Advertising on DU: Friday May 26 Update

First we want to thank everyone for your patience and understanding, and also for your valuable feedback (both positive and negative) in regards to the Google ads that we've been testing on our website for the last 24 hours.

We also want to especially thank everyone who has donated to Democratic Underground. We know that many of you are disappointed to see us testing ads so soon after you donated. As I said in my Wednesday announcement: The last thing on earth we want to do is to annoy the people who have been donating for the last five and a half years years to keep this website online. I promise that this testing period is not going to last forever, and one of our main goals is to find a solution that is acceptable to all of you.

As we promised, we have been moving things around and testing different configurations on our site, and we plan to continue doing so. We've already learned a lot of interesting stuff from this brief experiment that will help us design the best possible advertising plan for DU and for our visitors, such as:

- The AdSense program is actually a lot more effective than it was back in 2003. But it's not perfect. The targeting is not great, it serves up a fair number of ads that are of little interest to our visitors, and it seems to get hung-up on certain keywords even if there is only one thread on the entire DU website with those words. Hopefully it will get smarter after a while. But even with those problems, the click-rate and the cost-per-impression has been pretty good.

- Ads seem to get different click-through rates for donors versus non-donors and registered versus unregistered members. We are considering our options for changing or turning off-ads for people who donate, but we need some more stats before we make a decision.

- Ad placement is extremely important for click-through rates. But unfortunately some of the most effective placements for click-rates are also the most annoying to visitors. We have to strike a balance that allows for decent placement of the ads, but is not antagonistic to site visitors.

- Ads placed in the middle of discussion threads are extremely annoying for visitors and for DU administrators. Removing those ads made a big difference for usability.

- Click-through rates are very high when new ads show up, but they quickly decline. While the ads seem to be doing pretty well right now, we wonder where the performance will level-off once DUers get accustomed to seeing them on the site.

- I think I've seen enough Pink Floyd ads to last me for the rest of my life.

We've decided that we're going to continue with our experimentation over the weekend, and we're going to try a different ad placement to see how it effects click-through rates.

Right now, Elad is in the process of stripping out all the Google Ads from the site and replacing them with a single large banner ad at the top of every page. We believe that this less-aggressive placement will be significantly less noticeable for visitors, and for that reason we expect that you will prefer it. But we also believe that people will probably be less likely to click the ads than they do now. The question we're trying to answer is: How much worse will the new placement perform?

We plan to keep the ads on this less-aggressive placement throughout the Memorial Weekend, to see how click rates decrease over time, once people get habituated to seeing the ads.

Next Tuesday, we'll take a look at the stats we've collected, and then we'll probably mix the ads up again and try out some new configuration.

We apologize that we keep fiddling around and experimenting. Our goal is to find the best possible ad placement that strikes a satisfactory balance that makes us a decent amount of revenue, but does not annoy our visitors.

Thank you for your patience and your support.

Skinner, EarlG, Elad
DU Administrators

peace

Plotting the keywords I'll put in my threads over the coming days...oh, they'll spark interest, just you wait and see...mwahahahahaha
:evilgrin:

:evilgrin:

They add visual interest since they include graphics, and they are not as distracting and annoying as the text ads.

(I was thinking that before I saw this post.)

It is appreciated by all, I am sure.

A few ads will not keep me off of this site, that's for sure. And if they make you money, more power to you.

All the hot air here wouldn't float even one balloon. What's good for DU, is good for me. May DU live long and prosper.

Can't get it out of my head...


My compliments on how well you are fine-tuning this project, and keeping us informed.

Over the years I seem to have developed a ad filter and I don't even see ads on a website since all I want is the content. But I have a super fast connection and I would feel differently if I was using a dial-up modem and everything slowed down to load graphics, animations, bells and whistles.

but now I know I'm really bad. I honestly have not noticed anything different about DU. And I even knew it was coming!

I donated and I couldn't care less what you do to keep the site going. I'm not going anywhere.

THANKS!

They do cause and extra scroll down but they are damned funny at least some of them are.

I don't find the ads annoying at all. And if it brings more money to my favorite website and helps it stay on the net - COOL!

extensively sooner. Good for you. It's a good way to earn $$$. And we need to keep this site viable.

I put them on the very top of the page where they are not too intrusive to my visitors, but I get good results that way and make money to boot... I thought why doesn't DU do this as well?

without posting a link to the blog...

is it the russ for president or something else?

it is a site..

http://holidaygraphics.com/

enjoy :hi:

you crazy diamond!

Seeing the ads come in, changing them up watching them fine tune. We're watching the evolution of the internet.

Enjoy the ride.

The only thing I had a problem with was the click here to take a survey ad which I think is usually an e-mail collection website.

