This is EXACTLY why we need filtering by "keywords."

Just one example: I had to take Adsense off a site completely because of the word "FREE" which was running not only deceptive ads that weren't free but had strings attached (many leading to spam emails), but ads resulting in malware/spyware downloads.

How about all those diet ads with similar sounding ads with female name variations all pointing to the same place? I finally filled my competitive ad filter with nothing but these variations of the same ad. I've notified Google and nothing's happened.

We're close to pulling the plug on Google on this account for this reason. The ads are filling every channel and we will not provide aid to scam for a portion of the procedes. Money that originates from an unethical practice is dirty money in my opinion.

Atomic, I know just which ads you're referring to, and they're flooding the sites that get a *lot* of traffic from Google News about hot current issues.

There are loads of possible ad topics that would have value to targeted visitors (think books and memorabilia) but instead we're bombarded with irrelevant, untargeted drivel, and supposed to worry about our bellies. Mine is fine, so thanks but no thanks.

Added:

This is what needs modifying to screen out misleading & unethical advertising:

[adwords.google.com...]

[edited by: Marcia at 5:01 am (utc) on Dec. 1, 2008]

The other day I found *four* virtually identical ads for a certain widget, all leading to the same crap site, but using different domains on the .cn top level domain. No wonder they look the same - it's the same registrant.

Then there were *two* diet "blogs" with certain female names attached (see Atomic's post), both promoting the same product, but using different layouts. Advertised on the same page. Same server, same DNS, same private registration.

It's no surprise to me that noone is clicking any longer, especially when MY niche has nothing to do at all with the ad topics.

Bottom line: the amount of genuine ads seems to go really down, so that (for some publishers) the bottom feeders show up. These apparently do not get caught by any of the oh-so-smart Google algos. I guess Google mst be feeling the pain, too.

[edited by: zett at 6:32 am (utc) on Dec. 1, 2008]

About the diet ads, I checked one ad today and just to show you the length of sleaze these people go, there were fake comments by "users" at the bottom of the page all praising the product. Of course, there was no real way to post comments.

[edited by: martinibuster at 7:28 am (utc) on Dec. 1, 2008]
[edit reason] Removed Specifics. [/edit]

I'm not sure if this is quite the same as you meant, but with each month that passes the ad relevance on my sites seems to get further and further away from the site subject matter and content.

My Adsense revenue has been steadily decreasing since May 2007 (when it peaked), and November 2008 was yet another horrible month.

The main culprit right now appears to be low CTR but not so long ago CTR was fine so I don't believe ad placement is the problem. The nature of most of my sites, bar one, attracts few repeat visitors so I don't think the problem is ad blindness either. I believe the problem is irrelevant ads that visitors just aren't interested in.

A while back, I used the Adsense preview tool to clean things up and there was an improvement. However, I have just checked again and the irrelevant dross is back with a vengeance.

One site is a travel guide to a specific city in Southeast Asia. Visitors go to my site because they are interested in that specific city, of which there is very little information elsewhere online. Why then do they see general dating site ads for women of that country, or ads for hotels in cities hundreds (sometimes thousands) of miles away just because the hotels are in the same country - or even hotels in different countries?

Why, on another site that is for a private sports club, do visitors (normally playing members) see ads for a chimney sweep just because the chimney sweep happens to be based in that town? OK, maybe a playing member might have a blocked chimney but Adsense is supposed to be about targeted advertising and that is hardly targetted.

After a few sessions with the Adsense preview tool getting rid of this irrelevant dross my 'competitive ad filter' is almost full again but when it is full there won't be anything else I can do.

As you said, these irrelevant ads result in lost profit for both us and Google because the wrong audience is being targetted. Visitors aren't interested in irrelevant ads and therefore don't click.

The ads aren't competitive but the competitive ad filter is the only thing we have to deal with this problem; and the amount we can use it is restricted.

This is something that Google really needs to address - and soon.

I put 2 con man URLs in the filter.

The eCPM of the english version increased by around 150% after this action. The AdLinks created only for ths 2 con man vanished, now are there much better AdLinks.

I have a spreadsheet with all my filtered URLs

URL____date_____reason

It would be nice, when I would have this at my AdSense setings.

Instead of this simple TEXTAREA

Method = URL, Keywords in add or landing page, AdWords Publisher

Filter

Date applied

Comment field

Link to filtered ads
Link to filtered landing pages URLs
Link to filtered AdWords publisher

Method____Filter____Date____Comment____Filtered ads____URLs___AdWords Publihsers

As has been suggested here before, Google could be a lot cleverer when it comes to analysing what publishers are doing with their competitive ad filters. As you suggest, instead of just a simple textarea field they could solicit more information as to why publishers are blocking ads and then use that information to improve the whole programme. They must have their reasons for not doing so.

