Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Moz)   The $7.5 billion fraud in the online advertising industry. Only 8% of ad impressions are seen by human beings   (moz.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Ad Contrarian Bob Hoffman, Hoffman/Lewis Advertising, display advertising, media buyers, ad networks, ad agency, web traffic, online advertising  
•       •       •

2306 clicks; posted to Business » on 22 Jun 2015 at 8:20 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



61 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2015-06-22 07:53:51 AM  
I do my best to make that 8% even lower.
 
2015-06-22 08:28:50 AM  
But it's very likely the same across all media. When a commercial is on TV and I can't fast-forward past it, I do the same thing everybody else does: either leave the room to take care of something else while I'm waiting, or mute the TV, or change the channel for a few minutes. The same used to go for the newspapers: just because they were on the same page as a story I was reading didn't mean I was actually reading all the ads.
 
2015-06-22 08:37:31 AM  

sprong89: But it's very likely the same across all media. When a commercial is on TV and I can't fast-forward past it, I do the same thing everybody else does: either leave the room to take care of something else while I'm waiting, or mute the TV, or change the channel for a few minutes. The same used to go for the newspapers: just because they were on the same page as a story I was reading didn't mean I was actually reading all the ads.


I think you're missing the point. Commercials on TV and in newspapers are physically able to be seenin the first place. The point here, I think, is that most paid online ad impressions are not physically able to be seen in the first place. So, people are paying for a lot of ads that are never going to have even a chance at being seen.
 
2015-06-22 08:41:04 AM  
Adblock. Sweet, sweet Adblock.

/I'll turn it of when they murder those autoplay Flash video ads
 
2015-06-22 08:41:36 AM  
*off*
 
2015-06-22 08:48:06 AM  
Duh?

/Worked IT at an advertising company for a while and those people are dumb as rocks.
 
2015-06-22 08:59:16 AM  
I've always wondered what percentage of banner ad clicks were totally accidental.  Or rather, whether any of them weren't.

/even with adblock etc. I've managed to bumble my way into accidentally clicking a couple ads this year.
//I don't think they had a chance to install any malware, as I closed the tab the moment I realized what I'd done, but I can't be sure...
///ah, let's face it, my computer's toast.  Best to burn it and buy a new one.
 
2015-06-22 09:07:15 AM  

tzzhc4: Duh?

/Worked IT at an advertising company for a while and those people are dumb as rocks.


It's been a hundred years since (Wannamaker/Penney/somebody?) said "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half."  And things haven't changed a bit.
 
2015-06-22 09:18:35 AM  
Last few years?  Try a last few decades.  The advertising industry in and of itself is fraud.
 
2015-06-22 09:29:57 AM  
Shh! Don't pop the Dot Com ][ bubble!
 
2015-06-22 09:31:19 AM  

FrancoFile: It's been a hundred years since (Wannamaker/Penney/somebody?) said "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half."  And things haven't changed a bit.


It's not the same thing.

You could put out a bunch of ads on TV, on radio, and in the newspaper, and all of those ads were 100% guaranteed to be physically there. The joke is that out of those ads, he didn't know which half worked.

Online, it seems, more than half of ad impressions don't physically appear to a human viewer at all. Then, out of the half that do appear, the joke would be that he didn't know which half of those worked -- so, we're now down to 25%.
 
2015-06-22 09:36:25 AM  

sprong89: But it's very likely the same across all media. When a commercial is on TV and I can't fast-forward past it, I do the same thing everybody else does: either leave the room to take care of something else while I'm waiting, or mute the TV, or change the channel for a few minutes. The same used to go for the newspapers: just because they were on the same page as a story I was reading didn't mean I was actually reading all the ads.


Except that would be analogous to the ad appearing on a web page someone is served and they don't look at it. This is more like if a newspaper claimed it had a circulation of 1.2 million when it only sold 100k copies, or a TV station claimed 12 million viewers when the ad was being shown but it was actually only1 million. i.e. normally fraud on the part of the people being paid to show adverts.
 
2015-06-22 09:43:45 AM  

phamwaa: Adblock. Sweet, sweet Adblock.

