Text archives Help


Re: [projectvrm] Shifting the costs of ad fraud


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Doc Searls < >
  • To: Nathan Schor < >
  • Cc: Don Marti < >, ProjectVRM list < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Shifting the costs of ad fraud
  • Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 06:05:57 -0400

Nathan’s right here.

I’ve held off on replying to Don’s question because I wanted to find the post I read by a guy (on his own blog and Medium) that spoke of a huge gain in readership by publishing on Medium over publishing on his own blog. 

I thought it was Zeldman, and maybe it was. Not sure. Anyway, here’s a piece on roughly the topic by Zeldman on his own blog and on Medium. Read the comment threads on both, including Ev William's. (He founded Medium, and co-founded Blogger and Twitter before that.) Kind of covers the waterfront of the debate.

As it happens, I was invited early, by Ev, to write on Medium, but didn’t want to diminish my own blogging (and independent blogging in general) in the process. So I didn’t. And still haven’t. But here are some interesting rough stats…

Daily readership of my blog at its peak in the early-mid ‘00s: ~ 20,000
Daily readership of my blog today: ~ 200
# of Twitter followers of @dsearls: 22,000
Average # of clicks a link on @dsearls gets: ~ 15

Those numbers are approximate because I have a terrible connection at the moment and can’t check. And they’re a bit unfair because I post far less today on my own blog than I did in the old days (when I posted many times per day). But my point is that the leverage of blogging and even tweeting isn’t what it used to be.

It helps, as it always has, to have a big publisher with a big built-in audience.

The challenge is to remain independent and still participate in the larger world where there are useful centralized powers. Medium is one of those today. Ev’s also a good guy. And he does believe in the open and distributed Web.

Medium is useful for getting the word out to a larger audience than our solo blogs tend to have — and it works well with Zeldman’s approach, which is to republish one’s own blog posts there.

Doc

On Jul 15, 2015, at 12:32 AM, Nathan Schor < " class=""> > wrote:

RE: [projectvrm] Shifting the costs of ad fraud
curious about the advantage you see in doing Medium over blog+Twitter.
à Don, it's a double play.
You earn exposure to a newer and much wider audience for your work, thereby strengthening your brand while at the same time helping the VRM cause.
Plus you could still Tweet to your followers. They'll be impressed by you entering the media mainstream, making it a triple. ;)
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Marti [ " class="">mailto: ]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 6:27 PM
To: Doc Searls
Cc: ProjectVRM list
Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Shifting the costs of ad fraud
begin Doc Searls quotation of Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 01:45:42PM -0400:
> Suggestion: publish this, plus additional dollops of your usual wisdom, as a Medium piece.
How about
  Who's behind all those crappy ad toolbars on your uncle's PC?
as a title?
curious about the advantage you see in doing Medium over blog+Twitter.
Don 
> > On Jul 14, 2015, at 10:00 AM, Don Marti < " class=""> > wrote:
> >
> > Making the rounds...
> >
> >  Banner “Fraud” Doesn’t Matter
> >  Rick Webb
> > 
> > c
> >
> >  We use banners as little billboards now. We use them  strategically
> > as incredibly cheap (so cheap) repeat  impressions for brand
> > awareness. We know many people  don’t see them, we know most people
> > don’t see them.
> >  That’s okay. We use them accordingly, and the cost  has been
> > adjusted down to make them a perfectly great  buy even though most
> > people don’t see them.
> >
> >  We use them to measure the efficacy of campaigns we  run _our_ way,
> > using _our_ metrics.
> >
> > So Webb's method for dealing with fraud is:
> >
> > * Rely on the presence of huge quantities of
> >   fraudulent traffic to drive down CPMs everywhere.
> >   Buy a mix of fraudulent and legit banner impressions
> >   at massive scale.
> >
> > * Assume that adtech data is bogus, and that you
> >   have to measure banner impact with offline tools,
> >   as you would for a billboard.
> >
> > That solves Webb's problem.  Unfortunately, his strategy makes
> > things worse for publishers and users.
> >
> > * Ad fraud isn't just servers full of bots hitting
> >   servers full of ads. Ad fraud is now the number one
> >   malware payload. When Webb pays indiscriminately
> >   for fraudulent and legit banners, he's funding
> >   malware development, along with a bunch of other
> >   bad behavior, from copyright infringement to comment
> >   spam.
> >
> > * When fraud is priced in, legit sites are in direct
> >   price competition with fraud sites.  Costs of fraud
> >   end up being borne by publishers in the form of
> >   lower CPMs.
> >
> > Important implication of this: if you can figure out the minimum
> > quality level that makes banner inventory viable for Webb's "mass
> > buy/offline measurement"
> > strategy, you can focus anti-fraud projects on the _marginal banner_
> > -- whatever inventory is just barely possibly non-fraudulent enough
> > for a real advertiser to consider buying it.
> >
> > How do we spot the low-quality ad buys?  This is where brand-unsafe
> > placements and ad-supported piracy could be useful.  Spot those, and
> > you can get some idea of where the fraud-tolerant ad money is going,
> > and where is best to move in order to cut it off.
> >
> > --
> > Don Marti < " class=""> >                  
> > Are you safe from 3rd-party web tracking? 
>
--
Don Marti < " class=""> >                  
Are you safe from 3rd-party web tracking?  http://www.aloodo.org/test/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.