I’m with stupid
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Readers reacted strongly to yesterday’s column about how to use Google AdWords/AdSense to punish BP through its web advertising effort aimed at influencing public opinion. Rather than respond through the comments I think this subject warrants a column of its own because I’d rather address the AdWords/AdSense click fraud aspect of the subject and leave BP and oil spills out of it for now.
The crux of reader concerns come down to the idea that a publisher asking readers to click on ads violates Google’s terms of service and risks that site being banned from AdSense. It probably does violate Google’s terms of service, but then so do many things that happen on the web and frankly I don’t particularly care.
Look at the ads on this page, for example. I have no idea what ads you are seeing or even who the advertisers are. The ads on this page are served by IDG Technet. But your clicking on those ads pays private school tuition for my three sons so I hope you will click on any ads you find interesting.
Hey, did I just violate Google’s terms of service?
Yes I did, just like tens of thousands of other sites do that dare to refer to the ad content of their pages.
I doubt that Google will punish me, though. And I frankly don’t care that much if they do because Google isn’t the only game in town when it comes to Internet advertising, though we all act as though they are.
Google’s AdSense policy of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell is hypocritical, but then so too are most of Google’s other opaque policies. Everything with Google is algorithmic yet the algorithm is never defined. Enforcement, too, follows yet another unpublished algorithm. Google seems open to the idea of its partners being a little bad while never defining exactly how much bad is too much bad. Presumably we’re deemed not smart enough to understand.
Google benefits from click fraud so it tolerates it to some degree, with that degree never being fully defined, either.
My kids play free game sites that require clicking on an ad before the game will play. Is that click fraud? Given that it is the modus operandi of the entire site, I think it can’t be. Certainly the must-click policy isn’t hidden from advertisers. But by some definitions — and even some laws — it is click fraud.
What model counts in what situation? Nobody knows.
All of this works to Google’s advantage. They control the game in part by refusing to openly define it. We accept without question their de facto regulator role. And pages like this one that question what the heck is really happening behind the scenes are viewed as arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
If we are going to have rules then define them clearly and enforce them firmly.
But that will never happen with Google running the show because firm rules can’t be optimized and Google is all about optimization.
If the rule changes day-to-day or hour-to-hour then defining it clearly and enforcing it is too hard. And Google, seeing itself as playing in a dynamic competitive market, doesn’t want to do anything hard.
It’s easy to blame Google and easier still to blame Google for its lame algorithmic defense which wouldn’t fly with your Mom or mine. But what I have realized just recently is that there is a particular basis inside Google for this behavior: not enough normal people work there.
I was tempted to write “not enough dumb people work at Google,” but that’s not the real point. The point is that if you have too many geniuses things get skewed and distorted and here we stand as a result with Big Brother Google. They just need a little bit of normal thrown-in but can’t bring themselves to do that because it isn’t like Google.
“Don’t be evil” is a glib corporate tagline for Google but it doesn’t get to the heart of the company’s problem in dealing with its billions of customers. There simply isn’t anyone working at Google who can effectively relate to those customers — to you and me — because we fail to share any common frame of reference, which Google as an organization sees as being beneath it.
Here is an example of what I mean. I wrote a couple years ago about problems I was having with Google Sites, which was previously called JotSpot. JotSpot was far easier to use than Google Sites, which was supposed to be the improved version. Because I influence a lot of thinking Google reached out to me and offered assistance in using Sites. Surely with a little instruction I’d see the beauty of the new architecture.
Nope.
The improvements to JotSpot helped Google but didn’t help me. The developers and testers at Google didn’t share my difficulties because they were too close to their work. What seemed obvious to them wasn’t at all obvious to me and I’m not stupid, just busy.
I know this is a long way from click fraud or BP, but it speaks to the essential nature of what’s click fraud and what’s not in the context of today’s Internet. As a publisher I can refer to ads on my site, pointing out that they produce income for Mrs. Cringely. If that’s click fraud then I am guilty.
Updating Thoreau, not “civil disobedience” but “Google disobedience.”
Inserting a sentence into TOS is easy and painless compared to enforcing what that sentence says, which amounts to Google cutting off a piece of its own revenue/profit stream. (Isn’t virtually all their revenue on AdWords profit?)
I would argue that by allowing corporations like BP to buy up search results to promote their own corporate PR-propaganda constitutes “evil” behavior that contradicts Google’s own mission statement.
In the big scheme of things, Google’s evil does more public harm than the consequences of Bob’s click-to-punish tactic. At least from my perspective.
Does anyone actually believe this “Don’t be evil” mumbo jumbo? It’s total nonsense. And don’t go thinking it’s because Google have too many IQ points roaming the halls. Google can be evil, and often are evil.