/I'll turn it of when they murder those autoplay Flash video ads


I'm actually surprised that the article didn't mention adblock
 
2015-06-22 09:47:49 AM  
But like, 18% of ads for Campbell's soup.
 
2015-06-22 09:53:47 AM  
I've been thinking for a while now that online advertising isn't just making print (and, to a certain extent, television) advertising obsolete, but that it might be de-legitimizing all advertising, even most online advertising.

For over 100 years, ad reps have been justifying ad buys with, mostly, hand-waving; an awful lot of the older research has always seemed a little hopeful, to put it mildly.

The first people who started measuring click-through rates on 'dumb' banner ads probably felt rather sick to their stomachs about the prospect of making any serious money off them.

Google seems to have figured out that, for the most part, ads only work well when people are already actively looking for some sort of product and/or solution and the ad offers one that matches their requirements.

Game of War's recent success suggests that, given enough cash, you can bludgeon people into awareness off your product, but that particular style of campaign seems difficult to emulate easily (and odious to many).

I think that a lot of excellent marketing can be done cheaply, thanks to the internet, but that it won't look at all like advertising. It will look a lot more like market research, and it will rely on social-media based message 'multipliers'.

This is bad news for a lot of our current information and/or entertainment vendors - in every medium - as their ability to capture passive eyeballs won't translate into the cash it used to, and that will make it harder for them to create the shows and news coverage that we all have enjoyed for so long. I'm not sure about what they can do to monetize their offerings (but am certain that they are working very, very hard to figure something out.)

The two models that seem the least distressed lately are, perhaps illustratively, the two big ones that don't directly rely on advertising: The NPR/TotalFark model (voluntary contributions) and the HBO/Cable model (direct fees).

I also like the BBC model (use public money combined with licensing and other income when and where you can get it). Now-a-days, though, a lot of people have been convinced that politically unbiased information doesn't exist, so that public monies for distributing information has become an increasingly difficult sell. Too bad, I say.
 
2015-06-22 09:55:01 AM  

dookdookdook: I've always wondered what percentage of banner ad clicks were totally accidental.  Or rather, whether any of them weren't.

/even with adblock etc. I've managed to bumble my way into accidentally clicking a couple ads this year.
//I don't think they had a chance to install any malware, as I closed the tab the moment I realized what I'd done, but I can't be sure...
///ah, let's face it, my computer's toast.  Best to burn it and buy a new one.


That happens to me from time to time on dark using my tablet. I tap on the comments just as the screen is recentering, and I'm off to a sponsored link.
 
2015-06-22 10:05:41 AM  
So 15 years after Pets.com and still almost no one's figured out how to make money on the internet.  And the very few who do are relying on this scam to do it.

I just hope when the whole system implodes on itself that the free porn survives.
 
2015-06-22 10:09:43 AM  

Fano: dookdookdook: I've always wondered what percentage of banner ad clicks were totally accidental.  Or rather, whether any of them weren't.

/even with adblock etc. I've managed to bumble my way into accidentally clicking a couple ads this year.
//I don't think they had a chance to install any malware, as I closed the tab the moment I realized what I'd done, but I can't be sure...
///ah, let's face it, my computer's toast.  Best to burn it and buy a new one.

That happens to me from time to time on dark using my tablet. I tap on the comments just as the screen is recentering, and I'm off to a sponsored link.


Same here on my Android phone. Click a link while the page is still loading and the link you meant to hit is now somewhere else and you've clicked on " This one weird trick retailers hate that will give you a bigger penis and improve your credit score"
 
2015-06-22 10:30:25 AM  
Oh we see them. We see all the flicking and frame shuffling and what not while all the ads load long before the massive two sentence article we desperately want to read pops into view.
 
2015-06-22 10:33:53 AM  

edmo: Oh we see them. We see all the flicking and frame shuffling and what not while all the ads load long before the massive two sentence article we desperately want to read pops into view.


I love when I'm trying to find just the right video clip no longer than a minute on YouTube and have to watch a 30 second ad, and then again when I realize after 5 seconds it wasn't what I was looking for. At least lots of video ads let you opt out after 5 seconds.
 
