Slashdot Mirror
Hits or Misses: Who is Your Website's Audience?
securitas writes "The Christian Science Monitor's Gregory M. Lamb wrote a
story interesting to anyone who runs a website: How do you accurately and reliably measure the audience for your website? From the article: 'Most websites have no idea how many people view their content. This inherent fuzziness is causing problems for commercial websites, especially online publications desperate to make money from Internet advertising... How can you charge for ads when it's nearly impossible to tell advertisers how many people will see them?' The article discusses the flaws and problems with Nielsen/NetRatings and comScore Media Metrix - they grossly undersample workplace users - and the rise in the number of sites requiring user registration."
Call me oblivious, but wasn't this one of the reasons why cookies were created?
Hmmm.
that is why most online advertising consists of fees based on the 'per click' methodology?
"How can you charge for ads when it's nearly impossible to tell advertisers how many people will see them" --- These people use access logs??
This is completely backwards. Infact, it's exactly the opposite. It's quite simple to tell how many people view your webpage, and hell of alot easier (and more accurate) than radio or TV.
This is the source of the problem with web advertising, your numbers fairly accurate and based on actual events, not some satistically questionable sampling method. There's little room for fudging.
Demographics on the other hand are a little more complicated. There, you actually have to ask.
---
Less Talk, More Beer.
Mandatory reg. puts people off using the site in the first place (Why register if you can see the content.. If you can't see the content who knows if its worth registering for?).
IP addresses is half the problem (everyone behind one company firewall looks like 1 user).
Cookies are ok so long as your users are ok with you "tracking their browsing habits".
Its a tricky puzzle...
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Anyway, the exact numbers don't really tell you anything. You really need to know the differences between two sub-populations (are visitors from pay-per-click ads or visitors from standard search results more likely to buy?). A program which makes this sort of comparison easy will give you far more insight than one which tries to get the total number of visitors closer to some mythical "true" number.
(I am the author of analog and CTO of ClickTracks, but I'm writing in a personal capacity).
11.0010010000111111011010101000100010000101101000
Tracking unique visitors?
Not that hard if small margin of error is ok.
Charging for ads when you don't know how many page views you will get?
What about CPM (cost per 1k impression) rates? Want 10k impressions? Pay for 10k impressions.
Target demographics?
How about track what article topics are popular, how many return readers per topic, etc?
These are not that hard to do with the right people. The guy who writes the "techie column" in many cases is not the right person.
I guess if you think like a newspaper, you end up with these problems seeming impossible to figure out.
Have I lost my marbles, or is this really not that hard?
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
Read the article. They are complaining that one user may read the content from work and from home, and so count as two users. One might also point out that sometimes two people may use the same computer, and only count as one person.
My wife and I both read the same article/section in the newspaper we got yesterday, even though we only got a single paper. (We "logged" 1 impression even though 2 were made.)
I understand that is the opposite of what you suggest, so...
Not only that, but we had some sections delivered to us that we (gasp!) threw out without even reading even though we may have been part of the target demographic. (We "logged" 1 impression even though 0 were made.)
And the web is different how?
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
I'm not going to click on your banner. Nope. Not a chance. Not happening.
It's not that I'm not interested in your product. Online adverts I see actually tend to be:
1. Something unavailable to me (wrong country).
2. Something of no interest to me.
3. Something I own already (this happens a _lot_ with Gamespy).
But that's not the point. The point is, I'm at the web site because I'm looking for something, and it's probably not your product. When watching TV, I never watch an advert, and immediately decide to research/buy that product. At best I'll make a mental note to have a look out for information on it later, in most cases I won't think about it until I'm looking for that kind of product, at which point I'll probably remember your advert.
An example might be easier. I frequently see adverts for car insurance. I don't drive, for a variety of reasons, but if I was going to learn and buy a car, I'd probably start calling around the companies whose names I remembered from adverts. Well, actually I'd Google for a comparison site, but lets pretend I'm too lazy to do that, okay?
Oh, also, pop-ups/unders are a really good way of persuading me to avoid your company, your advertiser, and whatever site I got the pop-up/under from.
Who cares about demographics? We're trying to figure out what people's interests are, what types of ads they'll respond to.
Well, duh. If a visitor looks at the sports pages during work hours, you have a fair deal of information about that person already. Isn't that already enough to serve up ads that would likely be relevant?
If these dead-tree publishers of yesterday's news got a clue, they might also realize that web-ads are actionable, and actions can be counted. Do people click on the ads? Do they generate leads or sales? There's this interesting industry called affiliate marketing they should look into (my guess is they'd make good money off personals and job ads).
What they read, when they read it, and what ads they want to learn more about. WTF more do they need?
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
With a relatively compact bit of javascript embedded into a page, the user gets hopefully relevant ads that are not obtrusive or flashy, same as the Google Adwords text-only ads you see on the right side of the Google results pages. And you can customize the colors and format to suit your own pages. Google, while they do serve the ads based on your site's content, do allow you to prohibit certain keywords, so you can block out competitors' ads.
To make it useful to the host, Google allows you to create "channels", so within one AdSense account you can track different pages. You can get a detailed report of how many pageviews each channel generates, as well as click-thrus (which of course leave your site).
To sweeten the deal, you get paid for click thrus. That means you get paid when someone leaves your site, but my philosophy is that if they do that, they weren't planning on sticking around anyway, so I might as well profit from it.
In my case, my site generates about 3000 pageviews and 15 clickthrus, and that translates into about $1 a day in revenue. It's not much, but I roll that back into the Google AdWords campaigns that I run, which generate inbound traffic. I'd rather have people coming to my site that want to be here, than those that don't, so I see it as a fair trade.
And in the end, the reporting and tracking are handled by Google, and provide a tangible benefit to my business.
Oh, and if you want to see an example in operation, look at the very bottom of our site's main page.
--Brandon / Split Infinity Music