ad network.

All of those things you described (fake virus warnings, "clean your phone", flashing yellow and red images) are against Google's policies for AdWords. See:

https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6020954

https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6021546

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#478

Post by matchagaucho »

phantom_oracle wrote: post #12

For smaller websites (also referred to the democratization of the internet), I am sure many people may (or have) feel (felt) guilty for using an ad-blocker. Then you see all those shitty ads for: - finding a russian bride - getting rich through some millionaires secret - anti-aging remedies - adware and you realize that the ad-model only benefits Google and the peddlers pushing the dodgy adverts. Everyone else is los…

Direct mail campaigns with a 2% response rate are considered wildly successful.

Similarly, Google Advertisers are paying exceptionally low CPM rates for inventory that would otherwise go unfilled.

Even a 1% click-through rate justifies the acquisition costs.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#479

Post by ori_b »

harwoodleon wrote: post #250
ori_b wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My eyeballs are not being loaned to you; my senses/attention is not for sale. The sites need to pay for servers somehow. Experience has proven time and time again that putting up paywalls just makes people go elsewhere.

Moot argument. If everyone charged for their time creating content on the internet, you would buy the best quality content. Newspapers had this model for decades, worked for them.

> If everyone charged for their time creating content on the internet, you would buy the best quality content.

Interesting, the ones who tried to charge seem to be dying.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#480

Post by chuckdries »

phantom_oracle wrote: post #12

For smaller websites (also referred to the democratization of the internet), I am sure many people may (or have) feel (felt) guilty for using an ad-blocker. Then you see all those shitty ads for: - finding a russian bride - getting rich through some millionaires secret - anti-aging remedies - adware and you realize that the ad-model only benefits Google and the peddlers pushing the dodgy adverts. Everyone else is los…

I work at my college newspaper. We get some money from the university but I can tell you without a doubt that we would be in far worse shape if we didn't have an ad sales team that sold our ad space directly.
Post reply on HN