# The real problem with the Google ads (it ain't pretty) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 14, 2005, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182 "2005-10-14T04:46:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/61 "2005-10-18T00:26:49Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > IIn answer then, yes, you did say that. Uh huh. > [@](#): > > And further, in case you haven’t noticed, there are quite a number of members here who’ve said they both find the ads of interest and have also clicked thru to learn more. You’re twisting my words. Google ads is a generic ad method that could be applied to any board. It is not tailored to the SDMB, which I what I _was_ recommending. If it turns out that Google ads is as good as a tailored ad program that highly pleases Dopers, then you’re right and I’m wrong. I don’t think it will please many poeple, however; which I can still respect if it makes money, which I don’t think it will do either, per my calculations, which seem not to be overly controversial in this thread. > [@](#): > > Are all your marketing recommendations as thorough and well-thought out as the supposedly valuable nugget you dropped in here? It just gets better ‘n’ better. > [@](#): > > 'Cuz I’m less than impressed. You can trust I have greater goals in life than impressing you. > [@](#): > > Not only are your tactics and strategies incredibly lame (at least I think they are since you’re proposing the same targeted advertising scheme you’re bitching about), Yeah, they’re just _totally_ off-base. > [@](#): > > your assumptions on the financial side seem to be questionable, too. Why do you think so? And when did you become such a fuckin’ tool? ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/62 "2005-10-18T00:29:26Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Maybe we’re just seperating some of the chaff. IMO if they are gonna leave for that reason, then either this board wasn’t important to them to begin with, or they lack cognitive ability and don’t realize that advertisements are what make this here intarweb possible. Yes, the ads are a Christ come to raise the deserving! We shall be PUR-I-FIED! ---
**Author:** ![Silentgoldfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@Silentgoldfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silentgoldfish)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/63 "2005-10-18T05:22:57Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Maybe we’re just seperating some of the chaff. IMO if they are gonna leave for that reason, then either this board wasn’t important to them to begin with, or they lack cognitive ability and don’t realize that advertisements are what make this here intarweb possible. And eventually when it’s 40 of you still here wondering where everyone went I hope you’re still happy. By the way, “this here intarweb” was around long before internet advertising and it will be around long after some newer and better model of selling crap is invented. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/64 "2005-10-18T05:56:15Z")
> [@Silentgoldfish](#): > > And eventually when it’s 40 of you still here wondering where everyone went I hope you’re still happy. Actually, I don’t think bigger is neccessarily better. If the Google ads chase off a thousand people, that’s not a bug, it’s a feature. ---
**Author:** ![Silentgoldfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@Silentgoldfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silentgoldfish)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/65 "2005-10-18T09:32:07Z")
> [@furt](#): > > Actually, I don’t think bigger is neccessarily better. If the Google ads chase off a thousand people, that’s not a bug, it’s a feature. You’d be right if this wasn’t a general interest forum. If a thousand people leave GQ it’ll become a wasteland rather than what is ostensibly the backbone of the 'dope. If your idea of heaven is MPSIMS and nothing but, I guess there’s nothing to discuss, but whittling the whole board down to its weakest forum really doesn’t sound like a smart move. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/66 "2005-10-18T13:02:49Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > Uh huh.You’re twisting my words. Google ads is a generic ad method that could be applied to any board. It is not tailored to the SDMB, which I what I _was_ recommending. I’m not twisting your words; I fucking used them verbatim. Your plan is targeted advertising. Nothing more, nothing less. And it would use exactly the same keys to tailor its ads that the Google ads use - thread content. It would **have** to use thread content, because there just ain’t anything else. So, while your individual results might be a bit different, the net effect would be remarkably similar. Again, it would **have** to be because your ads are gonna come from the same pool of potential advertisers. Unless, of course, you’re gonna use an averaged profile of the people reading the newspaper(s) in which the Straight Dope appears. That, however, would be flawed; I doubt there’s a lot of crossover between the two groups of people. > [@](#): > > And when did you become such a fuckin’ tool? About when I signed up for the boards six years ago and graduated tool school. Since then pointing out stupid ideas has become both a hobby and a vocation. And your “plan” certainly qualifies. Especially if one judges by the same criteria you’ve used to judge the Google ads. You’re gonna use the same inputs, the same strategy, and the same outputs as what we’ve got now. Ergo, if it’s stupid now under the current scheme (as you claim), it’ll be stupid later under your scheme. But what the hell; I can play along with stupidity for a time. Tell me how your “plan” **isn’t** targeted advertising? And keep in mind this is how you described your strategy: > [@Aeschines](#): > > Or, best of all, have the ads _somehow or another_ be something in which Dopers will actually take interest and view as a positive. I admit that that’s not easy, but it can be done. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/67 "2005-10-18T13:22:25Z")