2015-06-22 10:36:27 AM  

Fano: edmo: Oh we see them. We see all the flicking and frame shuffling and what not while all the ads load long before the massive two sentence article we desperately want to read pops into view.

I love when I'm trying to find just the right video clip no longer than a minute on YouTube and have to watch a 30 second ad, and then again when I realize after 5 seconds it wasn't what I was looking for. At least lots of video ads let you opt out after 5 seconds.


YouTube has ads?
 
2015-06-22 10:54:30 AM  

Flint Ironstag: Fano: dookdookdook: I've always wondered what percentage of banner ad clicks were totally accidental.  Or rather, whether any of them weren't.

/even with adblock etc. I've managed to bumble my way into accidentally clicking a couple ads this year.
//I don't think they had a chance to install any malware, as I closed the tab the moment I realized what I'd done, but I can't be sure...
///ah, let's face it, my computer's toast.  Best to burn it and buy a new one.

That happens to me from time to time on dark using my tablet. I tap on the comments just as the screen is recentering, and I'm off to a sponsored link.

Same here on my Android phone. Click a link while the page is still loading and the link you meant to hit is now somewhere else and you've clicked on " This one weird trick retailers hate that will give you a bigger penis and improve your credit score"


Same here. If only iOS chrome had Adblock.
 
2015-06-22 11:00:42 AM  
That high? When I was using Adwords, I was billed for impressions on one site in one month that exceeded the total number of views for the site by a factor of 100. Also, had zero click-throughs registered on my site from that site, Adwords said there were over 1000.
 
2015-06-22 11:05:29 AM  

erupt2001: Last few years?  Try a last few decades.  The advertising industry in and of itself is fraud.


In the sense that it is " an industry who's sole purpose is to convince people to spend money they don't have to buy things they don't need to impress people they don't know."

That said, I have less of a problem with "ads to pay for content" model then the "content to sell ads". As the latter tends to deliver low-quality drivel.

One of the funnier custom ads I see is one offering "fluent Dutch" in 6 weeks. What with it being my first language and all.
 
2015-06-22 11:08:55 AM  
Same here on my Android phone. Click a link while the page is still loading and the link you meant to hit is now somewhere else and you've clicked on " This one weird trick retailers hate that will give you a bigger penis and improve your credit score"

If only they would advertise things that I could use . . .
 
2015-06-22 11:13:35 AM  
I'm in the Ad business and clients have become so cheap with this stuff anyway. There is no budget for online ads anymore. I do see some of what our interactive dept does online a lot though, but I'm sure our media-buy partners pull this scheme all the time. Thats why they occupy 10 floors of a 5th avenue high-rise.
 
2015-06-22 11:20:53 AM  

Raptorrat: erupt2001: Last few years?  Try a last few decades.  The advertising industry in and of itself is fraud.

In the sense that it is " an industry who's sole purpose is to convince people to spend money they don't have to buy things they don't need to impress people they don't know."

That said, I have less of a problem with "ads to pay for content" model then the "content to sell ads". As the latter tends to deliver low-quality drivel.

One of the funnier custom ads I see is one offering "fluent Dutch" in 6 weeks. What with it being my first language and all.


The geolocation routines that go into ads are hilarious when they break. (insert XKCD 'hot girls in low-earth-orbit' cartoon)

Every once in a while, they think I'm a Spanish-speaking resident of greater LA.

And for a week, they were convinced I lived in Italy.
Granted, the town of Milan, Michigan is 30 miles away from me, but...
 
2015-06-22 11:41:25 AM  

Raptorrat: erupt2001: Last few years?  Try a last few decades.  The advertising industry in and of itself is fraud.

In the sense that it is " an industry who's sole purpose is to convince people to spend money they don't have to buy things they don't need to impress people they don't know."

That said, I have less of a problem with "ads to pay for content" model then the "content to sell ads". As the latter tends to deliver low-quality drivel.

One of the funnier custom ads I see is one offering "fluent Dutch" in 6 weeks. What with it being my first language and all.


Maybe you bought anti-stuttering cream at some point before?

