Google Ads - let's clear the air
-
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
The reasons I hate ads in general are: 1. They're intrusive (popups) 2. They're offensive (get that crap out of my face so I can read the damn page, and stop asking me to install Gator) 3. They're bothersome (lots of animation is distracting) 4. They use ActiveX controls (Flash) 5. They waste my bandwidth (which is a scarce resource on dialup, just ask Nish) CP does not use popups, nor does it use ads that are mid-page or covering the page. CP does use animated GIFs and Flash, which means I have to the scroll the page quickly to get them off the screen (making the ad useless, as I won't read it) or hit NO to the "do you want to run ActiveX controls?" prompt, again making the ad useless. As for 5, I run an ad blocker at home to save bandwidth. All that said, I have no objection to Google ads on CP (right now, at work on a T3) because they do not fall into any of the first 4 categories. I'll have to see about bandwidth usage when I get home tonight. PS: I would really like it if you removed Flash ads, I think those are the worst offenders second only to popups. X| --Mike-- Personal stuff:: Ericahist | Homepage Shareware stuff:: 1ClickPicGrabber | RightClick-Encrypt CP stuff:: CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ ---- You cannot stop me with paramecium alone!
-
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
Chris Maunder wrote: So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. Well, as I'm not an author my points may be a little irrelevant. I don't mind the ads, you've got to pay for this site somehow. However Marc's point about it looking like the author of the article endorses the advertised products is a real one. Maybe displaying them in a different place would help to alleviate that problem. I'm not sure how much control you have over the ads but so far the ads I've seen haven't been very relevant to the section the articles are placed in. Also, the colouring sucks. It needs to look like it is part of the CP colour scheme rather than looking like the tacky ads that you see on lesser sites. It needs some Orange :-D Michael CP Blog [^]
-
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
Hi all. My main concern with the ads are whether or not they are impacting the load times for the articles themselves. I don't know if this is related to the ads or not, but load times for articles in the past day or so (for me anyway) have seemed to be very long... much longer than in the past. That being said, I appreciate both Chris M. & Marc C. 's comments, eloquently describing two sides to the issue. I've come to really benefit from CodeProject as a daily service; if additional revenue is necessary to keep it a free service, I would prefer the ads to a paid subscription. Chris Maunder wrote: Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic. That's hardly fair... the lone amateur had great direction. ;-)
-
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
I don't mind the Google ads. The bottomline is survival of CP. Had you change the background of Google ads to CP orange color then nobody would have noticed them.
Promise only what you can do. And then deliver more than what you promised.
This signature was created by "Code Project Quoter". -
Hi all. My main concern with the ads are whether or not they are impacting the load times for the articles themselves. I don't know if this is related to the ads or not, but load times for articles in the past day or so (for me anyway) have seemed to be very long... much longer than in the past. That being said, I appreciate both Chris M. & Marc C. 's comments, eloquently describing two sides to the issue. I've come to really benefit from CodeProject as a daily service; if additional revenue is necessary to keep it a free service, I would prefer the ads to a paid subscription. Chris Maunder wrote: Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic. That's hardly fair... the lone amateur had great direction. ;-)
Mike Ellison wrote: I don't know if this is related to the ads or not, but load times for articles in the past day or so (for me anyway) have seemed to be very long... much longer than in the past. I was wondering the same thing.
