Ads Within Article Text

[jamieFL]

I don't know about others, but I really dislike the Google Ads you've put within the text portion of my articles. Recently, someone posted a question in the comments of one of my articles, and I had to reference the article to answer it. With the new ads, I had a hard time following my own article, that I wrote.

It's not that don't like ads. I do. I've even made purchases from advertisers because of their ads on your site. But, the Google Ads are distracting, irrelevant, and cheapen the site.

 

[mikeporterinmd]

I rather agree. I just tried to read your Taranis pitch adjustment article, and was fresh from watching the podcast with Megan and her thoughts on article design.

I'm sorry FT, but inserting ads in-stream breaks a lot of the six rules (Increases word count, breaks visual flow, introduces too many topics... hi Megan!) . Maybe one ad in the middle and the usual gaggle in the right hand column.

Another thing to consider: if too many people are unhappy with the article look, they are less likely to put forth the effort it takes to write them.

And finally: I was reading the NYTimes on my phone and noticed they did the same thing. However, the ads were far less obtrusive. I think it is because of the leading surrounding the ad, the clean text and that the ad was only a graphic while the article was pure text. The line between article and ad was clean and sharp. If the article contained photos, I'm fairly certain that the ad graphics would have confused the reader and ruined the look of the article.

Mike

 

[jamieFL]

Mike,

Thanks for putting my gripe into a cohesive thought.

JamieFL

 

[TazRC]

Whoever is putting the ads on the page (or template) is a rookie. Google suggests no more than 3 ads per page, and before the fold. More will oftentimes just hurt monetization. Up until recently, Google didn't even allow more than 3 ads per page. Shoot an email to the powers-to-be at FT and express your displeasure. FT wouldn't have succeeded without its followers.

 

[mikeporterinmd]

FT should be reading the forums and passing on what is written here.

Mike

 

[PsyBorg]

Ads are teh debil. Nothing irritates me more then when ads pop up in the middle of things I am reading that shift the page around so I have to hunt for where I was at either before or after closing the ad so I can continue. Or even worse are the video ads stuck way down the page somewhere where the volume is not muted OR so loud it makes you jump out of your skin because you don't see the motion of the video that prepares you for sound.

On the bright note.. my list of things NOT to buy because of ads is growing exponentially and saving me tons of money at some point.

 

[jamieFL]

I dont mind the ads in the header or sidebar, but they really messed up my article when they appeared within the article text, especially since they are so irrelevant.

I feel like a jerk, but I've unpublished my articles until FT weighs in.

 

[AustinFurey]

Hey guys, thank you for your concern and your general distain for advertisements. I couldn't agree more.

Ads are typically gross and interrupt a good content experience. I think that a lot of the comments here are absolutely warranted, especially when we first launched the inline ads. They were absolutely bananas annoying, sometimes up to 5 ads per small article.

We have done a ton of refining since launch and I think the ad experience is much more typical / industry standard.
For an example the Cessna 170 article (no rhyme or reason, just the first one I clicked) has 1 inline ad.
It is also topical (DJI Drones In Stock) which is a big deal to me.
http://flitetest.com/articles/cessna-170-review

There are a handful of websites out that that I think execute ads well and I hope we can become one of those sites. Relevant, tasteful and targeted ads are the goal.

I would ask (perhaps we can just use this thread) that if you see something super annoying, inappropriate or otherwise with advertising on the site, please post and we will release some FT.com gremlins to investigate and adjust.

While unfortunately we cannot select preferred categories of ads served on our site (for an example I would just select tech/drone/nerdy stuff I like) we CAN black list a limited amount of categories and unlimited advertisers all together. So that's why you'll never see weight loss, pharmaceuticals or other super gross ads.

Anyway, sorry for the text wall. Just letting you guys know that as we grow and develop the website, we do care what people think. Just for a little behind the scenes, I have advocated strongly in the past for removing all ads from the site. However over time I have realized how important it is as a revenue stream. We have a staff now of about 25 people (crazy!) and we are creating more free videos, articles, podcasts then ever. Monetizing content enables us to keep making more.

We are still evaluating if the juice is worth the squeeze with inline ads. I hope that as Google "sees" more of what our site is about, it serves more relevant ads. I have seen ads for Horizon Hobby, DJI, Part 107 Test Prep etc. Those make me happy because those are ads I think someone would actually want to see and potentially click on.

Cheers folks!
Austin - Business and Operations Manager

 

[TazRC]

[Clip]

We are still evaluating if the juice is worth the squeeze with inline ads. I hope that as Google "sees" more of what our site is about, it serves more relevant ads. I have seen ads for Horizon Hobby, DJI, Part 107 Test Prep etc. Those make me happy because those are ads I think someone would actually want to see and potentially click on.

Cheers folks!
Austin - Business and Operations Manager

May I suggest a good article?

AdSense Matched Content: https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/6111393

I use Matched Content on my larger (50K+ unique hits) websites and it works well.

With that many employees and the amount of your ad revenue, perhaps you should have a dedicated person managing monetization.

 

[AustinFurey]

May I suggest a good article?

AdSense Matched Content: https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/6111393

I use Matched Content on my larger (50K+ unique hits) websites and it works well.

With that many employees and the amount of your ad revenue, perhaps you should have a dedicated person managing monetization.

