RKG Logo

On Tuesday, we released a nifty little tool with a funny name: RKG Duck, a Windows Clipboard Filter.

By Thursday, an exact search on google for “RKG Duck”, with the search phrase in quotes, brought back over 2000 results.

made for adsense2000 new pages in 48 hours! Boy, those webmasters must have burned the midnight oil generating valuable novel content about our software and…

Nope.

Almost every one of those 2000 are the output of the scraper parasites built to exploit advertisers via Google’s content network.

“MFA”, or “Made For AdSense”. Trash pages set up by spiders run by Bad Guys to rip off online advertisers.

Yuck.

Last year, a decidedly unscientific experiment suggested about 8% of all pages on the web are MFA trash. My intuition is that estimate was low then, and is wildly low now.

Because of the business model Google established, AdSense spam flourishes. Google’s battle to keep Bad Guys out of content increases in difficulty every day.

Historically our agency has found the content networks weak, but interestingly we’re seeing signs of some improvement from Google content clicks during the last quarter of 2007. We take that as evidence that Google’s getting better at keeping trash sites out the content network.

We look forward to a future when when content click fraud vanishes, when advertiser-funded Google checks stop flowing to trash MFA publishers, and when spiders stop harassing our duck.

Quack, quack.


Related links

If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.

Share this post (via email, Digg, Delicious, etc)

Similar Posts

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2008/01/25/mfa-duck/trackback/

Comments

  1. Zfreud, January 25, 2008:

    It continues to astound me the free pass that Google gets from the industry when it comes to how they manage Adsense. With one mouth they talk about their endless fight against SE spam and how much they do to combat it. With the other, they have setup a system that automatically approves tens of thousands of MFA sites that scrape other users copyrighted content. It is disingenous in the extreme and I really hope they are one day held liable in a court of law for this enabling of copyright theft from which they profit enormously.

    The way Google manages Adsense is akin to the way oil companies deal oil: they get rich polluting the web with garbage, all the while claiming they’re doing no evil. We need the press and the blogosphere to blow the lid off this racket.

  2. George Michie, January 25, 2008:

    The Web is still the proverbial Wild West, and freedom from governing bodies leads to both amazing innovation and a certain amount of chaos.

    I really don’t see Google as the evil beneficiary here. I think it’s darned difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff, and I think Google that they would make more money on content if they eliminated fraud and provided a better value for the ad dollar.

    It seems to me that there are two fundamental divides online that aught to play a roll within Google’s algorithm and indexation:

    1) Content generators vs recyclers (or thieves). This is critical but hard to determine. How can Google differentiate between the original and the copies?

    2) Retailers vs traffic aggregators. Which site actually sell the products vs those that simply link to other places.

    Seems to me that for product related searches Google and Yahoo could provide a better customer experience and help retailers as well by giving preference to content generating retailers.

  3. ZFreud, January 25, 2008:

    “How can Google differentiate the original and the copies?”

    At the risk of avoiding the deeper philosophical question, Google could go a long way towards making this differentiation by simply investing in technology along the lines of what Attributor.com is building. Techcrunch had a good review here .

    Another step? Not simply approving the thousands and thousands of MFA sites that come online everyday. Why not have some basic and sound guidelines instead of hiding behind the cloak of free speech?

  4. Jason, January 29, 2008:

    I wouldn’t say they are created to ripoff webmasters. While many do disguise their ads as nav links I see many many legit sites following Google’s guidelines to blend ads and they can be much more misleading.

    On one content network campaign I went through and blocked all the “junk sites” only to watch my conversions crumble. Once reinstated my conversions were back. Theory being, most people realize the site is crap and finally get what they want.

    The real issue is stealing peoples content and junking up the search engines. Which is the only reason I don’t have scraper sites of my own. I just wouldn’t feel comfortable, but I definately wouldn’t feel that I was hurting the advertiser any more than following Google’s own publisher’s guidelines.

Your Comment

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Gab Goldenberg: Been reading your posts and George's and other RKG ones for a while Alan, and this both looks like fun and a very nice initiative!...
  • Alan Rimm-Kaufman: Terry -- Thanks for catching the smart quote problem -- Fixed above now, hopefully -- Cheers -- Alan
  • Msn Avatarları: very good, thank you..
  • Terry: OK, your website changes straight double quotes to smart quotes, so my post doesn't look right. Just replace the quotes in your formula in...
  • Terry: 13. Tom, February 22, 2008: "When I do row B, it gives an “The formula contains unrecognized text”… And so when I paste the values,...
  • uttoransen: hi, nice article! actually it always the ROI that matters, is the sales are ok with the seo expense then it's always worth the service.
  • consultoria: RSS is one of the most amazing tools I've found in my programming career, it’s just amazing how this little XML file can create huge...
  • consultoria: It’s kind of hard to find a patterned way of creating good posts, I think experience, knowing trends, using viral and social roads...
  • Wadzie Kay: http://jott.com/default.aspx Does the above link still work,i desperately need software to transcribe words to text. I hope you will be...
  • Router Bench: So what happened? I am curious...
  • Alan Rimm-Kaufman: Yes, a dash of sensationalism can help, but going too far and writing titles only for link-baiting value doesn't feel good to...
  • Stephen Schramke: Definitely thought provoking... lots of grains of truth. Thanks for sharing!
  • Router Bench: Ahh so, Ok I get it. But don't you think that titles that are self aggrandizing or exaggerate the subject can also be more effective....
  • Alan Rimm-Kaufman: Most important words first. Not unlike optimizing a HTML TITLE tag for SEO.
  • Router Bench: Here is where I decided to be a little different, I use a few different plugins starting with Aksimet to allow me to moderate first...

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 729
  • Words: 322,676
  • Comments: 1,175

Administration

Close
  • Social Web
  • E-mail
Powered by ShareThis