I always appreciate Patrick's willingness to share information, but won't be using this deceptive tactic. Sad to see it voted to the top of HN.
Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
111–120 of 215 posts
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?"
Do you automatically sanction Google's deeds?
I think, they are clearly doing evil in this case.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't matter what it says, it matters what users perceive it to be. It's obviously meant to deceive the users while providing the author (not very) plausible deniability of the deception.
How do you think this compares to google's ads at the top of search requests? That is the comparison this article is making.
Those are deceptive as well
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
The site gets cash, but the user loses value and doesn't get anything in return.
If you're a teacher, and you're at a site looking for how to teach a lesson on subtraction, and I tell you bingo cards do that, and you pay me money for bingo cards, you're saying in the most explicit way that people know how that bingo cards were exactly what you were looking for.
If you're getting 100% conversion then I guess you can do no wrong. But anyone who saw your ad and didn't buy was looking for something else. No matter what you put in your ad, it's not going to be more valuable than the content it displaces, save for strange and rare accidents.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the article? Was maybe Patrick too subtle about the point that many (probably most) of Google's users perceive the paid placement at the top of every SERP as a search result? These "blended" ads are labeled as sponsored results as well.
That's why I find advertising such a ridiculous business model for a search engine. Let's spend all this time and money and invent the most amazing technology to find the best results for any search and then... let's sell the top spot to the highest bidder. I don't have a better business model to offer, but I do think the world would be better off if Google were more honest about ads and made it more obvious that the…
The bid is not the only thing that determines ad placement, Google has a quality algorithm that prioritizes better quality ads. Consequently it's possible for an ad with a lower bid on the same keyboard to trump a higher bid if the ad quality is sufficiently high enough (as determined by the algorithm).
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If you think Patrick is a black hat SEO, you don't really know what a black hat SEO is.
It's defiantly at least gray. He openly admits to trying to trick visitors into thinking the ad is organic content. That's well over the line in my book.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The user gets to use the site for free. How is that nothing?
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#118This is the kind of attitude that's bad for the Internet overall. Take someone like me, I probably spend more online than most 'casual' users. Yet I use noscript and adblock, so I don't see any ads or SEO crap. I spend money wisely on sites that deserve it by providing good content. The SEO people lose out on the bigger share of the pie, and instead they all go 'dark side' over trying to get as much of the tiny slice as they can.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#119I don't understand who still sees ads. It's apparently a huge majority of Internet users, but I don't understand where they come from. I often set up computers for family and friends and installing AdBlock is one of the first things I do. Who is computer-savvy enough to buy and install their own computer, and yet not computer-savvy enough to get AdBlock? Or do (most) people actually like ads?
I could install AdBlock, but I choose not to. I don't particularly like most ads, but I recognize that my attention is the price that the website owner asks of me in return for providing the service.
If the price is too high, I can find an alternative, walk away, or negotiate, but I don't have the right to not pay the asking price for a product or service and still get the benefits.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#120I'm going to come out in defense of patio11 here. Not because the ad isn't deceptive - it undoubtedly is. But because he fell into the dark side of a grey area and it's worth discussing HOW good people end up there. From a rationalist perspecive, the ad is justified. He is effectively capturing the majority of the market possible through adwords. So what's next? It makes sense to take your know-how in one market and…
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…
They do it on their own site, not on someone else's site, which is what Patrick is doing here. Edit: have read that this ad was approved by the publisher.