Many thanks!

 

[jamieFL]

Hey guys, thank you for your concern and your general distain for advertisements. I couldn't agree more.

We have done a ton of refining since launch and I think the ad experience is much more typical / industry standard.
For an example the Cessna 170 article (no rhyme or reason, just the first one I clicked) has 1 inline ad.

Today, I looked at my articles and on average, there are 2-3 inline ads, and 4 sidebar ads. Since my articles are no longer published, as an example, I found this one: (The first non-FT authored article I looked at) (my apologies to the author for dragging him into this)

https://flitetest.com/articles/ft-explorer-twin-boom-design-part-4

There are 4 inline (which are huge), and 4 sidebar. I don't see how this is industry standard. I hate to say it, but it reminds me of one of those spammer sites.

IMO, the sidebar ads add value to the site. I've clicked on many of them, and purchased from a few. The inline ads are a random distraction.

I published my articles here because I saw value (to me). I was benefiting from exposure to your users. But, you are benefiting as well. My articles brought traffic to your site. People looking for Taranis & FrSky help and solutions in Google, found my articles and then your site. My articles were driving traffic to your site. Then you show them cheesy ads within MY content. I feel taken advantage of.

 

[AustinFurey]

Then you show them cheesy ads within MY content. I feel taken advantage of.

I think this is the root of it and I am truly sorry for that. I put in a submission to our web gremlins to set an article max of one (or two for particularly lengthly articles). Ads are a reality on the site and I hope we can continue to improve it with good feedback.

Anywho, the internet is a big place and you have obviously taken your content elsewhere but you will always be welcome back, I recall some of your articles and thought they were well done.

Take care,
-Austin

 

[rockyboy]

Honestly I never even noticed the ads, but that's because I use https://adblockplus.org/ browser plugin so I don't have to see all the junk pop up. The downside is that the sites hosting the ads don't get any revenue from page views or clicks.

So I've been experimenting with https://adnauseam.io/ on a couple of my browsers because it really goes on the offensive the opposite direction - it clicks on every single ad in the background of every page while blocking them all from my view. Which gives plenty of revenue to the website hosting the ads, but it also makes the results of all those ad clicks worse than useless for google. The browser plugin has been blocked from chrome store, but there are instructions on the site how to get it installed anyway.

Of course neither of these actions are really what the advertisers, or the sites that host advertisements want - but until the volume of frustrating ads can be reduced to a reasonable level, I'll keep voting with my browser this way. And as FT has other substantial revenue streams beyond advertising, I'll just support the organization through buying kits and electronics every couple months instead.

 

[HilldaFlyer]

Hey - I almost started this thread. The other day I too made a reference to one of my articles an was accosted by content that I certainly didn't put there.... ads.

SO, my initial reaction was, hey, FT guys, stop that, and I'm going to start my own web page. But, I know that on the other hand, I am getting my material published for free with the added benefit of a ready-made audience that will appreciate it and even read it. If I had my own web site, I don't think I'd have more than a handful of readers. So, I thank FT for the opportunity to publish. I don't have to maintain a URL, or update the website etc. etc. Having ads is the price for getting something for nothing...

Can I offer a suggestions, of course I can... if revenue stream is so important, some of us may want to opt out of having random ads pasted into our material. I really like the idea of side bar or other placement that doesn't interrupt the content.

Another option you may look into is to get your bean counters to calculate the revenue of an article and allow the author to pay a one-time cover charge to publish without ads. I don't know if this is possible, but it may be an avenue to give you what you want, revenue, and provide what some authors want, unobstructed articles.

As a side note, when I published articles in biological journals like The Journal of Biological Chemistry, they charge a fee for publication that is pretty steep, like $1200, and then there is additional cost to get reprints. The publishers, on top of that, sell subscriptions of their journal to individuals and libraries. I would have thought that if a journal was getting a few hundred dollars from individuals and a thousands of dollars from University Libraries, they wouldn't require authors to fork over the money. Seemed a bit counter intuitive to discourage publication by charging a fee for getting published.

 

[FoamyDM]

I was kinda shocked to see my Article (al beit very long) on the Stem Scouts had a great many (4 or 5) in-line ads. The one was placed at the end of a section so I might think the article was finished, had I not written it. Sidebar adds are expected and non-invasive to the content.

I understand the need to have ads. it was the disruptive nature of the banner that irked me. FT has built a great positive community to share this hobby with. I love the community you've built. I feel that when I post I'm giving back into a community that has given me so much. And I always image most are hungry for the new idea or approach, or individual take each of us post. And I posted what I and many other hope are additions to the build and flying community. The articles are such a great resource I would hate to have it diminish due to intrusive ads.

I went back just now, and there 2 ads. So Thank you for listening FT

 

[cranialrectosis]

I think this is the root of it and I am truly sorry for that. I put in a submission to our web gremlins to set an article max of one (or two for particularly lengthly articles). Ads are a reality on the site and I hope we can continue to improve it with good feedback.

Anywho, the internet is a big place and you have obviously taken your content elsewhere but you will always be welcome back, I recall some of your articles and thought they were well done.

Take care,
-Austin

I whitelist FT specifically. I am merciless with Youtube ads and block them with prejudice.

This answer here is why I discriminate between the two.

Nicely done, FT.