Hello. Thought I would share this with all of you. Today at SES, there was an interesting session about click fraud with representatives from Google, Yahoo, Ask, Click Forensics, Click Tracks and a few others. From the beginning, the gloves were off between one of Google's Product Manager's Shuman (can't remember his last name) and the third party click fraud auditing firms (Click Forensics to be exact). To make a long story short, Google released (today) a report (on the google blog) that they claim basically debunks the methodology (rather, the way Forensics counts clicks) and he said and I quote "there are NO flaws in the way Google tracks click fraud -- invalid clicks). This is obviously bs! Number one. They did not share this report with any parties that were part of the study prior to its release. It basically caught Forensics off gaurd and looking at his facial expressions and body language, he was pissed and he couldn't even respond. Number two. Shuman is an arrogant jerk. The way he interacted with the rest of the panel was out of line. But, I guess he can act that way as long as he works for Goliath! So far, the SES conference is awesome. The buzz is really centered around the following topics: - blog marketing - behavioral targeting - Social Search (digg, del.i.cious, etc) Take care
no, nothing that we don't already know. The guy from Microsoft talked about some future enhancements but he didn't go into detail.
I think it's more than working for Goliath and may not be arrogance. I admire Google on a number of fronts, they can do very well on server side and also do very well in designing and redesigning the user interface for Adwords and other apps. I do believe the vast majority of schemes to defraud Google are known before they ever happen. I also expect a certain amount of fraud just like you should expect an amount of cheating in any aspect of life. I attended a panel discussion at the University of California, Irvine a few months back with a panel made up of Google, MSN, and a media firm that manages campaigns for Fortune 100 companies. I have seen some of the premiminary tests one goes through to go to work for Google and it shows they want a high level of brilliance and ability to think about many subject from different angles. The Google rep was clearly the brightest one in the bunch, she wasn't put on the defensive but I am sure she would have shredded any attact. Big guys can take cheap shots for a while but I don't blame them if they fire back eventually.
great post Tbarr. I have had allot of interaction with Google over the years and I must say that in dealing with them, there is always a sense of arrogance in the way they interact with people, even customers. On the other hand, Google is the number one engine when looking at metrics i.e. ctr, conversions, etc.
The Director of Ad Sales that I talked to was quiet pleasant while she was easily the brightest one one the panel and probably was the smartest person in this room with 100+ MBA students and alumni. I would hope they wouldn't come off as condesending to customer but I don't mind them attacking back when attacked. If the Click Forensic guys claims were shaky or unfounded and he knew it, he is making profits while hurting Google's profits, that is very close to stealing.