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

Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 220 posts

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#11

Post by vosper »

bittermang wrote: post #7
Rjevski wrote: post #6

Couldn't have happened to a nicer industry. :) Just imagine for a second the total human time lost due to ads and all the productivity that could've been done in that time.

I was some of the human time and productivity lost due to ads. Getting them to admit any wrong, from a technical issue, to anything, is like pulling teeth from a live dinosaur. Good. Hopefully they take their refund and invest it in something useful. But knowing the industry, the refund was in the form of an account credit, and that money is already lost to the system regardless.

The account credit probably goes to the agency, and the actual customer is none the wiser. Or it gets credited to some kind of covering-our-asses fund that can be used by the agency to make the click-through cost look a little less bad at the end of the next quarter.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#12

Post by cft »

madars wrote: post #8

In related news, certain subreddits have been promoting the use of https://adnauseam.io/ , a fork of uBlock origin that automatically clicks all the ads encountered. The same redditors also encourage searching for high-CPC terms (e.g. insurance or rare medical conditions) to maximize the impact.

This could be a coordinated 4chan attack https://files.catbox.moe/6ueduv.png

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#13

Post by vosper »

camus2 wrote: post #9

A big chunk of "google's ad traffic" is fake and always has been. It's hard to quantify though, it's up to each business to evaluate whether paying for ads on google makes sense. http://adland.tv/adnews/googles-ad-traffic-news-fake/2940245... Personally I don't think it does.

When you're on the inside the fake traffic is not so hard to quantify. Problem is that if you've taken the time to quantify it then your staff might start feeling obligated to do something about it. Like talking to customers. Ignorance, as they say, is bliss.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#14

Post by zaroth »

vosper wrote: post #11
bittermang wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was some of the human time and productivity lost due to ads. Getting them to admit any wrong, from a technical issue, to anything, is like pulling teeth from a live dinosaur. Good. Hopefully they take their refund and invest it in something useful. But knowing the industry, the refund was in the form of an account credit, and that money is already lost to the system regardless.

The account credit probably goes to the agency, and the actual customer is none the wiser. Or it gets credited to some kind of covering-our-asses fund that can be used by the agency to make the click-through cost look a little less bad at the end of the next quarter.

The former would be theft, and the later would be fraud. So, let's hope not...

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#15

Post by qq66 »

Rjevski wrote: post #6

Couldn't have happened to a nicer industry. :) Just imagine for a second the total human time lost due to ads and all the productivity that could've been done in that time.

For a different perspective, I had a business software product for a particular targeted use case that could ONLY find customers through targeted ads, particularly on Google. The company could have not existed without Google ads and the customers would have not solved their problem without Google ads.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#16

Post by sharkweek »

Pardon my rudimentary understanding here, but I sort of assumed in such a wide scale auction, pricing would reflect acceptance of a certain level of fraud, and that the price would balance out at a point where these fake clicks were part of the equation.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#17

Post by hi3980 »

Some of us tried to sound the alarm on fake traffic before Google IPO'd and WSJ or some other major news source wrote about it at the time days before their IPO, but no one cared at all. Everyone wanted Google to become the greatest in history based on a business model that acknowledges fraud but regards it as mere noise as opposed to mortal threat. Well, the whole point of warning the public before their IPO was to prevent the giant economic disaster that this can lead to. But Google was clever and managed to find a profitable business with Android and maybe other streams of revenue. I wonder how this will play out.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#18

Post by stephengillie »

Operyl wrote: post #5
adventured wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not all of their content gets paywalled. They treat different sections of the site very differently. For example, if you check the section the article belongs to (CMO Today): https://www.wsj.com/news/cmo-today you'll notice this particular article doesn't have a key next to it indicating a paywall. CMO Today seems to be heavy on the non-paywalling, for whatever reason.

Huh, good to know. I guess I just managed to always look at their paywalled content.

Content can't cost more than its advertising, or it's a loss. You're probably attracted to more-valuable articles, which likely cost more than their ads generate.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#19

Post by fakeads »

hi3980 wrote: post #17

Some of us tried to sound the alarm on fake traffic before Google IPO'd and WSJ or some other major news source wrote about it at the time days before their IPO, but no one cared at all. Everyone wanted Google to become the greatest in history based on a business model that acknowledges fraud but regards it as mere noise as opposed to mortal threat. Well, the whole point of warning the public before their IPO was to…

You got the business part wrong. Google is like 88% ads. The rest is barely profitable or run at a loss.

Re: Google Issuing Refunds to Advertisers Over Fake Traffic, Plans New Safeguard

#20

Post by MichaelGG »

cft wrote: post #12
madars wrote: post #8

In related news, certain subreddits have been promoting the use of https://adnauseam.io/ , a fork of uBlock origin that automatically clicks all the ads encountered. The same redditors also encourage searching for high-CPC terms (e.g. insurance or rare medical conditions) to maximize the impact.

This could be a coordinated 4chan attack https://files.catbox.moe/6ueduv.png

Yes, it's seen as, probably correctly, the only way to do anything that'll affect Google. Outside of getting laws changed, that is. It probably won't be effective - the people handling ad fraud are probably not the ones pushing their censorious politics. But hey, unlike most slacktivism, this causes them real damage. I imagine the response will be to ban people's Google accounts, for those dumb enough to sign in while using AdNauseum. (Anything more forensic might be a target for trolls.) We'll see if Firefox caves to pressure like Pale Moon did.
Post reply on HN