I hope that you guys can ask not have any ads for sites that collect and sell personal data or install spyware. Some of our DUers who don't know better than to click the link will thank you!

I second your suggestion. But I wonder if Google even knows that information. Even if they ask advertisers, such people would probably lie.

....neocon/fundie controlled crazy world, then do what you have to do.

It says something about you guys when google contacts you instead of the other way around. :grouphug:

:applause: Thanks for keeping us up to date on all this. :applause:

I mean, what do you prefer - Britney Spears ads?

I find the plain text ads to be very unobtrusive, except for the brief time when they were in the middle of pages.

Frequently I get a mild chuckle out of them, like when they're advertising a Republican. It's like, what was the ad-bot thinking? Oh, yeah, bots don't think. They just pretend to think.

We apologize that we keep fiddling around and experimenting. I don't see any reason to apologize for that. I thank you for that. How else will you find a balance between useful to DU finances and minimally annoying to DUers?

I was just in a thread - this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2647330

The thread subject is Kosovo and every ad is right on target. Sure, they're commercial ads, travel, hotels, etc. But still it's a good match. I was surprised to see how good.

The google ads really didn't bother me that much, however it did make the Latest Page difficult to read.

The google ads don't bother me, but the flashing ads make me wild with anxiety, to the point where I don't read pages that have flashing ads, or scroll down to underneath before I start reading. Makes for a very disjointed DU experience.

I scroll past them and miss what is nearby.

I don't mind the ads in general.

So when you are rich will donors get a kickback?

annoying. I can just scroll up if I don't want to look at them. If you must have ads, that's the kind of placement I consider least offensive.

I can see them and decide if I want to click, but they are not in the way at all.

It seems we're going to get more ads whether we like it or not, and that the decision has been made and down it's down to the detail of positioning.

In that case, will DU continue to fundraise, and how will this affect DU groups, the search function and the other bonuses that donors receive?

...I think it should be fairly clear that nothing is decided at this point. We are still experimenting with the ads. I think it is safe to assume that we are going to incorporate the ads in some way, but right now we do not know where they will be or who will see them.

observation???

As an aside, if the fundraising can be wiped away, we all can spend that same money on causes and candidates, so I don't understand why there is so much resistance.

Finally, Yahoo! is current rolling out an intelligent ad serving engine that will reportedly take on Google head-on as its serving technology is supposedly more advanced in terms of relevance. The rollout will be done in August. Something to check out. They probably will deliver higher relevance and, since they're taking on Google, a higher commission.

on the subject and voicing a variety of concerns on each thread, but this is the first Admin response I have received. I appreciate that nothing is decided just yet, and I value the fact that you are giving us the opportunity to feed back in this way, as you you would be entirely within your rights to slam advertising into every nook and corner without even mentioning it.

However, I do have one question that has not been answered: If you had not received that cold call, would you be considering expanding advertising in this way?

Never mind, Skinner already answered :)

I have to say that I find the ads to be no problem. I've seen none that make me want to click on thru but that may change with time as the programs learn more of our interests. I will also continue to donate, as I'm sure others will also. A place like this is a very deep resource and well worth the donation.

If someone leaves DU because of ads, they probably are pissed at the world in general and the ads make little difference. You guys have got to make some money off this thing. No one can reasonably expect you guys to put the hours in that you do and do it all "for the cause" then get pissed because you'd like to get something extra for your efforts (which I might add surpass any and all expectations anyone could possibly have for a site like this!). Having done this type thing before, I know you guys ain't gettin' rich even with the ads and I hope no one accuses you of it.

The contents of the right hand column are down at the bottom of the page. :shrug:

I'll have to check and see if there is a bug in the code.

Let us know if your Latest Page is rendering properly.

:thumbsup:

I feel now like I'm looking at them because I want to.

Air America's site uses Ad Sense--why not check out the kind the ads they're getting?

:headbang:
rocknation

:yourock:

How about this:

if you donate above a certain amount, you can opt out of ads. Then your donors get a reward for contributing, and non donors get an incentive to start contributing.

Back in the stone age of the Internet, the 80's, there were some very successful resellers of email and email/database services who sold subscriptions to their services. These were in the $200-$400 range and that's quite a bit in 1988-92 dollars. The users would pay email costs (which were $20.00 an hour with everything included, prime time) and the subscription on top of that. The resellers would make money on the discount for the email and/or database service. But the lions share of revenue came from subscriptions. You needed specialized information for a vertical market but the successful programs relied on user generated content, augmented by their own sources. DU is not a pure vertical market but it could be seen as a specialty. The days of making good money with a 30% discount on email/databases are long gone but the subscription idea is ready for a comeback.

