Everything about this post strikes me as a conspiracy-laden fake, from the typos to wrong terminology to untrue policies to the lack of specific names of people. I passed this pastebin to the ads side to confirm for sure, but I would treat this as completely untrue. Added: Yup, I'm hearing back from multiple people on the ads side that this is pretty much untrue from start to finish. Also notice that the "rmujica" ac…
Google AdSense leak?
91–100 of 176 posts
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#92I'm inclined to believe this, but I'm skeptical of Google Analytics numbers being deflated. Wouldn't people notice the data not being consistent with other tools or their own web server logs?
This was also my take. Also, during the period being written about, Adsense fraud at scale was a really huge issue.
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#93Everything about this post strikes me as a conspiracy-laden fake, from the typos to wrong terminology to untrue policies to the lack of specific names of people. I passed this pastebin to the ads side to confirm for sure, but I would treat this as completely untrue. Added: Yup, I'm hearing back from multiple people on the ads side that this is pretty much untrue from start to finish. Also notice that the "rmujica" ac…
I hate to break out the tinfoil, but do you have any reason to expect the Ads team would admit to you if any of this were true? Secondly, I'd be impressed if after the China incident, you still had access to Ads mailing lists given that you work in Search, so it at least seems unsurprising that your searches would reveal nothing.
Furthermore, How do we know Matt_Cutts is even telling us the truth here? Not saying he is lying, but as he is a high ranking Googler, I doubt he would risk his career to confirm such a huge leak about his employer. It could very well be that Google has tasked him to deny any such information that could damage Google's reputation. Simply put, we cannot 100% trust anything that someone with a stake in the company in question says as the truth.
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#94Everything about this post strikes me as a conspiracy-laden fake, from the typos to wrong terminology to untrue policies to the lack of specific names of people. I passed this pastebin to the ads side to confirm for sure, but I would treat this as completely untrue. Added: Yup, I'm hearing back from multiple people on the ads side that this is pretty much untrue from start to finish. Also notice that the "rmujica" ac…
Hi Matt,
We are a large and an absolutely legitimate publisher, that have been pestered and taunted by AdSense since 2009. Look at the history of this handle: it was created out of spite of the treatment we were given by the AdSense team.
If there was no strong bias of INNOCENT publishers against TAUNTING and making conducting our business difficult by semi-anonymous AdSense threats from no-reply email addresses, this story would be irrelevant and simply not resonate, regardless of whether it's accurate or not. Look the the Google adsense support forums where you used to redirect your clients, and at PeggyK that acted as an unofficial Google representative there, when people were banned with no explanation. Who is PeggyK- it was the largest farce I have personally witnessed, running a decent size business.
You guys created an entrenched persistent opposition by the arrogant actions of your AdSense policy team and its Ireland office specifically. For now, it's not important due to the disproportionality between Google and its clients and a near-monopoly of AdSense for eCPMS over $1, and GOOG is comfortable with this small risk.
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#95Whilst I've never used adSense much, this does corroborate with chatter in SEO/webmaster forums, especially around 2012. The paragraph on G analytics is also very interesting, it never seems to line up with other tracking tools like Piwik.
This is one the thing that I found curious as well. I worked at a company who used WebTrends. Some of the their customers installed Google Analytics alongside Webtrends and then would complain that the numbers didn't match up between the two. Sometimes it wasn't close (+/- 10%) other times it was closer, but there was always a discrepancy between the two. Of course it looked since we used WebTrends, we were inflating…
The reason for this would be that GA filters out bot traffic differently than other vendors. That includes legitimate bots like search engine crawlers. Web analytics are just not that accurate. The number quoted by the Xoogler in an analytics manual I recently went though is an expectation of ~10%+ wiggle.
GA is always going to show 'lower' numbers than straight logs in particular because of this.
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#96Everything about this post strikes me as a conspiracy-laden fake, from the typos to wrong terminology to untrue policies to the lack of specific names of people. I passed this pastebin to the ads side to confirm for sure, but I would treat this as completely untrue. Added: Yup, I'm hearing back from multiple people on the ads side that this is pretty much untrue from start to finish. Also notice that the "rmujica" ac…
ironing: https://twitter.com/danbarker/status/439125570115223552
I don't get it. It's just scraping wikipedia to come up with that definition...
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
aggronn, I've been debunking conspiracies about Google since 2001 ("buying ads on Google makes you rank higher/lower"). I believe there's value in commenting on untrue claims quickly to nip them in the bud. As a long-time employee with a close perspective on the post, I can tell you from personal experience that the terminology is incorrect and the allegations are completely at odds with my direct experience. I'm als…
I'm just questioning whether its ethical for you to 'quickly nip them in the bid'. Most people reading this discuss have no idea what role Google plays in the day to to day operation of the advertising industry, and I think its improper for Google to be the first voice that they hear when they're exposed to accusations like this. This shouldn't need to be nipped in the bud by a google spokesperson. The only way you'r…
"I think its improper for Google to be the first voice that they hear when they're exposed to accusations like this."
Well, the first voice people on HN were hearing was an obvious fake. I mean, do you seriously believe that Google employees are placed in an "untouchable" AdSense group, and were "given 'carte blanche' to do anything they wanted, even if they flagrantly went against the AdSense TOS and Policies" ? Come on. That's just ludicrous.
To be clear, I'm not against constructive criticism. I'm not against people asking questions about AdSense's methodology or policies. But people deserve better than an obviously false, ad hominem conspiracy post. That's not the appropriate place to begin a discussion.
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#98Everything about this post strikes me as a conspiracy-laden fake, from the typos to wrong terminology to untrue policies to the lack of specific names of people. I passed this pastebin to the ads side to confirm for sure, but I would treat this as completely untrue. Added: Yup, I'm hearing back from multiple people on the ads side that this is pretty much untrue from start to finish. Also notice that the "rmujica" ac…
Hi Matt, We are a large and an absolutely legitimate publisher, that have been pestered and taunted by AdSense since 2009. Look at the history of this handle: it was created out of spite of the treatment we were given by the AdSense team. If there was no strong bias of INNOCENT publishers against TAUNTING and making conducting our business difficult by semi-anonymous AdSense threats from no-reply email addresses, thi…
Maybe AdSense maintain such strong eCPMs by having a well-policed, high-quality network?
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi Matt, We are a large and an absolutely legitimate publisher, that have been pestered and taunted by AdSense since 2009. Look at the history of this handle: it was created out of spite of the treatment we were given by the AdSense team. If there was no strong bias of INNOCENT publishers against TAUNTING and making conducting our business difficult by semi-anonymous AdSense threats from no-reply email addresses, thi…
Maybe AdSense maintain such strong eCPMs by having a well-policed, high-quality network?
Maybe, if you are either a $300/mo blog or you are the New York Times with a Tech section, where they could run a story on AdSense. If you are a $15,000/mo legitimate publisher - Good luck.
Re: Google AdSense leak?
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm just questioning whether its ethical for you to 'quickly nip them in the bid'. Most people reading this discuss have no idea what role Google plays in the day to to day operation of the advertising industry, and I think its improper for Google to be the first voice that they hear when they're exposed to accusations like this. This shouldn't need to be nipped in the bud by a google spokesperson. The only way you'r…
"I think its improper for Google to be the first voice that they hear when they're exposed to accusations like this." Well, the first voice people on HN were hearing was an obvious fake. I mean, do you seriously believe that Google employees are placed in an "untouchable" AdSense group, and were "given 'carte blanche' to do anything they wanted, even if they flagrantly went against the AdSense TOS and Policies" ? Com…
> That's just ludicrous
Is Google above doing bad things? Did you believe that there was collusion over hiring practices what that news broke? Thats ludicrous, but yet there was a class action lawsuit that proved it occured.
I completely agree this is ludicrous--and yet, what if its true? Even on some meaningful level? People, including you, are willing to accept it as fact that this is an obviously false conspiracy theory because its Google. I don't think whitewashing is a behavior people should accept when its coming from a company like Google.