There is a clear distinction between what Google is doing and what Patrick is doing. Respect diminished.
Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
121–130 of 215 posts
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Do you remember what Google's ad strategy was a reaction to?
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I think, as respectfully as I can be on what I think is a thoroughly stupid thread, you are "defiantly" naive about what it is that black hat SEOs actually do. "Tricking visitors into thinking ads are organic content". Heh.
Black hat SEO is so much worse than anything we ever talk about on HN threads about advertising.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#124I 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…
I'm not so sure. Road-side billboards are typically pretty obvious ads. They stand out by shape, colour and presentation generally. What patio11 is doing is more like putting up a billboard styled with police colours or reminiscent of a "Bingo Fun - 12 miles" in white text on a green background, copying distance and direction signs. I believe signs emulating the blue-white checked police signs we get here in Australia are illegal or at least very heavily discouraged.
I'm sure there's a discrepancy relating to a public space and a private site, but at best this is a grey area and I'm surprised that patio11 would do this as anything other than a discussion point or temporary experiment.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#125I think the most jarring part of this ad is something that isn't patio11's fault: it's juxtaposed against an ad that completely stands out as an ad, which makes the 'blending' that much more 'blendy'. Without that other ad in the adjoining slot, I think the visual difference between patio11's ad and regular site content would be more stark, putting it at about the same shade of moral gray as a Google search ad.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#126Another 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.
Sadly, also effective are having an ugly site and not fully solving the problems of your audience.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#127Earlier 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.
Why not submit your site to that community for review (assuming it's as relevant as you say) and get a real star rating in the process? Your listing would look the same as your current ad and you presumably wouldn't be paying to advertise (unless the site accepts only paid submissions).
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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?
I'm never a fan of advertorials, despite their occasional efficacy, because I think they devalue their surroundings. I'm particularly bothered by then when substantial effort is made to make it difficult for even keen-eyed observers to recognize their existence.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#129I 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…
Wow, that's a very valuable insight! Do you need a %0.2 CTR in order to switch to CPM (e.g.: is it disabled before that?) or is it that your bids will not be as good if you don't have at least that high a CTR?
Every time I experiment with adwords, something in their policies seems to drive me off (last time it was that I couldn't use the terms "iPhone" or "iPad" in the ad, even though we have a legal license from Apple to use them.
This time, the costs seem really high the ads don't seem to run often, and I'm getting outbid even on terms where no ads show up when I do searches.
Between google having a mysterious cut, and taking on the roll of "optimizing" the experience, they make it very opaque for people who aren't add placement pros to use their service... and very hard to make it cost effective, which means, we don't use it. A real shame.
CPM might make adwords viable again...we still have the incentive to produce a good add to get more clicks for our Mille.
Re: Image Ad Blending Works Really, Really Well
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I 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. This is like that quote for "How could X have won the election? I don't know anybody who voted for him." If you learn one thing from me, learn that male twenty-something techies are not the golden normative standard for all forms of behavior . Some people actually do like ads, a lot.…
> males, twenty-something, techies, etc. My parents are 80 years old. That includes my mother, who is not male (or else I was lied to about EVERYTHING!) They are not techies by a very long shot. I installed Adblock for them on Firefox and Chrome. Sometimes they use IE by accident; inevitably they complain to me that the blocking of ads is broken or inconsistent because they just saw ads all over the place. You're rig…
But ads? Who ever speaks publicly in favor of ads (who isn't, like yourself, an advertiser)???
Have you ever had the after-the-Superbowl conversation? Or, take a look at the Youtube stats / comments / etc for e.g. Real Men of Genius or Old Spice Guy or Angry Birds or whatever. Or, watch HN when a new Google Doodle comes out. Or, talk to people who read trade press. Or, talk to people who read fashion magazines or bridal magazines or other things where every page is paid for. Or Steve Jobs keynotes. Or...
People love to buy things and they love to be sold things, at least some of the time.