Google Adds Image Ads
from the there-goes-that-plan... dept
One of the things that people always like about Google's advertising was that they stuck by their plan to do only non-intrusive, non-annoying, non-flashy text ads that got to the point. Well, it looks like they've had enough of that. Search Engine Journal notes that Google is now adding traditional image ads to their ad inventory. For now, it appears that these won't be used on search results, but only on content pages with Google contextual advertising. This suggests that the standard Google ad box has become so universal that (as expected) most people have learned to ignore it completely, so it was time for Google to try something different (which, strangely enough, seems a lot like what others have been offering for ages).
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Google will not last
I tell people at work all the time that I owe Google money. Whenever I need an answer to a SQL Server question, I go to Google, and within seconds I have my answer.
Long gone are the days of pouring over manuals, trying to find the little snippet of code, or the correct syntax...
I also have given up searching for information on Microsoft's own sites. Google has a much better index of the MSDN than even Microsoft itself.
I am very saddened to think that Google is only after our money, and will resort to annoying banner ads to get it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Google will not last
My motto is never to argue against more choices or more data. You can always ignore the choices or data, but it's good to have the ability to take advantages of new choices/data if you want to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Google will not last
It is true.
I've become so accustomed to seeing Google advertisements that I don't even pay attention to them anymore, not that I did in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not the reason
Mike, Google wants to attract the biggest advertisers who (stupidly or not) continue to buy BIG runs of banner ads across a lot of properties at once.
Google allows 4 standard sizes but NO rich media or animation of any kind.
The thinking is its a compromise - standard banners are running about 0.44% according to DoubleClick this quarter. With Google's targetting, the "Google banners" are bound to run significantly higher than that. With any luck, that will catch the eye of the Big Advertisers looking over their campaigns, and they're likely to throw more money Google's way, and maybe even try out some AdWords... where my guess is they're bound to get an even better ROI.
On the other end of things: Talking to several other publishers on some forums, no one is crazy about the idea, as the text ads wildly outperform the banner ad standards. But then the banners AREN'T targetted... so most are willing to test it out on a low-performing channel.
I don't think a non-flashy image will add to the annoyance factor. But my gut still says that the text ads will perform better. Only our trials will tell for sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Often NOT annoying
It's also interesting that when the ads "miss", they may still be related to what the reader was actually looking for - if a search engine misinterprets the content of one of my pages and you visit it, while the page may be disappointing in terms of what you wanted, the ads may be exactly what you wanted.
Context based advertising is not a bad thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]