The current “Our Android Platform runs Flash, because we’re as pure as driven snow” BS is pure evil. Utterly disingenuous, self-serving and pure dripping evil. The fact that Google are able to argue with a straight face that Adobe Flash is a sign of an “open web” shows you probably shouldn’t play Texas Hold ‘em with these guys.
Bob is right that the current situation of not being totally transparent about what is and what is not “click fraud” benefits Google, and they are more than genius enough to work that for themselves. Again I think Bob hits the nail on the head when he questions the morality of accepting the ads from BP in the first place.
Hi Steve,
Take a look at the Internet marketing community all the time. Google routinely cuts off businesses who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a year with them. The ads they publish on Google get good click-through rates and uptake, but Google bans them all the time anyway.
As far as Cringley goes, since you don’t have any AdSense on your site, I doubt Google cares what you do. But I bet IDG Technet would.
Also–Bob, do you make money per click or per impression? If you make money per impression, then telling people to click won’t make any difference.
-Erica
“I would argue that by allowing corporations like BP to buy up search results to promote their own corporate PR-propaganda constitutes “evil” behavior that contradicts Google’s own mission statement”
I would agree, but that’s not what they’re doing. BP is buying ad words, which are easily distinguishable from search results by anyone of moderate intelligence who is familiar with Google.
Top o the morning to you, Bob! I just clicked on ads on your site from United Airlines and Microsoft, two companies from which I buy only under duress. I hate their products and services!
I read the whole column in Opera’s built-in feed reader and do not see any ads. I clicked through to the site to see what you were talking about.
Not sure if this is more on the issue of to force push the adds in relation to Google policy or the policy and people of Google.
Are the Google people as whole different? Probably yes. Though this yes is with a bent on non-nefarious. Corporate rough without a normal corporate goal of profit/share price above all else.
The Google people are like brain-monks.
Simon Says
I’m sure someone has already mentioned this but the more BP pays out to AdSense the less it has to reimburse the residents of the Gulf Coast. I can’t believe you didn’t think of this already.
You think? You’re assuming (wrongly I think – time will tell) that BP won’t be able to meet its commitments. I’d also suggest that while a lot of seabirds and fish have had it, the lawyers will have a “feeding frenzy”.
So no, I think Bob is probably right on the money.
It’s ironic, but guess what ads are appearing for me now? Top banner says something like “the latest CEO compliants made me to switch to Google”
The one on the left says “patch Tuesday made me switch to Google”
Somehow I think this deserves another column…
It’s in Google’s interests to keep the rules as unclearly defined as possible, because that gives them the flexibility to enforce them or not enforce them however they see fit. There’s no reason for Google to clearly define the rules unless their customers (advertisers) force them to. The only way the advertisers could do that would be to switch to a competing advertising service. Just like everyone else, advertisers have more important ways to spend their time than worrying about click fraud. As such, there’s a certain threshold of click fraud ambiguity that advertisers are willing to accept. As long as Google stays above that threshold, they get to keep their customers.
“The point is that if you have too many geniuses things get skewed and distorted… They just need a little bit of normal thrown-in but can’t bring themselves to do that because it isn’t like Google.”
Finally! And you could easily go on and on about how these genius-only’s make such dull and never improving software.
Look at Google Docs! It’s still feels like a beta…where is 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 by now? (And I’m taking generational improvements with each!) Could they have dropped the ball any bigger here? Even friggin MS improves their own software. Google? They just seem completely incapable.
Can you even imagine them ever making significant improvements to Gmail or Google Reader?
Do you think it would be TOO WILD to EVER modify the Google Search home page to have three windows instead of one? (for normal Search, image Search and map Search?)
Frankly, I just don’t understand what goes on there. So many super smart people and yet so little to show for it other than dominating internet advertising. How can Apple profit in so many ways while Google only profits in one way?
I use AdBlock, and have since it went stable. More people should. Reduces bandwidth demand, cleans up the page, and reduces mental clutter. Can’t recommend it enough. Oh, and for those folks wanting to “make a living” from ads: get a real job and make real things.
Awfully ironic comment for a guy who just posted on a site that he’s reading for free thanks to ad support.
There’s nothing wrong with work being ad supported – there’s a long history of it including magazines and your daily newspaper. Do you also think that journalists writing in your local paper need to get a real job? The difference is that ads don’t make up enough revenue for print media, and you still have to buy the magazine or newspaper.
I enjoy reading columns like Bob’s, and I have no problem with either seeing ads on the page, or clicking on ones that capture my interest. And, I’m happy not to be forced to pay for a magazine to read articles from quality authors.
I also use AdBlock, but then I allow most sites I regularly visit such as Bob’s. These ads are not annoying at all, and are sometimes relevant. I want Bob to get the money to send his kids to private school, so I am happy to allow his ads.
