<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Ads by Goooooogle&#8221;, and graphics in text-only AdSense</title>
	<atom:link href="http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/</link>
	<description>Programming, Education, Computer Science</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:53:51 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-12695</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 03:11:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-12695</guid>
		<description>@Scott - well it&#039;s not like Google rolled out the new graphical ads overnight. They&#039;ve been testing &quot;ads by goooooogle&quot; since last year. I can only infer that on a large enough scale, they&#039;ve liked the results of the implemented changes.

Remember, if you&#039;re loosing money, Google is also loosing money. If everybody was to experience the same rate of drop as you describe, then Google would have quickly retracted their changes.

Has this countered accidental clicks? I don&#039;t know. Though you are right that the large logo graphic seems overpowering in small units such as 234Ã—60. Perhaps it&#039;s time to rethink a design.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Scott &#8211; well it&#8217;s not like Google rolled out the new graphical ads overnight. They&#8217;ve been testing &#8220;ads by goooooogle&#8221; since last year. I can only infer that on a large enough scale, they&#8217;ve liked the results of the implemented changes.</p>
<p>Remember, if you&#8217;re loosing money, Google is also loosing money. If everybody was to experience the same rate of drop as you describe, then Google would have quickly retracted their changes.</p>
<p>Has this countered accidental clicks? I don&#8217;t know. Though you are right that the large logo graphic seems overpowering in small units such as 234Ã—60. Perhaps it&#8217;s time to rethink a design.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Richardson</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-12497</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Richardson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 02:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-12497</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve seen my CTR over 4 websites go from a very steady 12-14% down to 6-8% overnight when these new graphic ads by google started showing up last Thursday. I&#039;ve showed my CTR stats to Google as well, because I&#039;m not at all happy with this new graphic. Whoever thought up this bright idea needs to be terminated.

I use a lot of the 234x60 single ads format and the new black graphic is there in your face, and dead center in my page, often overpowering the small ad&#039;s text. When I selected text only ads, that&#039;s what I expected to get - not this big ugly graphic.

The google logo should be an option you can pick in your settings, the same as amazon.com lets you do with their logo - text or graphic. At least give us an option.

I just hope anyone who has seen a dramatic drop in CTR complains. If they lose enough revenue, maybe they will do something about it. Ads that no one clicks on don&#039;t do the publisher or the advertiser any good.

In the mean time, I&#039;ve applied to YPN. If this drop in CTR continues, I&#039;m out of here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve seen my CTR over 4 websites go from a very steady 12-14% down to 6-8% overnight when these new graphic ads by google started showing up last Thursday. I&#8217;ve showed my CTR stats to Google as well, because I&#8217;m not at all happy with this new graphic. Whoever thought up this bright idea needs to be terminated.</p>
<p>I use a lot of the 234&#215;60 single ads format and the new black graphic is there in your face, and dead center in my page, often overpowering the small ad&#8217;s text. When I selected text only ads, that&#8217;s what I expected to get &#8211; not this big ugly graphic.</p>
<p>The google logo should be an option you can pick in your settings, the same as amazon.com lets you do with their logo &#8211; text or graphic. At least give us an option.</p>
<p>I just hope anyone who has seen a dramatic drop in CTR complains. If they lose enough revenue, maybe they will do something about it. Ads that no one clicks on don&#8217;t do the publisher or the advertiser any good.</p>
<p>In the mean time, I&#8217;ve applied to YPN. If this drop in CTR continues, I&#8217;m out of here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-12001</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 21:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-12001</guid>
		<description>AdSense does scan the page - first time it loads. Of course the page and its content could change since. Besides, it seems that &quot;Ads by Goooooogle&quot; and graphical logos have enough of a desirable effect, as they appears to be rolled out on a wider scale now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AdSense does scan the page &#8211; first time it loads. Of course the page and its content could change since. Besides, it seems that &#8220;Ads by Goooooogle&#8221; and graphical logos have enough of a desirable effect, as they appears to be rolled out on a wider scale now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bhupen</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-11975</link>
		<dc:creator>bhupen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 17:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-11975</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s time to slap those abusing sites... 

I hope their  AD SCRIPT becomes so smart that it actually hides when it is placed in a location which violates the terms and conditions of AD-SENSE. The first thing it should do is, look around and see if there is an image of a sexy girl or man on right,left,top,bottom, then of course the script will look at the content : is it a login page ? is it a registration page? is it a search page ? 

Google should have an intelligent adsense script to prevent the misuse of its product. Just by providing bigger LOGOS of &quot;Ads by Google&quot; won&#039;t work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s time to slap those abusing sites&#8230; </p>
<p>I hope their  AD SCRIPT becomes so smart that it actually hides when it is placed in a location which violates the terms and conditions of AD-SENSE. The first thing it should do is, look around and see if there is an image of a sexy girl or man on right,left,top,bottom, then of course the script will look at the content : is it a login page ? is it a registration page? is it a search page ? </p>
<p>Google should have an intelligent adsense script to prevent the misuse of its product. Just by providing bigger LOGOS of &#8220;Ads by Google&#8221; won&#8217;t work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-4554</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-4554</guid>
		<description>Yeah, it&#039;s the same font image, but I think they have since added a contrasting background as you have spotted. I believe I&#039;ve also seem some that looked like an arrow instead of a tab. Such minor variations are likely to continue as an ongoing experiment for Google to collect more data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, it&#8217;s the same font image, but I think they have since added a contrasting background as you have spotted. I believe I&#8217;ve also seem some that looked like an arrow instead of a tab. Such minor variations are likely to continue as an ongoing experiment for Google to collect more data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avinash</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-4552</link>
		<dc:creator>Avinash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:19:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-4552</guid>
		<description>I wish they make the tab-like ad format the default AdSense ad format. It looks so cool. :) You know what I think? The &lt;a href=&quot;http://avinash.ws/google/google-adsense-new-ad-format.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;screenshot that I took today&lt;/a&gt; is the same format as the 3rd image in your article. Maybe it&#039;s looking different because of my background selection?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wish they make the tab-like ad format the default AdSense ad format. It looks so cool. <img src='http://compsci.ca/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  You know what I think? The <a href="http://avinash.ws/google/google-adsense-new-ad-format.html" rel="nofollow">screenshot that I took today</a> is the same format as the 3rd image in your article. Maybe it&#8217;s looking different because of my background selection?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google AdSense - New Ad Format? &#124; AVINASH 2.0</title>
		<link>http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/comment-page-1/#comment-4550</link>
		<dc:creator>Google AdSense - New Ad Format? &#124; AVINASH 2.0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:08:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compsci.ca/blog/ads-by-goooooogle-and-alternative-adsense-formats/#comment-4550</guid>
		<description>[...] Update: Tony just wrote in his comment that Google has been trying these new ad formats since a month. You may want to visit this link to see many other ad formats. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Update: Tony just wrote in his comment that Google has been trying these new ad formats since a month. You may want to visit this link to see many other ad formats. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
