Search Engine Watch
SEO News

Go Back   Search Engine Watch Forums > Search Engines & Directories > Google > Google AdWords
FAQ Members List Calendar Forum Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-29-2006   #1
Discovery
Jerry Nordstrom
 
Discovery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,029
Discovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud of
Who's who in Google Syndication?

Since google cloaks all their partners in their content network and your referrer logs will only show something like pagead2.googlesyndication.com what methods are you using to identify good and bad content partners on Google?

Discovery
Discovery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007   #2
Rockstar82
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6
Rockstar82 is on a distinguished road
Would love to get some tips on this as well. Is there any way to search for pages containing your google ad? The problem with this would be that its just a snapshot... maybe there's a way to continiously track the ads..?
Rockstar82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007   #3
losloslos
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 37
losloslos is a jewel in the roughlosloslos is a jewel in the roughlosloslos is a jewel in the roughlosloslos is a jewel in the rough
Right now, even if you could identify good or bad partners you can't do anything about it in their search network. You can only opt in and out of sites for content ads not search.

Sometimes you can have Google remove you from a search partner. I was able to have google remove my ads from one, but it took them over a week to do it, and it was only after showing a huge increase in CTR that was the result of one partner.

Last edited by losloslos : 01-03-2007 at 04:52 PM.
losloslos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007   #4
Rockstar82
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6
Rockstar82 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by losloslos
Right now, even if you could identify good or bad partners you can't do anything about it in their search network. You can only opt in and out of sites for content ads not search.

Sometimes you can have Google remove you a search partners. I was able to have google remove my ads from one, but it took them over a week to do it, and it was only after showing a huge increase in CTR that was the result of one partner.
How would you know its the result of one partner though? And are you implying you do know how to find out for content partners (dont think so, asking just in case) ?
Rockstar82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007   #5
Discovery
Jerry Nordstrom
 
Discovery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,029
Discovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud of
True, we can't block domains from the "search" network. However, if the community can come up with ways of identifying poor search partners as well as poor content partners then pressure can be applied to make that come about.

Bottom line, I think we all want more transparency into the networks.

I have been told that logs from Apache servers can be analysed to see who the Google Syndication parters are. However, I dont use such a server any longer. Anyone out there with experience here?

Better - Who can explain techincally, how ad clicks go from a content partner or toolbar, over to google, get scrubbed and then get sent on over to our website?

Come on Danny I know your lurking, this one has got to be right up your countryside, cobblestone alley.

Discovery

Last edited by Discovery : 01-04-2007 at 10:53 AM. Reason: Forgot to call out D
Discovery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007   #6
AussieWebmaster
Forums Editor, SearchEngineWatch
 
AussieWebmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,153
AussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant future
Sent an email to my IT guys to see what they can get from our Apache log files.... will post their response.
AussieWebmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007   #7
Mel66
Oversees: Google AdWords
 
Mel66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 775
Mel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud ofMel66 has much to be proud of
I'm not a programmer or an IT person, but I know I can sometimes see Google's content partners in our referral reports. We use Atlas ProfitBuilder and Clicktracks. I stress *sometimes* - sometimes we can, sometimes we can't. I'm sure it has something to do with our site structure and server-side redirects, but beyond that I'm clueless.

I can say that I've used this info to block crummy content partner sites.

Melissa
Mel66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007   #8
Flyback
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6
Flyback is on a distinguished road
Maybe the answer is not in being able to track bad contact partners to cut them, but in concentrating on good contact partners to increase your efforts there. Positive responses are easy enough to track, because those people will usually tell you where they saw your ad.
It is much easier to figure out ways to track individual respondents than to chage policies of corporate entities, which are probably in place not to hide things from you, but to protect the privacy of thier customers.
Flyback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007   #9
Discovery
Jerry Nordstrom
 
Discovery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,029
Discovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud of
Flyback, your point is a good one. Flinging negativity in ones face never results in a positive reaction. I think network transparency would result in identifying both Good and Bad as you have suggested. Thus reports could be derived that show which search and content partners work on aggregate for certain industries and which do not. This would result in rewarding the good and removing the bad.

Discovery
Discovery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007   #10
AussieWebmaster
Forums Editor, SearchEngineWatch
 
AussieWebmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,153
AussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant futureAussieWebmaster has a brilliant future
There is a definite need to allow the cream to rise... right now it is all homogenised and we have to take it all.
Improve results and more will use it. Especially those that are priced out by the poor traffic.
AussieWebmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2007   #11
boostmarketer
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2
boostmarketer is a jewel in the roughboostmarketer is a jewel in the roughboostmarketer is a jewel in the rough
This is what we do....

What we have done for clients is a two part process but worth the hassle.

Step #1 - Seperate out your content & search campaigns - Basically run multiple campaigns with the same KW's one for content & one for search. When you do this you can focus more on the core KW's that will be successful in the content network than the tail KW's that are typically less successful.

