Greetings,
We are currently experimenting with a few Advertising Partners. One of them, which shall remain unnamed for the duration of this testing period, pays a decent $5 CPM for advertisements which are displayed when someone reaches a "Missing File" page(404). This seems to be a rather upper-level rate in the industry, at this time, but I feel the tactics used by this company to justify the rate are unbelievable, in the extreme.
For example, when a visitor comes to the advertisement, they are greeted with the standard portal-type page which is meant to engage them and have them surf on from there and hopefully click the ads on that page and buy things. Leaving this page open, however, for even a tiny amount of time(10+ seconds?) causes two popunders to be launched simultaneously. If this is left unchecked, it would appear each popup opens yet another popup or two. There seems to be no end to it. When attempting to close a few windows after they've loaded and initialized their own code, the closing seems to trigger an even t which launches another ad.
Now, I'm not dense, I know this has been happening for at least a year or more, and this is a major reason internet users are fed up with advertising. While I agree with the justification to perhaps launch 1 more popup, or even two, this insanity of more than that is ludicrous.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I'm sure a few other companies do this...probably a few of SI's programs, FastClick's, etc. It's common practice to do this, and probably justifiable to increase pay rates.
Truthfully, though, this alienation of our own visitors is sickening. While we, publishers, must sell out to advertisers to scrape by, we throw trash at our own bread and butter, to appease the advertisers(or perhaps it's the ad networks who are to blame).
What it comes down to is this: What are Advertising Networks thinking? Are they willing to engender a hatred of online advertising to the point where even users who could usually put up with the ads, willingly go out and seek the software to block these ads? It's absolutely terrible.
What really ticks me off, though, is that I'm part of the problem and there's not one reasonable thing I can do to stop the use of these ads and still survive. By our continued use of the ads, we passively advocate and affirm our desire for these ads, the pay rates, and the means to justfiy the pay rates.
My only hope is that the Online Advertising Market grows into maturity as soon as possible. I can't wait for the day when publishers and their clientelle/visitors are treated with the same respect and dignity as print, radio, television and other well founded media.
</RANT>
Farewell,
We are currently experimenting with a few Advertising Partners. One of them, which shall remain unnamed for the duration of this testing period, pays a decent $5 CPM for advertisements which are displayed when someone reaches a "Missing File" page(404). This seems to be a rather upper-level rate in the industry, at this time, but I feel the tactics used by this company to justify the rate are unbelievable, in the extreme.
For example, when a visitor comes to the advertisement, they are greeted with the standard portal-type page which is meant to engage them and have them surf on from there and hopefully click the ads on that page and buy things. Leaving this page open, however, for even a tiny amount of time(10+ seconds?) causes two popunders to be launched simultaneously. If this is left unchecked, it would appear each popup opens yet another popup or two. There seems to be no end to it. When attempting to close a few windows after they've loaded and initialized their own code, the closing seems to trigger an even t which launches another ad.
Now, I'm not dense, I know this has been happening for at least a year or more, and this is a major reason internet users are fed up with advertising. While I agree with the justification to perhaps launch 1 more popup, or even two, this insanity of more than that is ludicrous.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I'm sure a few other companies do this...probably a few of SI's programs, FastClick's, etc. It's common practice to do this, and probably justifiable to increase pay rates.
Truthfully, though, this alienation of our own visitors is sickening. While we, publishers, must sell out to advertisers to scrape by, we throw trash at our own bread and butter, to appease the advertisers(or perhaps it's the ad networks who are to blame).
What it comes down to is this: What are Advertising Networks thinking? Are they willing to engender a hatred of online advertising to the point where even users who could usually put up with the ads, willingly go out and seek the software to block these ads? It's absolutely terrible.
What really ticks me off, though, is that I'm part of the problem and there's not one reasonable thing I can do to stop the use of these ads and still survive. By our continued use of the ads, we passively advocate and affirm our desire for these ads, the pay rates, and the means to justfiy the pay rates.
My only hope is that the Online Advertising Market grows into maturity as soon as possible. I can't wait for the day when publishers and their clientelle/visitors are treated with the same respect and dignity as print, radio, television and other well founded media.
</RANT>
Farewell,