But some sites that force you to view ads before displaying content or who fill the page with pop-ups or worse use “kick-throughs” and mouse over crap. Those I block regardless.
I have Click To Flash installed, and therefore don’t see ANY ads on this page.
The difficulty for Google (and for Apple who similarly has cloudy rules for its App Store developers) is that once you define the system people set out to game it. The whole field of “Search Engine Optimization” is built on this principle.
Click fraud is merely another way people try to take advantage of others by gaming the system. It exists because wherever there are rules, there are those who are willing to break them for a little more profit. As long as it’s only a few people, it’s cheaper to ignore them. Only when the cheating becomes too expensive does it pay to crack down.
“The difficulty for Google (and for Apple who similarly has cloudy rules for its App Store developers) is that once you define the system people set out to game it.”
That NAILS it. I wish I could bump that quote to the top of the page. Gotta say I’m more sympathetic to google than apple though–who’d thought Steve J was a Puritan?
Weird. I don’t see any ads here (os X 10.5.3/Safari 5 [http://www.cringely.com/2010/06/im-with-stupid/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ICringely+%28I%2C+Cringely%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher]) when connecting from my iGoogle page.
As for making ‘real things’, I think words count as real around here. Just sayin’.
I’m not sure if this is a significant point, but I follow your blog through Google Reader, and I see none of the ads which you’re referring to.
Now, at first glance, this would seem to be a case of Google hurting its own core service (albeit, not very significantly), with one of its other services. Though I don’t know if it’s better to blame that on Google Reader, or on the way RSS feeds work.
Considering you have a stake in making sure those ads are visible, is this an issue that’s been big enough to appear on your radar?
I block internet advertising using a combination of OpenDNS filtering on my home router, GlimmerBlocker on each Mac, and ClicktoFlash in Safari. So I usually don’t see any banner and display ads. At all. And if any ads make it through the gauntlet, Safari’s Reader mode gets rid of them. Goodbye ads, hello faster browsing. When I have to use anyone else’s computer, the ads that show up are a bit disorienting.
Google claims to be obsessed with fast page load times. This is hypocrisy, because the ads they serve up slow down page loads.
Let’s not lose sight of the big story. We have an environmental accident that is getting worse by the day. It is causing great economic harm.
One of our favorite vacation spots is Gulf Shores AL. Here is their news update:
* We experienced some significant oil impact last weekend, ranging from tarballs to odor, in certain areas across the island. Some stretches of beach saw little to no sign of oil, while others experienced greater amounts. Clean-up times seem to be improving and oil was removed from most of the affected areas quickly. Local officials are urging more rapid response times and will continue to be diligent in their efforts to keep our beaches as clean and safe as possible.
* The cities of Gulf Shores and Orange Beach are flying double red flags at public beaches. This means waters are closed for swimming or wading.
* The Alabama Department of Public Health has a swimming advisory in gulf waters off Gulf Shores, Orange Beach and Fort Morgan, and in bay waters immediately adjacent to Fort Morgan, in Bayou St. John, Terry Cove, Cotton Bayou or Old River. A swimming advisory means that individuals are discouraged from swimming in affected waters. To read advisory information and frequently asked questions, visit the Alabama Department of Public Health website.
* The beaches are OPEN and visitors are still welcome to sunbathe and walk the beach, but we strongly suggest they swim in a pool or enjoy our many off-beach activities.
* The City of Gulf Shores has temporarily suspended the beach parking convenience fees. As a way to thank visitors for traveling to the coast, the parking fees typically collected at Gulf Place (Hwy. 59 south) and West 2nd Street public parking areas have been waived.
* The West 6th Street and Little Lagoon Pass public access and parking areas remain closed for an undetermined length of time. These areas will be used as work sites and staging areas for beach cleaning operations.
* The cities of Gulf Shores & Orange Beach have persuaded BP to purchase ten additional beach raking machines to facilitate faster and more effective clean up. The mechanical beach rakes are capable of sifting even very small contaminates from the sand efficiently and safely. There are now five machines cleaning the beaches daily. The cities are working with the U.S. Coast Guard and EPA to determine the best time to operate the rakes– most likely at night following low tide.
My community was ravaged by the 1993 Midwest Floods. The Federal response was easily 10x greater and more effective. Then President Clinton did more than just visit the area. He brought with him his entire cabinet and the members of congress (both parties) representing the affected areas. They hosted a series of meetings with local leaders. Executive orders were given to speed up payments, improve response, etc. Bill’s were rushed through congress to help with the crisis. All the resources of the US Government were made available to the states in the disaster area. The teamwork between local, state and federal government was great. While I didn’t vote for Clinton, I was proud of our US government during that difficult period. This wasn’t the work of one person. Clinton got everyone in the same room. They talked, they listened, they helped each other. Every issue was discussed and worked. It wasn’t politics — it was teamwork.
