Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.
Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.
Google AdSense pays out over $1bn in revenue every quarter of the year to publishers. For many of these publishers, especially smaller ones, AdSense is a primary source of revenue.
Yet there's something interesting about AdSense: publishers don't know the exact percentage they're being paid by Google for ad revenue their sites generate.
Publishers could be missing out when it comes to international visitors to their sites, with only 17% of revenue coming from overseas visits, despite international traffic accounting for 28% of visits.
Think you're tracking just about every possible user metric on your website? But what about, say, copy and pastes?
If you have an insatiable appetite for tracking everything, a nifty little product from a company called Tynt is probably going to excite you. It tracks how many times users copy and paste your content and increases the chances that those copy and pastes will turn into backlinks.
Google relies on media links to calculate PageRank, a gauge of website authority. These links bring order to search results, which is why everyone uses Google, which is why they make so much money. Brands therefore need media links to achieve SEO success in Google, which is fair enough.
But what do media owners get for providing the authority map behind Google’s meteoric rise? Plummeting advertising revenues as Google hoovers up the lot. This seems a bit of a kick in the teeth, but what can they do about it?
The proposed settlement in the class action lawsuit over Google Books has proven to be quite controversial. Amazon, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are among those questioning the proposed settlement. On the other side, Sony, the Computer & Communication Industry Association and the Authors Guild are among those supporting the settlement.
Opponents claim that the settlement will give Google a virtual monopoly over online books. Supporters claim that the settlement will benefit consumers and does not preclude others from competing in the market.
Question: why must news sites like Reuters split their stories over multiple pages? Is it because they’re desperate, misguided, hate readers, and are aiming to further commoditise their ad revenues?
Publishers need to be called out for pulling this dirty trick on unwitting visitors. It is aimed at doing one thing: boosting page impressions. After all, why settle for just one page impression when you can have many?
Well, it needs saying: publishers that give a shit about readers and advertisers simply do not do this. The way I see it, only those publishers that want to artificially inflate page impressions and loathe their readers adopt pagination.
It's a swinish technique...
One of the most annoying things for me is the automatic playing of audio when you arrive at a webpage, and I've come across a few examples of this on a couple of publishers' websites lately.
There is a trend over the last year or so for news websites to add video players showing things like Premier League highlights next to articles. This gives users another reason to come to the site, but publishers should be careful not to annoy users with intrusive audio.
A website I run is undergoing a makeover and is down for the day, and I wanted to show somebody the old version. As such I aimed for the Google cache, which is useful in this sort of situation.
I noticed that the cache had updated in the early hours of the morning, and as such I couldn’t see our old site. Bugger.
It seems that Google is caching news sites with increasing frequency. Yet some newspaper websites don't like Google caching at all...