NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Campaign Auditing vs. Fraud
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Campaign Auditing vs. Fraud
Mark J. Welch (MarkWelch_at_MarkWelch.com)
Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:00:54 -0600 (CST)
TERRELL MITCHELL WROTE:
>> * * * it is possible to write software that runs on
>> a machine and using ip-spoofing generates requests to web
>> sites that look like they come from all over the world. I
>> would never touch the web server. All logs would be
>> unmodified by me. The server would actually believe it was
>> serviceing requests from there various places, and the
> >messages would never leave the local lan.
>> As long as advertisers pay on a per view basis, there is the
>> issue of fraud.
CHRIS ELWELL REPLIED:
> On another level, I can't believe that reputable sites would
> risk what's described above. We sell on two things: audience
> and reputation. Diminishing the value of either could ruin a
> career and a business.
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry, Chris. Many sites, including many sites that appear
reputable and consider themselves reputable, have been
caught playing this game -- generating fake adviews that
look credible, generating fake clickthroughs that look
credible, and even generating fake "depth" and "persistence"
activity that looks credible. I have caught a number of
sites, including some sites that seemed awfully reputable to
me, in some very suspicious activity.
Sure, it can value the business, and the career, of the
person who does it. But the technical ease of some
techniques (and the reward) is tremendous.
To be honest, what I really fear is not "gross abuse." What
I fear most is "mild abuse" -- generating 10% or 20% extra
inventory via fraud. That is much harder to detect.
Another problem is that vendors who have addressed these
problems and found techniques to catch "cheaters" have NO
financial incentive to share their findings, or even the
names of the cheaters. They make the investment (often
running into hundreds of thousands of dollars in staff time
and extra technology) to identify and detect cheaters, and
they will not hand their results FREE to their competitors.
Nor will they disclose the techniques they use to their own
customers (making it impossible to judge the claims of many
ad networks and auditing firms that keep claiming that they
have all kinds of techniques but who refuse to disclose
any).
-- Mark J. Welch, Web Site Banner Advertising
-- http://www.markwelch.com/bannerad/
-- Ad rates: http://www.markwelch.com/bannerad/baf_spon.htm
-- (925) 462-8483 voice - Pleasanton, California
========================================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
The Mining Co. and MarketWave
NOBODY DELIVERS ONLINE BUYERS LIKE THE MINING CO. _at_Plan's Fall Release
says Mining Co. users are more likely to buy online than users of other
navigation sites. To reach them, contact Alan Wragg (awragg_at_miningco.com)
---
Which banner sent more QUALIFIED traffic? The one on Yahoo or Excite?
Hit List can tell you. Click here to find out how.
http://www.marketwave.com/default.htm?AdName=OA3&AdSource=OA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
========================================================================
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
