Blending ads equals to deceiving your visitors. Do you agree?

I've been here for quite awhile and have read a lot of tips about blending ads and have seen many examples where the ads are blend in such a way that I feel that you're just trying to deceive your visitor to click on an ad.

Like some forums who blend their ads into what seems to be a subforum.
Or how blogs blend their ads into their own text, making it seems that they link to somewhere else.
Even the images-technique. It's just a way to let people believe that when you click on that link, you'll see more of that pic.

If I was a visitor myself and I got fooled into clicking such a link, I'd feel like that the webmaster played a prank on me. "HAHAH, you fell right into my trap" and probably won't hit the back button too.

Don't you think that deceiving your (valued?) visitor like this is just not the right thing to do?

 

"Tricking" isn't good. Border images, etc are usually meant to deceive. Blending is good.

 

depending on the blending
if you ... help your visitor to find and read the ad it's their choice to click it

 

I think it is win-win-win, as long as people are not tricked into clicking.

You win
google wins
and the advertiser wins because you came to their site.

 

No one forces them to click.

Plus it is certainly not illegal from Google point of view. In fact in Blogger beta it automatically blends the ads with your blog.

If you choose that option obviously.

 

No,
your visitor lose. Because (s)he thought she'd get more info. Instead got in an adpage.

you lose. Because that visitor feels cheated and won't come to your place anymore, or decide to use adblocks so (s)he won't get cheated anymore, or learns that there are traps like this and won't click on them anymore.

the advertisor lose. Because the visitor didn't want to go to their site (to buy things) at all, but got tricked to. So (s)he leaves quickly.

google lose. Because that visitor thinks that google ads are trickery now.

You tricked them to click because they thought they were getting another page from your site. They trusted you and you misused that trust.

Not illegal/not against the TOS does not equals to not immoral.

 

@treblexl

I understand your point.

I am not talking about Sites/blogs with Ads ONLY. I am talking about a site with both.

You think users actually are interested if the link goes to a page on your site or to another site?

E.g. If i have an assignment, and i am looking for information, and the deadline is near, i do not care if it is from the same site or from another site. What matters is that i satisfy my information need.

I have clicked on ads for those reasons, and people are looking for answers. Our aim as webmasters is to satisfy a need. It is the same in an offline or online market.

 

You didn't say in your initial post they were going to an adpage. My assumption is they are going to another informational site that piques their interest because they clicked on the link text.

 

Funny. I just wrote a (small) article on the matter: http://clesto.com/blog/2006/11/16/images-next-to-ads-yes-or-no/

 

This, to me, is a very gray area with no clear answers. what is "blending" anyway, if not to remove the mental obstacles between the act of clicking on content and clicking on ads?

even google recommends "blending". if they really, really, really wanted to segregate ads from content, they would say that all ads have to have borders, colors have to be different from content, etc.

 

I agree with what treblexl is saying.

It is of course important to blend the ads into your site otherwise it would look untidy and not pleasing to the eye. If a site isn't pleasing to the eye you are usually less likely to stay on it. Thats when its not deceiving its just so the site looks good.

But at the same time I don't agree with sites that merge the huge adsense banners across the top of their site, they blatantly just want clicks and don't care if the user goes anywhere else on their site. That is when it is deceiving.

 

Blending as google meant it to be is IMO to make the ads look better in sites and to avoid them being screamy and unpleasant. That is the image that google adsense became big > non-obtrusive blends.

But 80% of the topics in the placement forum proofs that the publishers thinks that blending means, changing your ad in such a way that it looks like it's part of the site which will link further to the site. IMO that is trickery.

And it doesn't have to be MFA-sites. Images next to the ads is one too. Forums which have googlelinks underneath the navbar.
Forums which makes the ads seems like subforums/topics.
Normal contentsites who places the ads in the articles is also the same.

 

In my mind, thats wrong.
If I have a page like this:


TITLE
content-content-content-content-
content-content-content-content-
content-content-content-content-
content-
Ads
content-content-content-content-
content-content-content-content-
content-content-content-content-
etc

And the person on my page sees the ad and thinks "ah, this link says I'll find out more about insomnia!" then I win (for the click), the visitor wins (they found what they were looking for), google wins (money) and the advertiser wins because they got a genuinely interested visitor!

 

I agree..

Also putting images next to the ads are also a deceiving move.

Google will wake up one day

Peace,

 

blending + border is best solution imo

 

I dont believe its deceiving at all. You are adding to the user experience by making available content/websites which contain information that your site doesnt. To me, it makes no difference whether the user clicks on an ad to view that information, or clicks on an internal link on your site, as long as they are finding the information they want.

 

Agreed, it's not deceiving it all. You do have to pay the bills, and they saw something they liked; they clicked it. Also, you should do it for looks too. I noticed that even one small ad can make your website ugly, blending an ad can make a big difference

 

Readers can see and know what they are clicking on. Not decieving at all. It adds more value to a page letting readers know of other possible information sources.

 

By blending, all we are doing is trying to avoid banner blindness or ad blindness. Your visitors don't pay you to access your site so there is nothing wrong with you trying to profit while still taking no money out of the pockets of your visitors.

I am wondering if you think Google is deceptive by using a mission statement focused on search when in reality they are focused on advertising. In fact you can even call Google's search page an MFA website!

 

well, as adsense/adword is a targeted ad campaign, clicking on ads will lead visitors to a relevant site where they may find what they are looking for.
so, no question of tricking or cheating.
and, blending ads definitely make site visually good.