As the result of a class-action lawsuit over click fraud, the court directed Google to have an independent expert examine their click fraud detection methods, policies, and procedures. The expert selected was Dr. Alexander Tuzhilin, a professor at NYU. Alex’s impressive resume includes working with Click Forensics. He did a terrific job for us and we look forward to continuing our work together. A summary of Alex’s complete report has been posted in Google’s official blog. The report can be summed up in one word, “reasonable”.
While we applaud any effort toward greater transparency, I’d like to share our thoughts as to why we feel “reasonable” is not enough:
Precedent – The roots of media measurement by an independent third party date back to 1936. For many years traditional media (television, radio and print) have benefited from a third party sitting between advertisers and publishers. The role and responsibility of these unbiased companies is to ensure advertisers get what they pay for. It is inevitable this will occur in our arena as the online industry matures.
Trust – No one likes click fraud except those who are trying to beat the system by causing it. But the reality is that while they might make a reasonable effort to catch click fraud, it is the advertiser who is hurt financially when it occurs. As market research firm Outsell pointed out in a recent study, click fraud has caused advertisers to think twice. Uncertainty, ambiguity and frustration are not good for any industry.
Incentive – As it stands today, the search providers are the final arbiters as to which clicks are valid or invalid and which clicks you pay for. Additionally, they are only required to look at their own incomplete data set to make this determination. The process is not subject to any third party or reporting standards. This is not a reasonable approach.
The search provider participation on the IAB measurement committee is a step in the right direction. Click Forensics is an IAB member and we will do our best to help, but it has been and will be a slow moving process.
Data – The search providers only have access to their own data unless “site side” data is made available to them by their clients. The data they have provides only “technical” attributes and is incomplete. Dr. Tuzhilin said recently, “The search providers simply don't have enough data to have the most accurate approach.”
There is a solution available. It does not ruin pay per click advertising as we know it, in fact it breeds trust. It is technically possible and is based on a process that has worked successfully in traditional media for many years. It has been built and is ready to roll. It even allows the search providers to remain the final arbiter while giving advertisers a sense of comfort.
You can help solve the problem of click fraud by working with industry organizations, search providers and joining our Network. While “reasonable” is not enough, it is a step in the right direction. You have my commitment that Click Forensics will continue to work together with advertisers, industry organizations, search providers and smart guys like Alex. We will remain focused on realistic solutions that benefit the entire industry. Together we can build trust and continue to grow the pay per click advertising industry.
Tom Cuthbert
President and CEO
Click Forensics
|
| |