/it actually didn't help my stutter, but now my penis is huge
//it's possible I didn't apply it correctly
 
2015-06-22 12:01:49 PM  
Holy crap Fark.com... 117 different URLs are pinged when I load the home page.  This is not advertising done well.  No wonder you guys still have a drunk squirrel running server

The short list of crap loaded by the home page:

http://fark.com
http://www.fark.com
http://tap-cdn.rubiconproject.com
http://native.sharethrough.com
http://edge.quantserve.com
http://assets.pinterest.com
https://apis.google.com:443
http://static.fmpub.net
https://connect.facebook.net:443
http://vassg141.ocsp.omniroot.com
http://anvil.rubiconproject.com
http://img.fark.net
https://img.fark.net:443
http://ocsp.digicert.com
http://www.googletagservices.com
http://ox-d.fark.servedbyopenx.com
http://tpc.googlesyndication.com
http://www.google-analytics.com
https://cdn.fairblocker.com:443
http://cdn.taboola.com
http://pixel.quantserve.com
http://platform.twitter.com
http://news.e-generator.com
http://tenzing.fmpub.net
http://pixel.mathtag.com
http://tags.bluekai.com
http://netstorage.taboola.com
http://static.smi2.net
http://static4.smi2.net
http://static8.smi2.net
http://static3.smi2.net
http://static6.smi2.net
http://static2.smi2.net
http://static5.smi2.net
http://target.fark.com
http://b.scorecardresearch.com
https://www.facebook.com:443
http://beacon.rubiconproject.com
https://s-passets.pinimg.com:443
https://fonts.gstatic.com:443
https://oauth.googleusercontent.com:443
https://ssl.gstatic.com:443
http://b.sharethrough.com
http://btlr.sharethrough.com
https://syndication.twitter.com:443
http://u.openx.net
https://l.fairblocker.com:443
http://static.sharethrough.com
http://js.moatads.com
http://gv.symcd.com
https://log.pinterest.com:443
http://s.moatads.com
https://securepubads.g.doubleclick.net:443
http://us-u.openx.net
http://p.rfihub.com
http://sync.mathtag.com
http://r.turn.com
http://cm.g.doubleclick.net
http://ib.adnxs.com
https://adx.g.doubleclick.net:443
https://usefb.adsrvr.org:443
https://ad.adsrvr.org:443
https://choices.truste.com:443
http://www.google.com
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com
http://d.audienceiq.com
http://pixel.sitescout.com
http://m.xp1.ru4.com
http://cmap.ox.ace.advertising.com
http://match.adsrvr.org
http://pr-bh.ybp.yahoo.com
http://keywords.fmpub.net
http://loadm.exelator.com
http://ss.symcd.com
https://us-u.openx.net:443
http://gn.symcd.com
http://e.nexac.com
http://remnant.fmpub.net
http://c.betrad.com
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net
https://cm.g.doubleclick.net:443
http://ads.rubiconproject.com
http://optimized-by.rubiconproject.com
http://choices.truste.com
http://us-ads.openx.net
http://uac.advertising.com
http://tap2-cdn.rubiconproject.com
http://imp.bid.ace.advertising.com
http://idpix.media6degrees.com
http://openx2-match.dotomi.com
http://dis.criteo.com
http://rs.gwallet.com
http://idsync.rlcdn.com
http://ad.turn.com
http://tap.rubiconproject.com
http://l.betrad.com
https://pixel.rubiconproject.com:443
http://pix04.revsci.net
http://rbp.mxptint.net
http://pixel.rubiconproject.com
http://r.openx.net
https://ad.doubleclick.net:443
http://cdn.turn.com
http://clients1.google.com
https://pr-bh.ybp.yahoo.com:443
http://sd.symcd.com
http://s0.2mdn.net
https://d.turn.com:443
https://segments.adap.tv:443
http://o.aolcdn.com
http://ejs.moatads.com
http://ocsp.starfieldtech.com
http://moat.pxl.ace.advertising.com
http://pixel.advertising.com
http://ocsp.entrust.net
https://segments.adaptv.advertising.com:443
http://leadback.advertising.com
 
2015-06-22 12:06:40 PM  
Clients are buying something from an ad agency without being able to independently verify that the agency is even doing what they're being paid for. I'm shocked that this would result in fraud.
 
