Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well • Hacker News Board

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#91

Post by tptacek » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:55 PM UTC

teej wrote: post #56

patio11 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious as to why you'd draw a distinction between AdWords and scam filled advertising. Google's bread is buttered by credit cards, diet pills, and degrees. Search any relevant keyword if you don't believe me. Most of the advertisers I share pages with on the AdWords Content Network are also not pages you'd want your mother going to. The economics of Internet advertising heavily favor scams. Would it be better fo…

Let me clarify - I would much rather a teaching activities site be filled with BCC ads over weight loss ads. That doesn't justify the use of deceptive advertising beyond exploration. This is the -exact same- line of thinking that goes on at social games companies with viral game features. Good people say: "20% of users respond to this request, it must be interesting to people. Send more!" This is completely oblivious…

So, just so we can be as specific and absolute as possible: you also think that every Google SERP is dishonest. Because the whole premise of Patrick's post is, "here's how Google's ads work; I wonder what would happen if I crafted my ads to fit into pages the same way Google's do?"

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#92

Post by extension » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:55 PM UTC

PotatoEngineer wrote: post #77

extension wrote: post #47

I thought about where exactly patio11 crossed the line into evil territory, and I realized that there is no line. All ads are deceptive, because they are all trying to steal your attention by showing up when you are looking for something else. That we've developed the ability to ignore most of them doesn't change the basic principle. But the degree of deception can certainly vary. By running ads, you are pawning off…

Or, you're converting the nebulous "value of the site to a user" into cold, hard cash. The game isn't zero-sum, it's closer to an IPO (or some other stock-issuing event) in that sense: theoretical value becomes real value, but now you don't have "control" of everything anymore.

The site gets cash, but the user loses value and doesn't get anything in return.

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#93

Post by xd » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:56 PM UTC

Tactics like this are utterly immoral. I hope browser plugins like adblocker become massively mainstream and people start to learn to actively oppose this kind of rubbish. People that spend their "careers" advertising; contribute FUCK ALL to humanity.

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#94

Post by tptacek » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:56 PM UTC

teej wrote: post #60

mechanical_fish wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HOW good people end up there patio11's post tells us right up front where he learned this particular technique: Google taught it to him. I'm not even speaking metaphorically. Google invented this technique, they use it on every search-results page where there's any money to be made with it, and they published an educational page that explicitly teaches the technique to everyone else, a page which Patrick links to and…

"Those of you who rail about the evils of advertising in general, or this technique in particular, are entitled to your opinions, but do please aim your rage at the appropriate target: Google." Let's be clear - I'm not at all railing on the evils of advertising. I'm as much of a marketer as I am a product designer and programmer. Google does not put faked user-generated content (review stars) next to their ads. This…

This is at least a productive comment. It's the review stars that bother you? If he took the review stars off, replaced them with some other element, you'd be fine with the ad?

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#95

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:57 PM UTC

If you want to see the ad 'in real life' you can find it here:

http://busyteacher.org/classroom_activities-vocabulary-works...

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#96

Post by TylerE » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:58 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #89

TylerE wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's why I say ruin. Remember when you could do a search for product reviews, and actually get product reviews , instead of a million template link bait sites?

What does Patrick's advertising technique --- really, think about this --- exactly what does it have to do with Google SERP pollution?

Nothing, in and of it self. My rant was more at this whole group of grey/black hat SEO, a group he most defiantly IS in.

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#97

Post by staunch » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:59 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #87

staunch wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wasn't too subtle, he was just wrong. The comparison between Google's separate/distinct paid results and these ads inserted into organic results is completely absurd. Notice that he didn't have to write "Spot it yet? Hint: it’s the row without the Facebook button." when referencing the Google paid ads -- only the "blended" ones.

Please stop grinding this axe. You're not even bothering to respond to comments anymore; you're just repeating the same point over and over again. "Completely absurd"? It's the exact same tactic. I couldn't possibly think any less of you after these comments. What do you think you're accomplishing by writing this way?

It's not personal -- I'm a fan of Patrick's. My only problem is with this obvious intellectual dishonesty, on display in his post and both of your comments.

These ads are dishonest and pretending they're not is really absurd. I don't think he even truly believes that, hence the signification rationalization in the post.

I'm doing what I would to any friend of mine: calling them on their bullshit. You may want to consider whether you're impulsively defending a friend or actually agree with him.

I will stop commenting on this though. I don't have anything more to say and I'm not trying to be negative. I don't think Patrick is a bad guy or anything -- just wrong on this.

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#98

Post by chaosmachine » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 8:59 PM UTC

I watched that Mixergy video too, and was inspired to try something similar :)

BSA is great, but if you need more inventory, you can get this strategy working on Google AdWords, too. You just need to create a new ad group, and use "managed placements" to specify the sites you want to target.

Since you probably don't want 100 ad groups, you have to get a bit more generic with your ads, but there are plenty of ways to do that and still get the "this is useful information, not some off-topic ad" effect.

Here's another tip: Once you have an ad that exceeds about 0.2% CTR, you'll often get much lower cost-per-click by switching the campaign to CPM bidding.

For example, if you're bidding $1 CPM, and getting a 2% CTR, your effective CPC is only $0.05! In CPC mode, you'd often have to bid $0.30 CPC just to show up.

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#99

Post by badclient » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 9:01 PM UTC

Another trick that works: break your website.

When I ran a somewhat large music site(100K uniques/day), we'd make significantly more money from adsense when our streaming server went down.

Why? Because when hitting the play button on the player didn't work, people start clicking on the ads.

Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well

#100

Post by graupel » Wed, Nov 23, 2011, 9:01 PM UTC

Timothee wrote: post #28

seiji wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about things like outbrain? http://www.outbrain.com/getwidget They have more deceptive ad units at publishers: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/23/world/africa/egypt-protests/ (Scroll to pre-comment-box or search for "From around the web")

For the lazy, the "From around the web" section looks like relevant articles on other sites and is styled exactly like the links that CNN recommends, but it's actually paid content. A popup under "What's this" gives the following info: "Paid Distribution An Outbrain customer paid to distribute this content. We do our best to ensure that all of the links recommended to you lead to interesting content. To find out more…

As a large publisher who uses Outbrain, I can say that I'd much rather have the Outbrain paid links on my sites than running PPC AdSense with belly fat ads, and Work From Home stuff.

Outbrain actually links to content - often, decent to good content - where then publishers can monetize the click as they choose, but from a publishers standpoint, the Outbrain widget is one of the least objectionable drivers of revenue I've found.