Jon Sagara If you've ever watched 6-year-olds playing soccer, that's what the mainstream media is like. -- Jon Stewart
My Articles -
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
It's pretty freakin' sad that people can take this site and it's proprietor(s) for granted and think that just because they come here and browse around and maybe contribute that they can run the show. Marc, Anders, Jeremy, tell me, do you let your customers set prices for your products? If they don't want to pay that price what do you tell them? Probably to go jump in a lake! CodeProject is like any other business - Chris and his team have to pay for the bandwidth, the servers, the salaries, etc. If you want to pull your articles, then go ahead and be jerks about it, but it would be nice for once to see you be a little more appreciative and maybe give Chris a chance to improve things before splashing your whining, baby talk all over the Lounge. Maybe some reasonable suggestions would be good. BTW Marc, you can't tell me that the free publicity you have gotten from the site hasn't helped your career. Maybe not monetarily, but I've seen a few articles about you and your MyXAML and I doubt if you would get as many free eyes anywhere else. Your lucky Chris doesn't charge you for it. Chris, I can't say I like ads, but they don't bother me all that much either. CP is still the best programming site around. Don't let the critics get you down. There are thousands more that appreciate what you've done.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Chris Maunder wrote: Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? That's my vote. Chris Maunder wrote: We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. Most of the advertising is somewhat relevant anyway. It's for developers and we're developers. But, if you want to take the Google extreme fine, just keep the ads out of the articles and rotate them with the regular ads or something. I don't know about the other article writers, but for me all these ads make me feel as if my efforts are being used for your financial benefit (whether it be by toys, trips, or money). And, I can't imagine many people being motivated by that to write more articles with that in mind. Like I said before, maybe I'm wrong about what goes under the hood in CP, but that's the impression I get. Jeremy Falcon
>I don't know about the other article writers, but for me all these ads make me feel as if my efforts are being used for your financial benefit I am so shocked by this statement I have to make it clear I don't agree in anyway nor is it even with a parsec of what I feel. It is pretty much the opposite of what I think Chris' intentions are. There are a lot better ways for Chris to make money of us and he has not done any of them. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass South Africa Ian Darling wrote: "and our loonies usually end up doing things like Monty Python." Crikey! ain't life grand?
-
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
My 2 ct: 1) Many of us have seen good sites go down. One symptom unvariably was drowning content between ads. 2) What makes CP outstanding among similar sites is it's look & feel. The virtually "handselected" advertisements play a big role here: where others have ads, CP has relevant product information. (And as good as google's matching algorithm is, it is not as good as Team CP.) 3) Ads start to "intrude" the user provided area. Until now, all advertisement was separated by a colored bar, or else clearly distinguished from the article. (It is still a few inches away from the actual article, but the "visual barrier" is broken) 4) It just happened I don't see much sense in discussing, or announcing, such a move beforehand. However, it adds to a feeling of being cheated. 5) With all the gmail hype, google's "good guy" image gets an obnoxious-to-intrusive taint. Personally, I don't really like them, and I don't expect them to be helpful. But it's your server, and we are your guests.
we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen -
OK - the initial reaction has been pretty dark from a few of you. I honestly want to know why you hate it so much, why you see it as unethical, and why it is so much more obscene than, say, if we'd introduced a different sized banner. Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? The fact that ads are shown based on the article's content? The fact that it's Google? The fact that we make money off advertising? The design? This is not a precursor to subscription based article viewing nor is it a tip of any iceberg. This is an experiment to see if it works, if it's valuable, if we can achieve a balance, and, importantly, if it's acceptable. We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. So let's talk this out - but please - if anyone doesn't mind or has positive comments then I'd like to hear those comments too. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
I don't mind the border ads, but HATE animated ads. The google ads are fine where they are now, tucked in the bottom right of the article. Seeing as they are text i can't see them having much impact on page loading. I've always liked the links to related articles at the bottom, i see this a commercial extension of that. I actually consider it the most effective form of advertising. I've never followed an ad because of a flashy graphic, but a simple heading and a line or two description - that's what i follow. Were you to take the approach of CodeGuru and stick a bloody graphic ad in the article after the introduction, well then i might get a little tweaked. ...cmk Save the whales - collect the whole set
-
Well, I don't have anything against those ads, if they are really needed to keep CP alive. If this avoids a monthly subscription fee, I happily accept those ads. CP is one of the best programming sites I know and will definitively not remove my articles from here just because there are ads by google at the end of my articles... As long as you don't come up with popup ads, those annoying flash overlay ads, ads in the middle of the article, it's ok imho. Can't you make the background color a bit more CP-like? Like the light yellow? Currently it looks somehow crap and destroys the CP feeling somehow :) Dominik
_outp(0x64, 0xAD);and__asm mov al, 0xAD __asm out 0x64, aldo the same... but what do they do?? ;) (doesn't work on NT) -
Matt Newman wrote: I use google ads on my own website. Yes, but that is YOUR choice. I have some 50 articles now with someone else's products being advertised that I don't even endorse, sitting there in the MY article content. Marc Microsoft MVP, Visual C# MyXaml MyXaml Blog
Marc Clifton wrote: someone else's products being advertised...sitting there in the MY article content. Is it the placement of the ad, or the content? How is this different to banners? cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
-
No big deal to me as long as you don't charge *me* for access to the site. However, I would put the ads at the bottom unless Google has specifically contracted you for placement in another location. If I can hang with this (being the most vocally critical member of the board), all of you snivelling foreigners can damn well deal with it as well. How's that Chris? :) ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: How's that Chris? I think you just hit home run John! :-D
Promise only what you can do. And then deliver more than what you promised.