2015-06-22 12:08:39 PM  

aaronx: I've been thinking for a while now that online advertising isn't just making print (and, to a certain extent, television) advertising obsolete, but that it might be de-legitimizing all advertising, even most online advertising.

For over 100 years, ad reps have been justifying ad buys with, mostly, hand-waving; an awful lot of the older research has always seemed a little hopeful, to put it mildly.

The first people who started measuring click-through rates on 'dumb' banner ads probably felt rather sick to their stomachs about the prospect of making any serious money off them.

Google seems to have figured out that, for the most part, ads only work well when people are already actively looking for some sort of product and/or solution and the ad offers one that matches their requirements.

Game of War's recent success suggests that, given enough cash, you can bludgeon people into awareness off your product, but that particular style of campaign seems difficult to emulate easily (and odious to many).

I think that a lot of excellent marketing can be done cheaply, thanks to the internet, but that it won't look at all like advertising. It will look a lot more like market research, and it will rely on social-media based message 'multipliers'.

This is bad news for a lot of our current information and/or entertainment vendors - in every medium - as their ability to capture passive eyeballs won't translate into the cash it used to, and that will make it harder for them to create the shows and news coverage that we all have enjoyed for so long. I'm not sure about what they can do to monetize their offerings (but am certain that they are working very, very hard to figure something out.)

The two models that seem the least distressed lately are, perhaps illustratively, the two big ones that don't directly rely on advertising: The NPR/TotalFark model (voluntary contributions) and the HBO/Cable model (direct fees).

I also like the BBC model (use public money combined with lice ...


I get the concept of the need for advertising. However, the problem is when offering it with media, one has to do it in a non invasive way to be effective.

Case in point, cord cutters aren't just getting rid of cable/satellite TV, but the invasive ads that come with it. Shows produced on networks now literally have 30 second car/fast food commercials during the show. Let alone Cable TV stations that have the bottom 1/4 of your screen advertising another show on that station while you're trying to watch a show!

Personally, I like the Netflix model. I pay X a month, I watch shows, maybe give a little feedback, and it uses that data to send products(other shows) my way that I might be interested in.

I know this doesn't necessarily translate to every possible market, but it's a hell of a lot more effective than TV commercials(I don't watch TV anymore), radio commercials (Now I just stream playslists from my device into my vehicle's aux port), on line ads (Adblock/Flashblock), etc.

And really, the only time I want to be advertised at is if I'm seeking a service. That's when an ad can be truly effective, and competition can actually come into play.


The other half of the issue is that our economy still sucks. We can report low unemployment numbers an a high DOW, but that's smoke and mirrors. Most people don't make enough at a full time job to live, let alone have the spare money for your new service or product that you want to get out there. Money needs to move and in our economy, it just drifts to the top and stays there.
 
2015-06-22 12:34:08 PM  

erupt2001: Try a last few decades. The advertising industry in and of itself is fraud.

Saturation marketing brands beg to differ.

Marketing is the giant rusty barrel into which we cast our sociopathic retards (there's very little difference between marketing and politics), but there are certain ways it can be used effectively.
 
2015-06-22 01:04:28 PM  
I will occasionally click on the car dealer banner adds in case my pipe dream of being able to buy a new car were to suddenly come true.

Amazingly, even online, manufacturers STILL make the "option packages" and "build your own" configurations hard to understand.
 
2015-06-22 01:12:31 PM  
That's why you rely on affiliate marketing. Screw this PPI or even PPC advertising, get sales get paid.
 
2015-06-22 01:16:15 PM  

wildcardjack: That's why you rely on affiliate marketing. Screw this PPI or even PPC advertising, get sales get paid.


There's now CPA advertising -- cost-per-action. Instead of paying per impression or click, you pay every time someone takes a desired action after clicking from the ad to your website. That desired action could be an e-commerce sale or a contact forum submission or something else.
 
2015-06-22 01:36:55 PM  

aaronx: Game of War's recent success suggests that, given enough cash, you can bludgeon people into awareness off your product, but that particular style of campaign seems difficult to emulate easily (and odious to many).