I then watched in horror the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and now the BP crisis. Our government seems to have become clueless. I am very, very disappointed with it.
* Why hasn’t a Federal Disaster Declaration been issued for the region?
* Why isn’t there a major US Navy presence at the scene of the damaged well assisting with stopping the leak?
* Why is the US congress more intent on having hearings to blame someone and is doing little to help with the immediate problem?
This is ridiculous.
You mention Clinton. Good. He was a good and skilled president. I expected the same of Obama and had high hopes for him. Unfortunately, he is more and more looking like the Democratic George Bush. He is botching this spill big time.
Heheh, Google must a) have a sense of humor, and b) be reading this column.
Because to day in New Zealand this page, and Bob’s previous, are both enticing me to accept Google’s offer of “free” business listing on google.com/places
The comment about how Google operates with respect to customers is exactly how DEC operated.
Anyone remember them?
yes, do remember DEC. good products, good service, big pricetags but not nearly as big as IBM. big early pusher of Unix and BSD.
the end started quickly after the DEC CEO had a line of new machines coming out in the early 90s, and told Wall Street they would internally finance the introduction and tool-up by pausing their dividend. they’d save hundreds of millions of dollars doing this.
Wall Street had a king-size fit (to borrow a quote from a former Chairman of the FCC, it would be close enough to say “they broke out into a$5h013s and 5417 themselves to death.” forced board changes, got rid of the CEO, made DEC a me-too moneygrubber that not two years later was gone, bought by Compaq to be pounded into obscurity.
why, yes, I do remember DEC.
I also remember Wall Street.
Your school fees are at risk as there are NO advertisments showing on this web page.
I hope that you’re recommending the same treatment to the SOBs at Union Carbide and it’s successors who blighted the lives of tens of thousands of Indians at Bhopal and got away with a few cents compensation per person – less than each click through might cost BP. Time to drop off the Yankee Imperialism band wagon?
BTW, apologies to all for the apostrophe catastrophe (it’s) in my post immediately above. Looking at the grammatical gaff, anyone could be confused into thinking I was really an American.
“Look at the ads on this page, for example. I have no idea what ads you are seeing” I’m not seeing any!
You have ads on your site?
Oh yes – smart people are their own worst enemies … that’s why, whenever our tech staff write a manual / user guide etc … it doesn’t get released until it’s been “proofed” by someone who has no idea what it’s about. Google is a company built around a single product (search engine) – and in that way the face many of the same issues that Microsoft does … so they “innovate” by buying other companies.
PhD – piled higher and deeper, pumpkin head doctor … Education is a wonderful tool – if it’s used wisely … for example, a “good” teacher can explain any subject to anyone … even someone who has no clue about the field … a bad teacher says the pupil’s too stupid. No – the bad teacher simply doesn’t know how to explain the subject / application / function …
I had something similar to your JotShot experience. I was using Grandcentral well before Google purchased it. The site was very easy to use, I would say even intuitive. Then Google purchased and rebranded it under Google Voice giving it a whole new UI, which still after a long time of use, I find the usability of the site very annoying. However, not being a technology pundit, I did not receive an offer of help ( not that I really asked ). They seem to think by just saying their stuff is better, that it is actually so – it is not. I won’t even get into their ‘improvements’ to the Google Books section…
[...] I’m With Stupid – Google AdSense Hypocrisy (cringely.com) Share and Enjoy: [...]
Bob
Just a little more on group think/don’t do evil …. its interesting to watch Google’s denile about issues arsing from how they collected personal wifi information during the street photo runs.
I’ve not seen much in USA press but the issue is hot in both Europe and Australia where privacy laws (and expectations) are a lot stronger.
Love to hear your comments … Growing pains?
From the age discrimination lawsuit discussed on Slashdot this morning, it seems to imply that Google has a very low percentage of their work force aged 40 and over …Greyglers, as they call them there.
Too few people who are over 40 means a lot less wisdom and experience, coupled with a crazy percentage of the employees being geniuses … how can that work really out?
[...] I, Cringely » I’m with stupid – interesting article on click fraud [...]
I don’t think Google is doesn’t share their boundaries of their policies because they think we’re stupid, or at least thinking that we’re stupid is only incidental to the policy of letting us know where the line for bad behavior is.
If you don’t know where the line is, you have an incentive to act well. It is sort of like the Panopticon from Foucault’s Discipline and Punish. You end up following the rules, because you never know if know if Google is watching.
Less importantly, not setting that line also protects them from liability. (They can’t very well tell their advertisers that they’ve endorsed fraud up to X%)
This really is seriously excellent info, many thanks.
[...] I’m With Stupid – Google AdSense Hypocrisy (cringely.com) [...]
what the stupid