> [@furt](#): > > Actually, I don’t think bigger is neccessarily better. If the Google ads chase off a thousand people, that’s not a bug, it’s a feature. What a pain in the ass you are trying to be. Anything that would chase you off would be a godsend. I’m not especially against these ads, but your grovelling at the feet of Madison Avenue is seriously getting on my nerves. Perhaps you could quit with the one-liners. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/68 "2005-10-18T13:43:27Z")
> [@Silentgoldfish](#): > > By the way, “this here intarweb” was around long before internet advertising and it will be around long after some newer and better model of selling crap is invented. A better model for selling crap than . . . _advertising_? That’s been around a lot longer than “this here intarweb.” It’s only now that technology has proven adaptable to effectively (more or less) advertise on the 'Net. And I suspect advertising will be around a long time after “some newer and better model of ‘intarweb’” is deployed - complete with advertising. Methinks your chronology, and therefore, your reasoning, is suspect. > [@Silentgoldfish](#): > > And eventually when it’s 40 of you still here wondering where everyone went I hope you’re still happy. If the advertising offend you off so greatly, why not follow the yellow brick road now and save yourself months of aggravation? Or is it just too difficult to act according to principles when there’s $7.48 at stake? ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/69 "2005-10-18T14:11:57Z")
I’ma don’t get it – all this hostility. However, I know that I can’t argue with one’s perception, in that it is true for that person. My perception is that we had slow boards, alot of users and a solution developed by some pretty intelligent folks, in the form of a small fee. Okay, I’m game. I was mortified by the backlash at fees. However, since many folks were penniless numbnuts who acted like they knew it all about life/economy/politics and probably lived in squalor at the hands of their own doings, I was not surprised after I reflected on just what was out there. Frankly, we filtered out alot of the worthless dopers. We have fewer Dopers, but a higher ratio of quality ones. Fees, ads, whatever. It is their product, not yours. Submit a business model and/or run your own ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/70 "2005-10-18T15:39:18Z")
**SilentGoldfish** Umm, any method of getting the word out about your product is by definition advertising. So there won’t ever be a better model than advertising, there just might be better ways to advertise. Personally adsense doesn’t bother me at all, and I think anyone that who is driven off by Google adsense is too stupid to warrant an audience in my chambers, so yes, I’d be happy to be rid of them, and I like google adsense, I’ve clicked on a few of the links myself and found some neat stuff based upon threads I chose to participate in. Erek ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/71 "2005-10-18T16:10:19Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > I’m not twisting your words; I fucking used them verbatim. Your plan is targeted advertising. I didn’t use the words “targeted advertising,” hence the twist. I’m not talking about links that alter based on thread content, that twist and writhe like snakes based upon Doper emotions. I’m talking about developing long-term sponsors with products that are of particular interest to Dopers. I hope that this simple concept has penetrated your think noggin. :rolleyes: And, by the way, I don’t think that the idea of appealing advertising was the heart and soul of my advice. Admittedly, it’s a no-brainer. But I’ve never expected the Reader to have a brain. > [@](#): > > Unless, of course, you’re gonna use an averaged profile of the people reading the newspaper(s) in which the Straight Dope appears. That, however, would be flawed; I doubt there’s a lot of crossover between the two groups of people. I already recognized that, moron. > [@](#): > > About when I signed up for the boards six years ago and graduated tool school. It’s clear that you graduated with honors. > [@](#): > > Since then pointing out stupid ideas has become both a hobby and a vocation. It’s clear you need to find a different line of work. And get out of the house more. > [@](#): > > But what the hell; I can play along with stupidity for a time. Seems like you’ve aspired to the stupid all your life. Keep it up. ---
**Author:** ![slaphead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9bcb4/32.png) [@slaphead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slaphead)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/72 "2005-10-18T16:49:35Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I’m talking about developing long-term sponsors with products that are of particular interest to Dopers. Such as? Bearing in mind that the whole attraction of the SDMB is the incredibly diverse community who have very little in common other than curiosity and a desire to ‘fight ignorance’? And how much is it going to cost to develop and run all this highly targeted advertising? GoogleAds are great because you show some financial return for basically zero investment - your scheme could potentially pay off big but also could potentially go belly-up and cost the Reader big-time. I’m sure they have enough headaches already without embarking on a chase for the dot-com gold at the end of the rainbow. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/73 "2005-10-18T17:51:09Z")
> [@slaphead](#): > > Such as? Bearing in mind that the whole attraction of the SDMB is the incredibly diverse community who have very little in common other than curiosity and a desire to ‘fight ignorance’? The key here is _community_. That’s what Dopers have in common. You can sell events and other products to the community. At the events you sell hot dogs or whatever. I’m not saying it’s going to make millions, but it could be run like a small business that makes 50k in profit or so a year. > [@](#): > > And how much is it going to cost to develop and run all this highly targeted advertising? BTW, all advertising is “targeted.” Do you think TV spots run without any regard to demographics. And a marketing package for the Dope would not be hard or expensive to develop. > [@](#): > > GoogleAds are great because you show some financial return for basically zero investment - your scheme could potentially pay off big but also could potentially go belly-up and cost the Reader big-time. Google ads might be “great” in the sense you mention, but my overall point is that they will not bring in the survival money, and the Reader is blowing a chance to turn the Dope into something self-sustaining. > [@](#): > > I’m sure they have enough headaches already without embarking on a chase for the dot-com gold at the end of the rainbow. Yeah, it’s such pie in the sky to make a few bucks off a fairly consistent community of people. ---
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/74 "2005-10-18T17:55:27Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I’m talking about developing long-term sponsors with products that are of particular interest to Dopers. Name one. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/75 "2005-10-18T19:09:26Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > I’m not especially against these ads, but your grovelling at the feet of Madison Avenue is seriously getting on my nerves. Perhaps you could quit with the one-liners. It’s not grevelling at the feet of Madison Avenue; it’s a knowledege that the the level of discourse here was much higher when we had a much smaller membership. I’ve seen the SDMB grow from a small discussion board of very bright people to its current cacophony of the bright, and, increasingly, the not-so-bright. While admitting **Silentgoldfish** is right about GQ benefitting from the larger membership, on the whole, I think that (at least for the things I care about)smaller is better. If we can get the naive and easily-offended to self-select their way off, that’s a plus, not a minus. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/76 "2005-10-18T19:40:36Z")
> [@furt](#): > > If we can get the naive and easily-offended to self-select their way off, that’s a plus, not a minus. You seem to be assuming that an aversion to ads automatically equals naive and easily-offended. I’ll disagree with that. I think that the pay for post got rid of the bulk of the type of people you’re talking about, anyway. ---
**Author:** ![JohnBckWLD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JohnBckWLD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnBckWLD)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/77 "2005-10-18T21:15:27Z")
> [@Priceguy](#): > > Name one (long-term sponsor with products that are of particular interest to Dopers) Anime.co.jp Burger King Clifford’s Interactive Storybooks DC Comics Easy Chairs Fabulous Forums of Fathom Gastric Bypass Surgery Hillary '08 Inspector Gadget Jeopardy! Klingon Costumes > **[Lucasfilm Ltd. | Lucasfilm.com](https://www.lucasfilm.com/)** > > Founded in 1971, Lucasfilm is one of the world's leading entertainment companies and home to the legendary Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises. Mother Jones Nintendo The Onion Pet Smart Qur’an (English Edition) [RainbowGuide.com](http://RainbowGuide.com) Slim-Fast The Tolkien Society Uncircumsizing For Dummies Velveeta Cheeese Products Worker’s Party Xanax Yoda Figurines Zoloft Not everyone, of course 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/78 "2005-10-18T21:37:57Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I didn’t use the words “targeted advertising,” hence the twist. I’m not talking about links that alter based on thread content, that twist and writhe like snakes based upon Doper emotions. I’m talking about developing long-term sponsors with products that are of particular interest to Dopers. One big advantage of the Google ads is that they’re text only. I find text-only ads to be far less annoying than image-based ads (particularly animated ads, barf), and so far the only text-only ads I’ve ever seen were Google ads. I’m not sure you could convince a long-term sponsor to pony up much for a text-only ad on a single message board. ---
**Author:** ![Moirai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/96bed5/32.png) [@Moirai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moirai)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/79 "2005-10-18T21:47:36Z")
Seriously, these ads are so discreet compared to what they could be (and are, other places). How can this be such a big deal for people? They are stuck way down at the bottom of the page; as **Giraffe** noted, they are text-only; frankly, I hardly notice them. Isn’t there something more substantial to get people’s panties in a bunch about? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Silentgoldfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@Silentgoldfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silentgoldfish)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2005, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182/80 "2005-10-18T22:45:38Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > If the advertising offend you off so greatly, why not follow the yellow brick road now and save yourself months of aggravation? Or is it just too difficult to act according to principles when there’s $7.48 at stake? :rolleyes: I’m here till March, or whenever my subscription runs out. I’ve paid till then, so why not? I know that my two favourite posters are currently thinking the same way. If the only people who will eventually still be around are like you I’m not going to be missing much. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-real-problem-with-the-google-ads-it-aint-pretty/326182.md?page=5)