Um, I think they are doing well due to their TV ads with an attractive, half naked woman in them, as opposed to any of their ads on-line.
 
2015-06-22 01:52:06 PM  
4 years ago Google gave me back 80% of my adwords budget due to fake clicks.  Just a few months ago I started up again.  Everything was fine for about 3 months and i regularly got referals for a whole $30 a month in adword charges.  Was paying very little for my ads as my target area is super small.  Then out of the blue I got socked with several hundred dollars in clicks.

The adwords were working but when I go from paying $30 a month to $500 a month with no changes on my part AND get zero leads out of it then it's utter bullshiat...again.  This time I got no reimbursement.
 
2015-06-22 01:53:44 PM  
Raptorrat:

One of the funnier custom ads I see is one offering "fluent Dutch" in 6 weeks. What with it being my first language and all.

We... we need to talk about your Dutch.
 
2015-06-22 02:19:17 PM  
the online advertising industry is a Fraud.  but the advertising on the boob toob, mags, billboards, movies, etc., those are all legitimate.
yea, riiiiiight.

without the advertising industry and its BS, this Nation would collapse. it's the glue that holds us together.
 
2015-06-22 02:23:31 PM  
the best part about Ads is i get very few of them and TV costs less now, courtesy of the Roku.  Roku is your Friend.

cable TV and dish are a nightmare of ads.  unbelievable the sh*t they spew out and expect me to watch.  the commercials just seem to go on forever.
 
2015-06-22 02:54:00 PM  

dookdookdook: So 15 years after Pets.com and still almost no one's figured out how to make money on the internet.  And the very few who do are relying on this scam to do it.

I just hope when the whole system implodes on itself that the free porn survives.


Actually a lot of people have figured out how to make money on the internet... it's just that they're also all tied to tangible products with assets.

The reality is that mass-scale advertising will go away sooner or later, in the future all advertising will be specialized & catered to each person via tracking programs, likely with no easy way for the layman to skip.
 
2015-06-22 03:14:58 PM  

xria: This is more like if a newspaper claimed it had a circulation of 1.2 million when it only sold 100k copies


No, the paper really did distribute 1.2 million copies.  (Circulation figures represent distribution, not sales).

But of the 400k of those that were sent to newsstands, 150k went unsold and got pulped.  And of the 800k that were delivered to subscribers, 250k are still neatly stacked in waiting rooms and hotel business centers.

And the rest?  Readers scanned the front page and the sports section, but the Arts & Entertainment section almost never even got opened to your quarter-sheet display at on page E7.  Maybe 100k people saw it.

Not that there's any way of accurately quantifying that.
 
2015-06-22 03:22:49 PM  
Google Adwords doesnt make you pay for impressions, just clicks.
 
2015-06-22 04:19:15 PM  

gunther_bumpass: Raptorrat:

One of the funnier custom ads I see is one offering "fluent Dutch" in 6 weeks. What with it being my first language and all.

We... we need to talk about your Dutch.


I guffawed thinking of the xkcd with the YouTube comments "nobody told me..."
 
2015-06-22 05:30:03 PM  

asquian: I also like the BBC model (use public money combined with lice ...


Can't say that appeals to me but if you like it....
 
KIA
2015-06-22 08:02:29 PM  

aaronx: I've been thinking for a while now that online advertising isn't just making print (and, to a certain extent, television) advertising obsolete, but that it might be de-legitimizing all advertising, even most online advertising.

For over 100 years, ad reps have been justifying ad buys with, mostly, hand-waving; an awful lot of the older research has always seemed a little hopeful, to put it mildly.

The first people who started measuring click-through rates on 'dumb' banner ads probably felt rather sick to their stomachs about the prospect of making any serious money off them.

Google seems to have figured out that, for the most part, ads only work well when people are already actively looking for some sort of product and/or solution and the ad offers one that matches their requirements.

Game of War's recent success suggests that, given enough cash, you can bludgeon people into awareness off your product, but that particular style of campaign seems difficult to emulate easily (and odious to many).

I think that a lot of excellent marketing can be done cheaply, thanks to the internet, but that it won't look at all like advertising. It will look a lot more like market research, and it will rely on social-media based message 'multipliers'.

