Comments on: Noted: The New York Times Tech Desk Discovers AdSense

By: Saul Hansell

Saul Hansell — Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:22:53 +0000

David.
The article you refer to indeed was taken to say many things. What it did say, however, is quoted below. I'm not sure that I see any mention of rich media on search results pages. Nor do I see anything that is in conflict with the statement Google put out later. To be sure, we did clarify a few aspects of the deal in our later stories about it as more facts emerged. But Google does not dispute that it will try graphic ads of various formats on its site.

AOL gets Google to try busier ads

Users of Google's search engine will soon see something they are not used to on the notoriously spare site: advertising with logos and graphics.
....
One format being discussed is a box, which may include a photograph and a logo, that would appear on the main search results pages toward the bottom of the advertisements in the right-hand column. Traditional banner ads may appear on Google Image Search and the Froogle shopping site, which already include many photographs, an executive involved said. No advertising is contemplated for the Google home page.

By: John K

John K — Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:03:43 +0000

Dog bites man. NYT confuses basic facts.

People should realize that the big revenue part of AdSense is not the ads you see on blogs, but the AdSense for Search deals that Google cuts with the likes of AOL.

TAC = traffic acquisition costs, which were reported to be 79 cents for a dollars worth of traffic on the AdSense for Search side.

It does raise the good question of what percent Google pays AdSense for Content publishers. I'd guess it's about 30% and it changes depending on who the publisher is, and what Google had for breakfast that day...

By: Russianger

Russianger — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:45:13 +0000

look at this! The algorithm of Quaero rules!
http://www.quaero.com/searchpro/index.php?q=quaero&search.x=0&search.y=0

By: David Utter

David Utter — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:16:24 +0000

I agree with Saul. Look at how he followed up his "AOL Coaxes Google to Try Busier Ads" story that a lot of people picked up on as Google trying out rich media ads on search result pages:

Umm, wait, I'm sorry, I can't seem to find a follow-up at the moment.

By: saul hansell

saul hansell — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:09:06 +0000

Where folks have been:
http://battellemedia.com/archives/001981.php

As bad as missing a story, I'd argue, is to say that once you wrote about something important that you don't need to keep coming at it as it evolves.

Saul