News Google's new advertising standards start tomorrow

[shiraz9944]

Have anybody else posted this? This is a really big deal and will destroy a lot of people businesses that rely on media buying and ads on display sites. I got this from exoclick and it basically says EVERYTHING that was allowed before for the past 15 years is not longer allowed LOL. You have to read it to believe it. Why Google thinks they can dictate to the world what ads we can use and how they perform is beyond me. I hate them with a passion.

https://www.exoclick.com/googles-new...lp-publishers/

[Klen]

Yes i saw that e-mail but it is not entirely clear does exoclick cutting down pop format or it is just recommending not to use it. Either way, i doubt people will remove pop just like that, toomuch money in it to remove it.
But probably just a recommendation as exoclick still have redirect which is also big nono by google.
And also , if anyone wants to know a simple way how to cloak your ads from showing to google, send me PM.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by shiraz9944

I hate them with a passion.

This was a grand ending for your post ...

[k0nr4d]

In their defense, ads ARE getting fucking ridiculous. I can't even go on the Polish news sites anymore without adblock let alone on a porn site.

[Klen]

Originally Posted by k0nr4d

In their defense, ads ARE getting fucking ridiculous. I can't even go on the Polish news sites anymore without adblock let alone on a porn site.

Yeah news site are bloated with ads, you cant normaly surf on them due it But nativeads are good, they look like a part of site and not to invasive. But the irony is, how most news ads are using adsense, which is owned, surprise surprise by google.

[rogueteens]

Originally Posted by k0nr4d

In their defense, ads ARE getting fucking ridiculous. I can't even go on the Polish news sites anymore without adblock let alone on a porn site.

I find mainstream sites far worse than porn sites - especially sites belonging to newspapers.

[Best-In-BC]

Originally Posted by rogueteens

I find mainstream sites far worse than porn sites - especially sites belonging to newspapers.

Oh yeah, totally, guess Konrad doesn't get around like the rest of us, good thing he makes wicked scripts.

This google update has been a long time coming, them and Facebook have turned the freedom of the internet into a joke and lefty tit sucking operation.

[Beaver1]

If you still need a popup provider do some test whit popads.

Tomasz Klekot has one of the best AD block solutions across the industry.
(and we worked with most of them)

He works since weeks on that chrome 64-65 ad block problem
and to find a way to bypass the better ads standards and test.

Best Regards

[The Porn Nerd]

Less revenue for sure.

[Bladewire]

I have a canary version of Google and they just did an update that makes Adblocker fail, turning every page you surf to white until you disable AdBlocker. So the new Chrome in February is going to disable AdBlocker in Chrome. AdBlocker is hiding all the complaints on their forum and now insists all "bugs" be emailed to them

[Brian mike]

Publishers have started to Lose income by using certain ad network BANNERS display getting Blocked at the moment by chrome for some.

As for us at TC Network we are not blocked by the Google update and will be working hard to stay in compliance.
Crossing my finger and praying lol .... Just saying

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Beaver1

If you still need a popup provider do some test whit popads.

Tomasz Klekot has one of the best AD block solutions across the industry.
(and we worked with most of them)

He works since weeks on that chrome 64-65 ad block problem
and to find a way to bypass the better ads standards and test.

Best Regards

how you want to bypass better ads standards?

do you know that this new standards are tested MANUALLY by editors?

even when you can bypass the browser security you will be blocked manually again.

i assume that this is just the beginning. i am pretty sure that the next step will be a solution where users can report ads.

Originally Posted by Klen Telaris

But the irony is, how most news ads are using adsense, which is owned, surprise surprise by google.

you don´t seem to know much about this update in chrome.

IF they find an ad what is not conform with the rules they

1. inform the webmaster in webmaster tools
2. they give you 30 days to remove the problem
3. if you do not react within the 30 days they block the complete spot - EVEN when it happens with a spot who is using different adnetworks plus google adsense. even google ads would be blocked in that spot.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Brian mike

Publishers have started to Lose income by using certain ad network BANNERS display getting Blocked at the moment by chrome for some.

As for us at TC Network we are not blocked by the Google update and will be working hard to stay in compliance.
Crossing my finger and praying lol .... Just saying

nonsense NO ADNETWORK GETS BLOCKED !!!

i can show you hundreds of manually checks google did and they informed the webmaster of the site. to resolve the problem.
they do not look at the networks - they look on the domains and started it with the top alexa sites.
many webmasters did not even get anything yet because the sites are too small.

