Category: Journal ISSN 1078-1935

Google Search, AdSense, and Other Pressures

I read “Google Is Enraged By A Fake Conspiracy Theory That It Is Stealing Money From Publishers.” My initial reaction was, “Google seems to have a low threshold for pain.” I continue to hear and read that the shift from desktop Web surfing to whiz bang mobile devices is putting some pressure on Web sites that are designed to make money. This blog is free and every couple of months I try to figure out how to get the paltry sum Google says I have earned.

The article does not address my concerns about AdSense. I don’t have much at stake with my personal blog. Heck, after hitting the big seven oh, I am lucky to remember that I have a blog.

The article points out something that I found mildly interesting:

an alleged former Google employee who claims the company systematically banned hundreds of Web publishers from its AdSense advertising system simply because they were making too much money.

That comment gets into the notion of trust, but apparently the “leader” was a fake. Business Insider did not peg the false information method as disinformation, misinformation, or reformation.

The article points out that a Googler explained that Google does not penalize anyone using AdSense.

But for years, I have heard about Web sites that experienced some AdSense anomalies. For example, I was asked by one Web site owner to look at data about the company’s AdSense earnings. I worked through the information and noted one anomaly. It seemed that variances in the amount paid to the Web site owner ramped up as Google approached the end of a fiscal quarter.

I have only a sample of one, so I want to emphasize that this situation may be an anomaly, or in fancy talk, an outlier.

Google’s fast response to the false story struck me as interesting. Google is not exactly the most rapid response outfit I have come across.

I have several questions:

1. Are there other Web sites using AdSense that have periodic anomalies? It would be interesting to learn about payment deltas so I can figure out if my analysis was an odd duck or something more interesting, maybe a snail darter.
2. Why is Google so vociferous with regard to a one shot article? The reaction in itself was fascinating because of its speed and the delivery of the message from a person at Google who has the job of balancing search engine optimization with the Google need to sell ads.
3. What financial pressures are mounting at Google as the emergence of New Age searching pushes down the value of certain types of online advertising?

If I were younger, I suppose I could build a head of steam about the fake story, the Google reaction, and the experiences of other AdSense dependent sites. Well, I am not. I don’t care because Google, like other companies, may have its work cut out for it in the months and years ahead. AdSense may be the least of Google’s worries. Plus is exciting. Glass is exciting. Management churn is exciting. You get the idea.

Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2014

When I first saw this yesterday, the first thing I thought was the Air Force or DOD conducted a successful experiment. Today, Wayne Madsen chimes in saying “What is the Air Force and CIA playing with now? Some new toy that could do the same with computerized Russian air defense networks? Count on it.” http://waynemadsenreport.com/categories/20130101_1

“A relic from the Cold War appears to have triggered a software glitch at a major air traffic control center in California Wednesday that led to delays and cancellations of hundreds of flights across the country, sources familiar with the incident told NBC News. On Wednesday at about 2 p.m., according to sources, a U-2 spy plane, the same type of aircraft that flew high-altitude spy missions over Russia 50 years ago, passed through the airspace monitored by the L.A. Air Route Traffic Control Center in Palmdale, Calif. The L.A. Center handles landings and departures at the region’s major airports, including Los Angeles International (LAX), San Diego and Las Vegas. The computers at the L.A. Center are programmed to keep commercial airliners and other aircraft from colliding with each other. The U-2 was flying at 60,000 feet, but the computers were attempting to keep it from colliding with planes that were actually miles beneath it. Though the exact technical causes are not known, the spy plane’s altitude and route apparently overloaded a computer system called ERAM, which generates display data for air-traffic controllers. Back-up computer systems also failed. As a result, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had to stop accepting flights into airspace managed by the L.A. Center, issuing a nationwide ground stop that lasted for about an hour and affected thousands of passengers.”

More:

Spy Plane Fries Air Traffic Control Computers, Shuts Down LAX