(Additional Benefits: You can focus on context with ad creative and customize it for the content and search network to increase your CTR & CVR. You also are able to budget for content & search individually)

Step#2 - Take the core KW's from your content campaign. Set up a Site Targeted campaign (even if you don't want one). Use the site targeted campaign to run queries on your core keywords that match up with sites in the Google content network. Sift through the sites and determine which ones are not applicable to your campaign / target personas. Block selected sites from the content KW campaign.

This will help you at least filter out the larger sites and it has shown a significant improvement in content network conversions for our clients.

It is absolutely unbelievable that they make it this hard to do this but the content network is a significant driver of revenue for Google, it goes against their "Don't be evil" mantra if you ask me.
boostmarketer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2007   #12
rdrabkin
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6
rdrabkin is on a distinguished road
We will put our in house product on our site to help ...

hi All,

We struggled with the same issue at Adisem on our internal campaigns, and came up with a product for internal use that we will put out there for general free trial use in the next couple of weeks.

Basically we will automate your capture of referring sites for you and put it into an easy to use report. From there you can make your own blacklist.

Note blacklist does not necessarily mean fraud in my mind anyway, as was stated above, if there are poorly performing syndicated sites, well, you don't want them.

<edited spamtastic self-promo>

Cheers,

Ron

Last edited by evilgreenmonkey : 01-06-2007 at 05:04 AM. Reason: Removed self-promo
rdrabkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2007   #13
Rockstar82
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6
Rockstar82 is on a distinguished road
So instead of (usefull?) spamming, why dont you tell us how the proces works?

Last edited by evilgreenmonkey : 01-06-2007 at 05:05 AM. Reason: Removed quoted self-promo (not your fault)
Rockstar82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2007   #14
Discovery
Jerry Nordstrom
 
Discovery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,029
Discovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud ofDiscovery has much to be proud of
Boost, thanks for your take, its a good one. I think a few of us have been down that path and have thought the same thing.. man that takes a lot of effort!

We'll see if it is possible to uncover the content cloak. Perhaps folks/companies like rdrabkin's can come up with a solution. If they could, that would light a serious fire under all of the search engines to get on the ball with exclusion.

Cheers - Discovery
Discovery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2007   #15
rdrabkin
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6
rdrabkin is on a distinguished road
(process and) a few questions on classifying these syndication sites

Man...have never been called a (useful) spammer before. I guess that is ok...sorry if have offended.

process should be pretty easy. we just send you some code to put on your site and it will track the referring sites for you in an easy to use report so you can see/slice/dice/exclude.
the best part of it will be seeing what our other customers think about a certain referring site to let you know if it should be excluded or not...even if that particular site has never sent you traffic before.

I have a few questions for the group from our customers that have tested it so far...feedback welcome:
-sometimes the referring URL is blocked or invisible. in this case is there any chance it is *not* clickfraud? anyone asked google about that? any ideas of how these sites do it?
-how about the domain parking sites. i am really sick of the amount of traffic i see from them. i don't believe it is all fraud, but i am sure there is a lot of it...but maybe more important, like any MFA site for sure its bad quality. They are quite hard to exclude because even if, for example, you don't want traffic from Sedo, you have to block the referring sites one by one...eek
Has anyone tried to tell Google that the domain parking sites are click fraud, and did you get a positive response from them?
-anyone seen any way to block bad sites that have a theme in their domain name? there is this group of MFA sites that look all the same, they all have a number, and then the word bestsites or something like this. would be great to be able to block all of them as a group...
rdrabkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2007   #16
Marcia
 
Marcia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,476
Marcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
-anyone seen any way to block bad sites that have a theme in their domain name? there is this group of MFA sites that look all the same, they all have a number, and then the word bestsites or something like this. would be great to be able to block all of them as a group...
Just to keep removing them. And they cost publishers money, too. It got so bad I had to take Adsense off a couple of sites almost 100%, I just didn't have the time to keep monitoring daily and putting on the filter. Whenver one got filtered two more would pop up. MFA sites.

BTW, welcome to the forums!
Marcia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2007   #17
Flyback
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6
Flyback is on a distinguished road
I'm new here, so forgive me. What are "MFA" sites?
Flyback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2007   #18
Marcia
 
Marcia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,476
Marcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond reputeMarcia has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyback
I'm new here, so forgive me. What are "MFA" sites?
MFA = Made for Adsense

They're usually nothing more than a bunch of scraped page titles and descriptions listed directory style, or auto-generated gibberish text with every keyword variation on the site and in the navigation and Adsense placed all over the place - or, very commonly PPC syndication ads the "content" - like YSM, etc.
Marcia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2007   #19
egain
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 134
egain is on a distinguished road
What about just running a site targetted campaign. That way you have some control over what sites your ads are running on, and to a certain extent, can limit the amount of iffy traffic driven to your site via "content searches"
egain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2007   #20
boostmarketer
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2
boostmarketer is a jewel in the roughboostmarketer is a jewel in the roughboostmarketer is a jewel in the rough
RE: egain

The problem with runnning a site targeted campaign is it limits the potential exposure (vs. a KW campaign running over the content network) and you can only bid using the CPM model.

Site targeted campaigns work well if there is a site that is HIGHLY targeted to your potential market, I have not had much success with them otherwise.
boostmarketer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off