This signature was created by "Code Project Quoter". -
My 2 ct: 1) Many of us have seen good sites go down. One symptom unvariably was drowning content between ads. 2) What makes CP outstanding among similar sites is it's look & feel. The virtually "handselected" advertisements play a big role here: where others have ads, CP has relevant product information. (And as good as google's matching algorithm is, it is not as good as Team CP.) 3) Ads start to "intrude" the user provided area. Until now, all advertisement was separated by a colored bar, or else clearly distinguished from the article. (It is still a few inches away from the actual article, but the "visual barrier" is broken) 4) It just happened I don't see much sense in discussing, or announcing, such a move beforehand. However, it adds to a feeling of being cheated. 5) With all the gmail hype, google's "good guy" image gets an obnoxious-to-intrusive taint. Personally, I don't really like them, and I don't expect them to be helpful. But it's your server, and we are your guests.
we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen -
>I don't know about the other article writers, but for me all these ads make me feel as if my efforts are being used for your financial benefit I am so shocked by this statement I have to make it clear I don't agree in anyway nor is it even with a parsec of what I feel. It is pretty much the opposite of what I think Chris' intentions are. There are a lot better ways for Chris to make money of us and he has not done any of them. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass South Africa Ian Darling wrote: "and our loonies usually end up doing things like Monty Python." Crikey! ain't life grand?
I have no problem being wrong. In fact, I hope I am. Jeremy Falcon
-
Personally I don't mind the google ads one bit! 1) They don't seem intrusive to me. (Tucked away where they are still visible) 2) Text loads fast! Much better then huge graphical ads, what is there to complain about. 3) I personally like context sensitive ads and am much more likely to click them. I think everyone is up in arms over nothing. It's a box right next to other links. Maybe I am looking for a commerical product after all or something. If it helps I say keep it. Google ads are one of the LEAST intusive web ad types I have ever seen. Dare I say I like them?
-
Chris Maunder wrote: Is it the straw that broke the camel's back? That's my vote. Chris Maunder wrote: We want to provide advertising that is relevant, not just blast you with stuff that you simply don't care about. Most of the advertising is somewhat relevant anyway. It's for developers and we're developers. But, if you want to take the Google extreme fine, just keep the ads out of the articles and rotate them with the regular ads or something. I don't know about the other article writers, but for me all these ads make me feel as if my efforts are being used for your financial benefit (whether it be by toys, trips, or money). And, I can't imagine many people being motivated by that to write more articles with that in mind. Like I said before, maybe I'm wrong about what goes under the hood in CP, but that's the impression I get. Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I don't know about the other article writers, but for me all these ads make me feel as if my efforts are being used for your financial benefit NOOOO! Of course it is! It's a frickin' business.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Marc Clifton wrote: someone else's products being advertised...sitting there in the MY article content. Is it the placement of the ad, or the content? How is this different to banners? cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
Chris Maunder wrote: Is it the placement of the ad, or the content? How is this different to banners? Both. The banner ads are generic, everyone gets them. I sort of see them as representing an implicit agreement between me and CP, so that I can post articles and CP can generate revenue. Now, with the banner ads, I feel like I've been violated. I don't agree to having products of dubious nature being specifically targetted based on the content of my article. I have no problem helping CP stay in business by writing (hopefully) decent articles that people can google, and when they go to the CP site they see banner ads. Great. I have a big problem with endorsing and lining the pocket of some shmuck and his shmucky product because his google ad ended up on my article! Let me put it another way. The banner ads are a "community evil". The google ads, while on every article, are my personal evil now, because they are based on what I write about. In no way does that fly with me. An acceptable compromise would be if the google ad were just some random thing based on some huge collection of keywords. But then, it wouldn't provide the "service" that you mentioned. The thing is, I don't want MY articles providing THAT service. Just because I post an article on CP, doesn't mean that I don't retain some sense of ownership of it. People read it and use the code. Google ads add new meaning to "being used". I now feel abused. Marc Microsoft MVP, Visual C# MyXaml MyXaml Blog