I don't have any such ads running on the type of sites I have; my complaint is seeing those ads is as a user, being confronted with irritating garbage ads all day long. And as I mentioned, these are high traffic, high profile mainstream sites, all of which I access either directly or mostly through links from Google News all day long (I'm a politics/election/news junkie).

What's most irritating and disturbing is that they're offensively deceptive - at best. I've clicked on one of them a few times, just out of curiosity, and the particular site is seen constantly - and traps you on the site when you try to leave.

WAIT! says the popup window. You can't close the browser because their window is "waiting for a response." The only way out is to re-boot the computer, usually by killing the power switch and then doing a cold boot.

There's no reason sites like that should be able to run ads at all, in the first place; my feeling is that they would more than likely be in violation of FTC or FDA regulations if checked out. And yes, I have "complained" by clicking on "Ads by Google" - to no avail.

As I said before, I think Google is seeing the problems of the financial crisis now. Advertisers are dropping out and are replaced by broad-match ads, bottom-feeders that try to aquire cheap traffic. To protect this revenue stream, Google looks the other way when approving such ads. All this is only possible because there are too few genuine advertisers left (some were dropping out for sure) AND there are more and more MFA sites popping up every day.

So we see decreasing demand (by advertisers) that is met by increased supply (by publishers) - the classic recipe for reduced prices. Not all sites will be hit by this though, and Google may even get out on-par, but the average revenue per publisher is decreasing. (We could verify this if Google would publish the numbers of publishers they currently have on the network. There must be a reason why they don't do this.)

What's most irritating and disturbing is that they're offensively deceptive - at best.

Yep. The amount of borderline ads (if not outright deceptive) is breathtaking. In my sector I estimate about 20% genuine ads (i.e. for genuine products & services, directly from the manufacturer), 30% affiliate schemes, and 50% borderline/deceptive ads (most of which are irrelevant for my sector).

Marcia, I agree. As a user, when I look at (for example) a high profile English language Thai newspaper site to see what's happening in Bangkok at the moment I don't want 336x280 ads staring me in the face telling me how to lose my fat stomach. And although I am very unlikely to click on the type of ads that lead me to sites I can't escape from without rebooting my computer, I don't want those either.

But also, as a publisher I hand over real estate to Google for ads. I want these ads to be relevant to my content so that they add value to my sites and provide the best opportunity for me to make a little money to help offset hosting charges.

This is all about quality control. Google isn't shy about insisting on a certain level of quality from its publishers but isn't this a two-way contract?

zett sums up the current situation very nicely. Google is fully aware of what is going on but first and foremost it is a business and in these tough economic times there is obviously a certain amount of 'looking the other way' going on to protect the revenue stream.

Despite my disappointment with falling revenues since midway through last year, however, Adsense continues to be the only program I have ever used that has actually paid me anything. My attempts with affiliate schemes over the years - and the addition of Amazon ads a few months ago - have not resulted in a single cent.

For that I am very grateful and, hopefully, once the general economy starts to pick up again, then Adsense revenues should also start to pick up again.

I've had it with the diet ads myself; have sent multiple complaints with screenshots, WHOIS results, etc to both AdSense and AdWords to no avail. I have some pages with recipes where three or four of the exact same ad going to the exact same page (except on a different url with maybe a different color scheme on the landing page) show up in the same ad block. So now I gotta go higher profile about how this whole scheme is run, and makes Google look stupid. (Obviously not here) It'll be out soon.

makes Google look stupid

Not so much stupid, but desparate. They seem to grab for every penny they can find, and be it by having such ads clog up their system (and make them look stupid as a consequence).

But wait! Weight loss ads. 4 of 10 ads. Hmmmm... Should tell me something, eh? Looking at my mirror image tells me I really need to do something (wife nods a confirmation)! OMG... Maybe the personalization and targeting REALLY works after all?! ;-)

really need to do something (wife nods a confirmation)! OMG... Maybe the personalization and targeting REALLY works after all?! ;-)

LOL... hardly! I'm as skinny as a rail (no belly problem, except that it needs to be fed more), and I'm as easy to track as a train.

I'd like to also mention that it isn't only Google; other ad networks are also glutted with those (pardon the pun). But it does seem like the 800 pound gorilla should be leading the way for ad relevancy.

Not so much stupid, but desparate.

No, stupid. They're being gamed so obviously and transparently that a million flags should be going up. Whether you believe me or not, they *don't* want to have this happen, because it absolutely affects the longterm viability of their ad network. And the short amount of cash (these ads can't be paying more than a few cents) won't make up for loss of credibility. So yea - *stupid*.

it's spelled desperate - sorry, can't help it, useta edit copy, ork ork