ALL big tubes got it already since last november (someone told me they got is already in october but I can not confirm if that is right)

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Bladewire

I have a canary version of Google and they just did an update that makes Adblocker fail, turning every page you surf to white until you disable AdBlocker. So the new Chrome in February is going to disable AdBlocker in Chrome. AdBlocker is hiding all the complaints on their forum and now insists all "bugs" be emailed to them

no but the point is that google also hates adblockers.

there have been many tries to sue the adblocksolutions in courts but they all failed because there is yet no standard and they could show up with the worst examples what they can block.

NOW there is a standard and I am pretty sure that this is quite another situation.
if an adblocker blocks ads what are compliant with the rules of the coalition for better ads they will indeed have a problem.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

Less revenue for sure.

i don´t see it like that.

we are cleaning up since december trying to comply with the rules and yes that is a huge kick in the ass for the moment.

as we are not doing CPM (god thanks) we have to live with a lower CTR but I can see already on some complaint campaigns and advertisers feedback that the conversion rates went up a lot.

so at the end of the day we will sell less clicks for a higher price because with a higher quality it is possible.

on the long run i do not see a very big problem in that - it will help to keep users on the websites and make them return and a returning user is a trusting user - trust is helping ads to sell.

I think that we are back to old revenues in march.

[Bladewire]

Originally Posted by thommy

no but the point is that google also hates adblockers.

there have been many tries to sue the adblocksolutions in courts but they all failed because there is yet no standard and they could show up with the worst examples what they can block.

NOW there is a standard and I am pretty sure that this is quite another situation.
if an adblocker blocks ads what are compliant with the rules of the coalition for better ads they will indeed have a problem.

My post was about Google Chrome blocking off sites served while ad blocker is active. When you disable ad blocker Chrome works fine in my canary pre release version.

Chrome will itself become an ad blocker in next release, disabling ad blocker plugins, at least that's how it looks with this last Canary update.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Best-In-BC

Oh yeah, totally, guess Konrad doesn't get around like the rest of us, good thing he makes wicked scripts.

This google update has been a long time coming, them and Facebook have turned the freedom of the internet into a joke and lefty tit sucking operation.

The Internet is about freedom, Google is a company that's not the Internet. Google goes to extraordinary limits to deliver what surfers want. They don't want an Internet that's dominated by adverts. I can't surf on my mobile because of the fucking ads.

[Bladewire]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The Internet is about freedom...

...and you're against net neutrality ( internet freedom )

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Bladewire

My post was about Google Chrome blocking off sites served while ad blocker is active. When you disable ad blocker Chrome works fine in my canary pre release version.

Chrome will itself become an ad blocker in next release, disabling ad blocker plugins, at least that's how it looks with this last Canary update.

it is not possible to see it in canary (except most pops are blocked) because nothing is blocked yet in it but the browser is already capable to block and will do it by the end of february.
but it is not the ad what is blocked ! it is the whole spot - i don´t know how they are blocking it because there is nothing blocked yet. but the 30 days began today 23. of january for all who were already informed that they have failed the compliance.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The Internet is about freedom, Google is a company that's not the Internet. Google goes to extraordinary limits to deliver what surfers want. They don't want an Internet that's dominated by adverts. I can't surf on my mobile because of the fucking ads.

i think there is still a lot of your old content sold with this ads :-)

[NewNick]

Originally Posted by rogueteens

I find mainstream sites far worse than porn sites - especially sites belonging to newspapers.

So newspapers have their well established businesses destroyed by the internet and google in particular.

They used to spend vast sums on journalists, news gathering, and reporting tha actual news.

Then the google master plan, just spider all of that expensively collated news, pop it into a feed, sell ads down the side and bingo !

Then the newspapers get with the program - fuck journalism and news gathering - lets fill the site with click bait ads and the odd story that is ?trending? on twitter !

The parallels with porn.......

And now google says that the ad funded model is too aggressive. You could not make it up.....

Do no fucking evil. Hypocrites.

[shiraz9944]

Yup the problem with google is they don't care about anybody but themselves. If you ask to get clarification on why an adwords account that is totally fine and legit is suspended they say 'too bad'. Or an ad like this..........forget it. This is very monopolistic in nature to do this since nearly all androids default to chrome. Same as the antitrust filed against MS for bundling their antivirus and browsers first and making it hard to stop them.

I'm cruising the big sites that exoclick uses, like pornhub youporn etc....to see what ads are showing and what are not via chrome dev tools.

[Beaver1]

Originally Posted by thommy

how you want to bypass better ads standards?

do you know that this new standards are tested MANUALLY by editors?