This is bad news for a lot of our current information and/or entertainment vendors - in every medium - as their ability to capture passive eyeballs won't translate into the cash it used to, and that will make it harder for them to create the shows and news coverage that we all have enjoyed for so long. I'm not sure about what they can do to monetize their offerings (but am certain that they are working very, very hard to figure something out.)

The two models that seem the least distressed lately are, perhaps illustratively, the two big ones that don't directly rely on advertising: The NPR/TotalFark model (voluntary contributions) and the HBO/Cable model (direct fees).

I also like the BBC model (use public money combined with lice ...


This.  Also, manufacturers and productive types seem to have forgotten: the very people who are soliciting your advertising dollar are experts at peddling crap to unsuspecting rubes...
 
2015-06-22 08:24:14 PM  
I also got scammed by Adwords. Niche area of law in a small community generated 500 clicks and zero contact from potential clients.
 
2015-06-22 08:34:27 PM  

Huck And Molly Ziegler: I will occasionally click on the car dealer banner adds in case my pipe dream of being able to buy a new car were to suddenly come true.

Amazingly, even online, manufacturers STILL make the "option packages" and "build your own" configurations hard to understand.


What's hard to understand about "If you want the good stereo, you have to get heated and cooled leather seats, heated mirrors, the sport package, sunroof and the ugly 17" wheels for an extra $12k?"
 
2015-06-22 08:41:08 PM  
This must explain the "Eat this and Never Diet Again" adds, because only an alien robot would ever even consider eating any of the shiat in those ads, no matter how true its promise of un-fattening you is.
 
2015-06-22 10:04:03 PM  

SmellsLikePoo: Holy crap Fark.com... 117 different URLs are pinged when I load the home page.  This is not advertising done well.  No wonder you guys still have a drunk squirrel running server

The short list of crap loaded by the home page:

http://fark.com
http://www.fark.com
http://tap-cdn.rubiconproject.com
http://native.sharethrough.com
http://edge.quantserve.com
http://assets.pinterest.com
https://apis.google.com:443
http://static.fmpub.net
https://connect.facebook.net:443
http://vassg141.ocsp.omniroot.com
http://anvil.rubiconproject.com
http://img.fark.net
https://img.fark.net:443
http://ocsp.digicert.com
http://www.googletagservices.com
http://ox-d.fark.servedbyopenx.com
http://tpc.googlesyndication.com
http://www.google-analytics.com
https://cdn.fairblocker.com:443
http://cdn.taboola.com
http://pixel.quantserve.com
http://platform.twitter.com
http://news.e-generator.com
http://tenzing.fmpub.net
http://pixel.mathtag.com
http://tags.bluekai.com
http://netstorage.taboola.com
http://static.smi2.net
http://static4.smi2.net
http://static8.smi2.net
http://static3.smi2.net
http://static6.smi2.net
http://static2.smi2.net
http://static5.smi2.net
http://target.fark.com
http://b.scorecardresearch.com
https://www.facebook.com:443
http://beacon.rubiconproject.com
https://s-passets.pinimg.com:443
https://fonts.gstatic.com:443
https://oauth.googleusercontent.com:443
https://ssl.gstatic.com:443
http://b.sharethrough.com
http://btlr.sharethrough.com
https://syndication.twitter.com:443
http://u.openx.net
https://l.fairblocker.com:443
http://static.sharethrough.com
http://js.moatads.com
http://gv.symcd.com
https://log.pinterest.com:443
http://s.moatads.com
https://securepubads.g.doubleclick.net:443
http://us-u.openx.net
http://p.rfihub.com
http://sync.mathtag.com
http://r.turn.com
http://cm.g.doubleclick.net
http://ib.adnxs.com
https://adx.g.doubleclick.net:443
https://usefb.adsrvr.org:443
https://ad.adsrvr.org:443
https://choices.truste.com:443
http://www.google.com
http://pagead2.googlesyn ...


Yeah, with a hat trick of Adblock, Greasemonkey and Ghostery, I still get the TF ads, the Fark TV/WTFark ads and the sponsored shiat. Any recommendations for new filters welcome.
 
Displayed 50 of 61 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report