Shady or Superior Adsense Integration?
There will always be some experimentation as to what works best for placement and integration of Adsense ads. Checkout this site, TutorialPod.com, and tell me what you think of the ad placement.
Oh and there are three sets of ads up on that site.
Related Stories
POSTED IN: Google Adsense
17 opinions for Shady or Superior Adsense Integration?
Scrivs
Jan 24, 2005 at 6:44 pm
Another example
Kyle
Jan 24, 2005 at 9:07 pm
Personally, I think the third one is way too fishy. Especially since I just read an article claiming only 1/6 people can tell the difference between sponsored results and real results on search engines - I don’t think you have to try to fool people. Just be honest, when you get shady, Google sees it and will kick you out.
John
Jan 24, 2005 at 9:29 pm
Those ads are probably pretty effective. They appear to be more like regular links then ads. But, I thought Google only allowed one set of ads per page?
Darren Rowse
Jan 24, 2005 at 10:04 pm
No John, they changed it to three ads per page at least 3-4 months ago.
I’m not sure what I think of the first example at the tutorial site. Whilst they are obviously trying to blend them in and put them in the prime spot on the site its a close call. I’ll bet their click through rate is pretty decent.
It is a fine line really - most of us try to do what they are doing to some extent by blending our colors with our sites - but that does take it to the next level. Not sure it breaks the rules though….
Tom Hanna
Jan 25, 2005 at 12:06 am
Blending the colors is what Google recommends in their tips:
“When using color palettes, we recommend making:
* The background color of the ad the same as or similar to the background color of your page.
* The border of the ad a color that is prominent on your page.
* The title of the ad a color that is similar to the text on your page.
* The URL of the ad a color similar to other link colors on your page. “
Magic Bean Dip
Jan 25, 2005 at 12:28 am
Here’s a link to the
I don’t see anything in the policies that sites are violating.
I thought the tackle site was a unique approach to integrating the ads. I wonder if he would have better luck trying to direct traffic to his affiliate links instead of google ads though.
Scrivs
Jan 25, 2005 at 8:27 am
There have been discussions on other site discussing the merits of said advertising and whether or not they are in violation of Google’s TOS. The basic conclusion is that although they are a bit slimy, they do not violate Google’s Policies. Now if only they could touch up their sites to get a significant amount of traffic to them they might be doing alright.
Frank Johnson
Jan 25, 2005 at 12:58 pm
Whether or not they are violating Google’s TOS, it seems to me that they are risking alienating their users over time. If I click on the third ad expecting to find a tutorial, but instead find myself at the website for the “3D World Club” (which is where the ad that was served to me pointed), am I going to keep coming back to TutorialPod.com?
Long term, I think they may be shooting themselves in the foot.
Kyle’s point about people not distinguishing between paid ads and organic listings, however, is well taken.
Ben
Jan 26, 2005 at 5:20 pm
Well, is the goal to trick people into clicking ads, or helping them click links they believe will show them they’re looking for? And is that the same thing? If you had a useful site & a bunch of random ads that didn’t match your content, no one would click them. But since adsense shows links that match your content, google themselves is trying to blur the distinction between “good useful links I want to click to get what I’m looking for” and “bad useless advertisement that isn’t related to what I’m searching for.”
If they’ve effectively created a new navigational zone of “ads that have a good change of having what I want”, then is it really wrong to give ads the same design treatment as the other sections of your site? Who’s to say that the destination of those ads isn’t more desirable or useful to the user than the links on one’s own site?
James
Jan 27, 2005 at 10:47 am
Just noticed how weird it is that their default colour isn’t white, yet they say to blend the background colour with the background colour you have.
I also remember that Tackleprices from SitePointForum.com or another such forum, asking about his AdSense ads.
I think it’s probably a bit slimy. I’d say I’d only do it were I very very desperate for money
Scrivs
Jan 27, 2005 at 12:39 pm
Another question to ask (something that probably can’t be answered) is once a user clicks on the ad and realizes its an ad will they block them out every subsequent visit to the site?
Karen
Jan 28, 2005 at 11:14 am
I don’t see how anyone can be confused when it’s clearly labeled “ads by google”.
Tim
Jan 30, 2005 at 8:56 pm
Yes, and no-one is forcing them to click it. What is the problem? That it’s an ad? If the user isnt interested, they wont click it anyway. I can’t see any issue. You bloggers need to get over your anti-advertising/profit mentality.
Superior…
Scrivs
Jan 30, 2005 at 9:25 pm
Anti-ad? Anti-profit? Wrong site to say something like that man. Of course that is if you are talking about me.
Tim
Jan 31, 2005 at 1:44 am
No, I was replying to some of the stigma above… particularly from Ben. Sorry for the confusion and nice site. Just needs more frequent updates. :)
Dan
Feb 2, 2005 at 12:47 pm
“Up to three ad units may be displayed on each Web site page” - AdSense Policy
No rules are broken, yet I suppose you could say there is an “ethical” issue.
Yet if the user is not interested in the content of the ad, the user will not have clicked it in the first place. You could go so far to say that this is better than obvious advertising for the advertisers because there is more interest in their content.
I believe that this more discreet form of advertising is more beneficial to the user than explicit popups, for example.
Ben
Mar 22, 2005 at 4:23 pm
#13/#15/Tim, maybe I wasn’t clear in my comment. I’m not anti-ad or anti-profit, nor is anyone else here. What is being debated here (I thought) is whether it’s wrong to disguise ads as internal site/content links, and whether it constitutes as “tricking” users. I was trying to say that if an ad (disguised or not) takes the user to a site that matches the description of the link and takes them to something useful, then maybe there’s no ethical issue and maybe it’s even a better thing that overt ads. Do users care if a link is an ad, or do they only care if it takes them where they want to go?
I was merely playing devil’s advocate to the “those ads seem shady” crowd. But perhaps my probing tone & comment length got in the way of my thoughts.
Anyhow, I agree this site is nice, and I appreciate the opportunity to add my two cents in.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: