Graphics Coming to Google Ads

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Graphics Coming to Google Ads

Posted by CmdrTaco on Tuesday December 20, 2005 @04:00AM from the only-a-matter-of-time dept.

Firmafest writes "New York Times reports that "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. And the advertisers will not be limited to America Online, whose talks with Google prompted the change in policy, according to two executives close to the companies' negotiations." The Financial Times has more on the partnership" CT: Sorry folks. My email is broken this morning and i'm not getting error reports.

10 of 466 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

AdBlock by glomph · 2005-12-20 04:02 · Score: 4, Informative

https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=10&application=firefox
1. Re:AdBlock by SCHecklerX · 2005-12-20 04:10 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  And a very simple set of rules that will match almost any ad (remove the space that slashdot adds to some of these):
  [Adblock] us.a1.yimg.com /.*ads?[./]/ /.*banner s?[./]/ /.*sponsors?[./]/ adserv advert fastcl ick.net
2. Re:AdBlock by geschild · 2005-12-20 05:12 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Better yet: CustomizeGoogle
  
  --
  Karma? What's that again?
3. Re:AdBlock by cloudmaster · 2005-12-20 05:18 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It blocks anything that ends with ad, ads, ad., ads. Are you telling me that no valid words end with the combination ad or ads?
  [danny@midnight devel]$ egrep -c 'ads?$' /usr/share/dict/words 147
  Some of those words include "uploads", "threads", "download", etc. Yeah, I'm sure there's probably nothing I'd ever likely want to see in a directory called "threads" or "downloads". I mean, gingerbread and keypad, probably not, but the Mardis Gras sites would suck without beads and redheads!
  
  Also, "advert" matches "inadvertant", and Yahoo! puts some of their navigational graphics on *.a1.yimg.com as I found when I blocked that site (though I still block it).
  
  There's a good reason that those banner blocking proxys, etc, use hostnames and more specific rules, and why in general you want regexps to be as specific as possible. It's not because people like excessive busywork.
  
  As a service to those who would say "fine, what would *you* do," here's the relevant part of my squid.conf, which blocks a big chunk of the annoying ads on sites I regularly visit (including a big chunk of the google ads that I got pissed off at a while back):
  # junk ads acl junk dstdomain .tradedoubler.com acl junk dstdomain .doubleclick.net acl junk dstdomain .fastclick.net acl junk dstdomain .advertising.com acl junk dstdomain .atdmt.com acl junk dstdomain .a1.yimg.com acl junk dstdomain .mediaplex.com acl junk dstdomain .valueclick.com acl junk dstdomain .cj.com acl junk dstdomain .pointroll.com acl junk dstdomain .m7z.net acl junk dstdomain ads.wunderground.com acl junk dstdomain banners.wunderground.com acl junk dstdomain .falkag.net acl junk dstdomain .ru4.com acl junk dstdomain .eyewonder.com acl junk dstdomain .casalemedia.com acl junk dstdomain .pennyweb.com acl junk dstdomain .2o7.net acl junk dstdomain ads.autotrader.com acl junk_url_paths urlpath_regex ^/ads/.* acl junk_urls url_regex http://./\.priceline\.com/banners/.* acl junk_urls url_regex http://./\.googlesyndication\.com/pagead/.*\.js a cl junk_urls url_regex https?://a.*\.akamai\.net/.*!(shopnbc\.com.*) # block requests to junk domains http_access deny junk http_access deny junk_urls http_access deny junk_url_paths # replace the junk ads with an image from my web server deny_info http://www.myinternalsite.com/images/icons/thumbs_ down.gif junk deny_info http://www.myinternalsite.com/images/icons/thumbs_ down.gif junk_urls deny_info http://www.myinternalsite.com/images/icons/thumbs_ down.gif junk_url_paths
  Using the thumbsdown icon I can see that it's working - I like that a little better than my previous use of a 1x1 clear .gif. The list is getting big enough that I should probably just put that stuff in an external file (at least the rules) which I include, rather than putting it in squid.conf directly, but I haven't felt the compulsion to do so yet. Also note the akami.net rule has an exclude for shopnbc.com - it was blocking product images on something the wife wanted to look at. It may block other useful imagery, but so far I haven't noticed - but I may not notice, either. Though, one could argue philisophically about whether or not something I didn't notice was important to begin with, I suppose...
Google, or the content network? by penguin_asylum · 2005-12-20 04:05 · Score: 3, Informative

I read here that the graphical ads are just for people who use adsense, and not for the main page. (from the site, "I sent an email to the Google Adsense support team and 'Jim' tells me that the beta is for the content network only.")

In any case, if it _is_ for google too, this could easily make me use another search engine if it's at all obtrusive. One of the few reasons I use google is because it's simple, so it's quick to load and easier to find what you're actually looking for.
Adblock to the rescue by hotspotbloc · 2005-12-20 04:09 · Score: 4, Informative

Google has been playing with image banner ads for a while which is why "http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/imgad ?*" is in my Adblock kill file. Don't they realize that the only reason most people who can block ads haven't blocked them because the vast, vast majority of their ads are text only?
BTW, get Adblock here: http://adblock.mozdev.org/

--
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
You *do* have choices by brunes69 · 2005-12-20 04:09 · Score: 4, Informative

Teoma still has only text-based ads, and has some innovative features and accurate results.
MSN Search has only text ads. Sure, it is MS, but the new engine is actually pretty accurate and has useful features like encarta integration.
Yahoo! search also has no image-based ads. Funny how people are constantly bashing Yahoo!, and now Google is going to have image ads on it's search, where Yahoo! removed them a long time ago.
It's called a free market, we wil see how it plays out. If Google alienates their customers, they will migrate elsewhere.
Re:Finally a chance to user my adblocker on Google by sqlrob · 2005-12-20 04:35 · Score: 3, Informative

They do. I've had them blocked since the "Download Ep3 here!" and "Get your free PS3" ads. If it's not IFRAME's, then it's script tags with an external source. Either way, it's blockable with AdBlock.
Re:Finally a chance to user my adblocker on Google by shreevatsa · 2005-12-20 05:09 · Score: 4, Informative

You mean you haven't heard of Flashblock? (Install it from here.)

It does exactly what you want—blocks all Flash with a box with a Play button on it, which you can click if you want to allow that Flash object to play.
Re:code by dotwhynot · 2005-12-20 05:46 · Score: 4, Informative

Google agreed to special placements/treatments of AOL in their Search that Microsoft during the negotiations refused as unethical. That's interesting.