-
It's pretty freakin' sad that people can take this site and it's proprietor(s) for granted and think that just because they come here and browse around and maybe contribute that they can run the show. Marc, Anders, Jeremy, tell me, do you let your customers set prices for your products? If they don't want to pay that price what do you tell them? Probably to go jump in a lake! CodeProject is like any other business - Chris and his team have to pay for the bandwidth, the servers, the salaries, etc. If you want to pull your articles, then go ahead and be jerks about it, but it would be nice for once to see you be a little more appreciative and maybe give Chris a chance to improve things before splashing your whining, baby talk all over the Lounge. Maybe some reasonable suggestions would be good. BTW Marc, you can't tell me that the free publicity you have gotten from the site hasn't helped your career. Maybe not monetarily, but I've seen a few articles about you and your MyXAML and I doubt if you would get as many free eyes anywhere else. Your lucky Chris doesn't charge you for it. Chris, I can't say I like ads, but they don't bother me all that much either. CP is still the best programming site around. Don't let the critics get you down. There are thousands more that appreciate what you've done.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blogJason Henderson wrote: Marc, Anders, Jeremy, tell me, do you let your customers set prices for your products? Individually no, but in a whole you're damn sure I do (and everyone else too). It's the same way with MS, do you think they dropped the price of Office by accident or the free alternatives had something to do with it. If one of my customers had a problem, it's their problem. But, if 50% of them had a problem, it's my job to serve them. Quite frankly, too many people nowadays don't focus on the customer. And, it's disgusting the attitude that some accept now because of that. Jason Henderson wrote: before splashing your whining, baby talk all over the Lounge Like you wouldn't complain on something you felt cheated out of. Whether right or wrong, wether you agree with it or not, everyone complains from time to time. Now, why don't you grow up and stop with the insults? Jason Henderson wrote: Maybe some reasonable suggestions would be good. Ok, I agree with you there. Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I don't know about the other article writers, but for me all these ads make me feel as if my efforts are being used for your financial benefit NOOOO! Of course it is! It's a frickin' business.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blogJason Henderson wrote: Of course it is! It's a frickin' business. So was CodeGuru. Jeremy Falcon
-
Chris Maunder wrote: Is it the placement of the ad, or the content? How is this different to banners? Both. The banner ads are generic, everyone gets them. I sort of see them as representing an implicit agreement between me and CP, so that I can post articles and CP can generate revenue. Now, with the banner ads, I feel like I've been violated. I don't agree to having products of dubious nature being specifically targetted based on the content of my article. I have no problem helping CP stay in business by writing (hopefully) decent articles that people can google, and when they go to the CP site they see banner ads. Great. I have a big problem with endorsing and lining the pocket of some shmuck and his shmucky product because his google ad ended up on my article! Let me put it another way. The banner ads are a "community evil". The google ads, while on every article, are my personal evil now, because they are based on what I write about. In no way does that fly with me. An acceptable compromise would be if the google ad were just some random thing based on some huge collection of keywords. But then, it wouldn't provide the "service" that you mentioned. The thing is, I don't want MY articles providing THAT service. Just because I post an article on CP, doesn't mean that I don't retain some sense of ownership of it. People read it and use the code. Google ads add new meaning to "being used". I now feel abused. Marc Microsoft MVP, Visual C# MyXaml MyXaml Blog
So it's the Google ad auction system that's offensive, in the context that your article's content is being used to select ads? What if the ads were placed elsewhere? I'm talking with the Google tech guys at this very moment to see how we can improve relevancy. The ads have *just* gone up so my understanding is that the contextual matching hasn't fully kicked in yet. I don't want to see crappy ads in articles - it demeans us all. I too have a bunch of articles here and don't for a second think that I'm not sensitve to the environment they live in. We're doing our best, Marc. Pleae give us the benefit of the doubt, and please give us a chance. cheers, Chris Maunder Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