Maybe the strategy would be to emphasize more contributors with ads as a secondary revenue stream AND, at the same time, recruit more high volume-high quality posters so contributors would have a value added component. In this scheme, contributors would be able to opt out of ads (like NewGrounds did for a while before it started relying on naughty material;)

Just some thoughts.

of non-registered members seeing the ads, whereas registered do not. I belong to another site that does this. Seems to be a good idea. :)

Memorial Weekend may not be the best time to test this? Doesn't traffic on the site (as with most sites) usually decrease because people are actually out of the house doing things and not sitting on the computer vegging? Just a thought. :hi:

:thumbsup:

DemEx

Enough Pink Floyd ads. They were sort of overrated anyway, imo and since I quit doing drugs, I don't care for a lot of their stuff, although "Money" remains a classic at this house. We'll just have to wait and see how things go before making any judgements about ads.

adequate revenues in order to run a commercial concern.

But it'd be disingenuous of me to say that I think these adds are an improvement.

However, the entire internet is changing, and business models are changing as part of this. Moreover, growth often entails changes of itself.

And considering that fund-raising is a pain, some (more or less) steady streams of income that do not come from member contributions are highly desirable. Plus, if an individual stream doesn't require much "maintenance", then so much the better.

But I have watched many sites change over the years, and these new (to here) sorts of ads are like a virus spreading from site to site. Now, maybe it's only a skin-deep infection, but still it's troubling.

So if (just about) any form of membership donations can do the job* (that is, without these ads), then I am all for it... although this would be, perhaps, just postponing the inevitable.

*: Some suggestions:

1) Maybe you should do the fund-drives in terms of dollars. Perhaps that's somewhat unseemly, but it tracks better to a business model. And just maybe it will encourage larger contributions. (You could also have a "hall of benefactors", where big donors (who so wish) could be given recognition.)

2) The hearts model generated the desired number of donations quickly, and while it might be expected to lose its luster over time, maybe something like it should be the standard model for fund-drives, although perhaps in changing form.

3) The sticky model did generate a certain amount of interest, and maybe there could be a big board (of some set size, so that elements get pushed off eventually) where people could post stickies at any time for a fee. Now, this would require a certain amount of moderation -- but relatively little compared to the posts, one would think.

4) Query the members for ideas. And maybe when you have some new feature that you are thinking about (and that the members want), you could have a fund-raiser to "fund" that feature.

5) Maybe you need to look (more) at how other sites do "sales", and try to find a model that works for a site like this, a site that's not oriented towards popular entertainment (gossip, various dish and dirt -- true or not, etc). I am of engineering bent myself, but I understand the importance of "sales" -- and those who understand selling.

(It's rather hard to write a piece like this and not sound somewhat... ah, preachy.)

Does that make me bad person?

Oooh... make millions of dollars working at home... yeah, I'll click on that ad, and make THAT dirtbag pay $0.005, while getting DU some money at the same time.

I like the new ad placement because they are out of the way, but I would bet a nickle that they don't generate as much click-through as the placement on the Latest page does. Also, for some strange reason, the ads in the banner format do not seem to be as interesting and/or as context sensitive as the ones on the Latest page. Especially the one-ofs that you put right in the middle of the threads on Latest. Those seemed much higher quality of appropriate than the banner ads are.

Oh, and this article on Google ads might interest you, it's specific about the Ad Sense algorithm:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1292846&mesg_id=1292846

basically Republicans who are fed up with the fundamentalists?

*Banner ad on the Greatest page

As a monthly contributor to DU, I would really, really like the option for suppressing ads on the site.

Mind you, I understand the economic pressures that make AdSense attractive (and I've considered it for some of my web sites). I'm willing to put up with ads if I browse a site without paying anything. Beggars can't be choosers, after all.

But as an enthusiastic financial supporter of DU, having the option to turn off ads would be a wonderful payback. And it could serve as a fund-raising motivator for anyone else who signs up for the monthly contribution to the site.

In this way you could create a tier of contribution benefits, much as NPR and PBS do with their contribution premiums. One-time quarterly contributions get you a star and use of search, monthly contributions get you the ad-suppression option.

"Block Javascript" option within firewall ZoneAlarmPro, for example, seems to suppress the Google Ads (and others) from appearing

ZoneAlarmPro Control Center
"Privacy" (left Menu choice)
---"Site List" (Tab)
------Right-click www.democraticunderground.com (from list of Sites)
----------Select "Options" (Right click on URL, select "Options" for a pop-up menu entitled "Site Options")
-------------Mobile Code Control (Tab)
---------------- ♦ Block Javascript

you can selectively grant Javascript access using NoScript instead of making an all-or-nothing decision.

still using IE, here, which lacks an equivalent to the Firefox feature, apparently. For IE, had trialed Ad-muncher (shareware), which works fine for selective filtering, though with some overhead on performance (and wallet...$25 :) )