I am talk about the tools, inside the google webmaster tools.

Did you realy belive they ban or test millions of sites, per hand?

If the people didnt found porn at google they went to bing or duck
and at least the search engine that offers both, main and porn will get the traffic.

People are to lazy to use two search engines.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Beaver1

I am talk about the tools, inside the google webmaster tools.

Did you realy belive they ban or test millions of sites, per hand?

If the people didnt found porn at google they went to bing or duck
and at least the search engine that offers both, main and porn will get the traffic.

People are to lazy to use two search engines.

1. they do not have to test millions of sites per hand. it is enough to test the big ones to create such an earthquake (what they actually did already).

2. yes they have millions and millions of humans to test it - the users !!!


3. we are taking about the new chrome browser and not about google´s search engine. the search results are not influenced by that but a users who ends up with chrome on a website will not see ads in case the site did not pass the test.

i think you missundesrtand the issue completely.

[247mg]

In simple what we have to remove?

[Klen]

Originally Posted by thommy

you don´t seem to know much about this update in chrome.

IF they find an ad what is not conform with the rules they

1. inform the webmaster in webmaster tools
2. they give you 30 days to remove the problem
3. if you do not react within the 30 days they block the complete spot - EVEN when it happens with a spot who is using different adnetworks plus google adsense. even google ads would be blocked in that spot.

Ok let me re-phrase then myself - google look first after their ass .
And i do know for cases like, where you can do things with adsense, but google bot will say how it's bad and as result take your rankings . So, if you have traffic which coming from somewhere else but google, you can set adsense any way you like, but if it's coming from google, then you need follow special rules.

[Klen]

Originally Posted by Beaver1

I am talk about the tools, inside the google webmaster tools.

Did you realy belive they ban or test millions of sites, per hand?

If the people didnt found porn at google they went to bing or duck
and at least the search engine that offers both, main and porn will get the traffic.

People are to lazy to use two search engines.

There are tube sites which dont have popunders, just banners, so user wont go to bing, it wlll simply go to such tubes in case they cant access to tube with pops.

[Konda]

Originally Posted by 247mg

In simple what we have to remove?

banners that overlay on top of the video player (video pause)
banners that are flashing or have play buttons or pagination or close button etc
banners that look like virus warnings or system errors or fake chat message etc
prestitial and interstitial ad pages

https://www.exoclick.com/googles-new...lp-publishers/

some of our sites got the warning from Google, we followed all the steps here and re-requested a review but we still failed the new review, according to the review video they also see popunders as abusive, so seems you have to disable popunders as well.

[Denny]

Originally Posted by rogueteens

I find mainstream sites far worse than porn sites - especially sites belonging to newspapers.

[Konda]

double post

[Klen]

Originally Posted by Konda

banners that overlay on top of the video player (video pause)
banners that are flashing or have play buttons or pagination or close button etc
banners that look like virus warnings or system errors or fake chat message etc
prestitial and interstitial ad pages




some of our sites got the warning from Google, we followed all the steps here and re-requested a review but we still failed the new review, according to the review video they also see popunders as abusive, so seems you have to disable popunders as well.

So, you wont get ban for it , but it will be blocked in chrome, right ?

[thommy]

Originally Posted by KlenTelaris

So, you wont get ban for it , but it will be blocked in chrome, right ?

correct !

and chrome have actually 70% usage.
so nothing what can be ignored.

[Konda]

Originally Posted by KlenTelaris

So, you wont get ban for it , but it will be blocked in chrome, right ?

yeah starting jan 23 (yesterday) they start blocking ads on sites that have abusive ads from opening (so user can see them but won't be able to click them)

and starting feb 15 they will start enabling adblock on sites that don't follow the better ad standards

so in both cases, you lose 50+% of your ad traffic, as 55% of the people use Chrome, so you have basically no choice to comply

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Konda

banners that overlay on top of the video player (video pause)

we had such an issue but it was because the editor visited the page without another page before.
when he clicked the close button (what is usually working in our system) the pop was executed.

after we got rid of the pop they accepted the banners in the player as long as they do not fraud other rules

banners that are flashing or have play buttons or pagination or close button etc
banners that look like virus warnings or system errors or fake chat message etc
prestitial and interstitial ad pages

they also found fault with heavy animations, telephone buttons (with no function)
and even on banners with an ⚠️ somewhere (not in context with virus or social engineering stuff - but normal dating ads).

also ad density is a criteria.

but as this is in hands of humans we saw also issues when one editor said no and the other yes.

that´s why I am pretty sure that this is just a start and the later solution will be in the hands of the users.

[Klen]

Originally Posted by thommy

correct !

and chrome have actually 70% usage.
so nothing what can be ignored.

Hmm, but so far none of big tubes give a fuck about it.

[Beaver1]

Originally Posted by KlenTelaris

There are tube sites which dont have popunders, just banners, so user wont go to bing, it wlll simply go to such tubes in case they cant access to tube with pops.

I would use that SE wich offers me the bigest selection of sites
and thats not google, if they bann all sites with pops.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Beaver1

I would use that SE wich offers me the bigest selection of sites
and thats not google, if they bann all sites with pops.

you still do not get it ???

google bans nothing - the new chrome will do that.

and if 70% are using chrome it will not help you when they search somewhere else - the ads are blocked - no matter if they come from google, bing or with directly calling the page.

you can cry about google as long as you want - that will not change a thing and the users will be happy to use the new chrome.

so better swim with the stream.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by KlenTelaris

Hmm, but so far none of big tubes give a fuck about it.

they will - believe me.

as far as i can see a lot of the ads have changed already.
and chrome is not updated yet automatically to 64 - 63 still says it is the most recent version.

[3xmedia]

I don't use ad networks on my sites and it seems the ads I use should be fine. I just use popups (not from the ad networks) on some sites so if I get it right:

I can remove them and lose 100% popup traffic

or

I can do nothing, Chrome will start blocking popups on my site and I lose 50%-65% popup traffic (Chrome users)

correct?

[Beaver1]

Originally Posted by thommy

you still do not get it ???

google bans nothing - the new chrome will do that.

and if 70% are using chrome it will not help you when they search somewhere else - the ads are blocked - no matter if they come from google, bing or with directly calling the page.

you can cry about google as long as you want - that will not change a thing and the users will be happy to use the new chrome.

so better swim with the stream.

Of course, they ban page from the serps.

Not sure where you get the 70% percent from, defenitly not from my pages.

And the only one who crys about google are this ad companys wich one start that shit.

And if i remeber right the last time we used your network our traffic ends up straight in barcelona.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Beaver1

Of course, they ban page from the serps.

they do NOT !

Not sure where you get the 70% percent from, defenitly not from my pages.

in europe in total we have around that. in mobile even ore.

And the only one who crys about google are this ad companys wich one start that shit.

since when do ad companies advertisement?
they sell adspace but the banners are from the advertisers?

And if i remeber right the last time we used your network our traffic ends up straight in barcelona.

häh ?
what are you talking about ?

[thommy]

Originally Posted by 3xmedia

I don't use ad networks on my sites and it seems the ads I use should be fine. I just use popups (not from the ad networks) on some sites so if I get it right:

I can remove them and lose 100% popup traffic

or

I can do nothing, Chrome will start blocking popups on my site and I lose 50%-65% popup traffic (Chrome users)

correct?

i would say get rid of the pops in chrome 64 and higher - that should be ok and you will not lose ALL poptraffic.

if you did not hear from google yet (check your webmaster tools for that) you are still not on their focus. they just started with the very big ones in each country and checked all big sites manually. IF they checked your site and all is ok you can also find that in webmaster tools.

if you get a complain from them you will see it in webmaster tools and you have 30 days to get rid of the problem til they block your ads.
you still can go for a recheck after the 30 days but as we know google they are a bit slow and this can take time.

[Beaver1]

Originally Posted by thommy

häh ?
what are you talking about ?

You arent the momo guy?

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Beaver1

You arent the momo guy?

i am that but i don´t know what you mean with "traffic ending up in barcelona"

[The Porn Nerd]

Who owns Chrome? Google right?

Best advice: comply if you can. If not, adapt or die.

[Best-In-BC]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The Internet is about freedom, Google is a company that's not the Internet. Google goes to extraordinary limits to deliver what surfers want. They don't want an Internet that's dominated by adverts. I can't surf on my mobile because of the fucking ads.

I agree 100% besides "Google goes to extraordinary limits to deliver what surfers want." They go to extraordinary lengths to show preferred websites in search that one can only speculate is paid for. They have designed there results not to show facts but what they think the surfer wants to see.

Please, there a joke, or at least on there way to become one.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

Who owns Chrome? Google right?

Best advice: comply if you can. If not, adapt or die.

absolutely correct !

[Best-In-BC]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

Who owns Chrome? Google right?

Best advice: comply if you can. If not, adapt or die.