PTR on the Dark Side of Online Advertising
Click fraud has made the cover of BusinessWeek magazine and the main story, Click Fraud: the dark side of online advertising, written by Ben Elgin and Brian Grow, is available on their website now. It's already stirred up a bit of interest at SearchEngineWatch and SlashDot, and at various points in the blogosphere -- Affiliate Marketing Journal, MicroPersuasion, Hunc Tu Caveto, GPTOutreach, YouKnowYouWantToKnow , and of course the blog that may well have started the whole ball rolling, The Affiliate Marketing Blog (original PTR-Click Fraud post). You can even Digg it, if you want to.
Of course most of the mainstream emphasis will be on how this will effect big PPC players like Google and Yahoo, which is perfectly understandable. But I think the various reactions from within the "Get Paid" community are much more interesting. But definitely not unpredictable.
Just like 12DailyPro members cried and raised all manner of hell when their cash cow was busted, many Paid to Read program owners, and the members and promoters who've been profiting from the status quo, are crying foul. When Charis Johnson's little Ponzi scam was first exposed, the members harassed and abused Brent Huntsaker, the ABC4 reporter in Utah who broke the story. Before it was over, they'd created a huge conspiracy theory involving the FBI and the SEC deliberately going after Johnson to put an end to an "honest business" that made it possible for "the little guy" to make "easy money" just like the folks at the big end of town. Now some of the Paid to Read people are doing the same thing with Ben Elgin, BusinessWeek, and the "traitors" who talked to him and aired their little cottage industry's dirty laundry in public.
One member at GetPaidForum, ptrhost, started the ball rolling by accusing the authors of the article of not doing enough research and not reporting alternative views:
PTRHost then goes on to point out some other ways PTR members can rip off advertisers, like getting paid to sign up for free or nearly-free trials and then cancelling just before the trial period ends. Doing these sorts of "sign-ups" can pay a lot better than doing hundreds of paid searches a day, that's for sure.
Of course, the simple fact is that in the vast majority of cases, she's absolutely right. The very same people who will happy click on PPC search results for a fraction of a cent are most likely more than happy to get paid $6.00 to sign up for a free trial at Netflix or whatever. And if they can convince some survey company that they're a 26-year-old stay-at-home mom with 4 kids under the age of five and the regional manager of a multinational company with direct responsibility for an annual IT budget of $1,000,000 or more, then they'll do it! And in all of these cases, the bottom line is that they do all these things because they want the money, and they will lie, cheat and steal to get it. Because doing it that way is much more profitable than participating honestly, accepting the incentives provided by the advertisers and responding in good faith.
In the vast majority of cases, that's the way it is. But not in all cases. The Paid to Read "cottage industry" also has lots of honest people who are involved at every level. As owners, advertisers, and as members. And in many cases, as all three. While the most fundamental nature of the business - the incentives themselves -- may make it difficult to be done honestly, it's not completely impossible. That's why I'm still involved in it, and I know that's why others are as well. Because we hope that one day when all the people who are looking for "easy money" have gone to look somewhere else, those of us who are left can be involved in a small, but essentially honest, form of e-commerce and online advertising.
Of course most of the mainstream emphasis will be on how this will effect big PPC players like Google and Yahoo, which is perfectly understandable. But I think the various reactions from within the "Get Paid" community are much more interesting. But definitely not unpredictable.
Just like 12DailyPro members cried and raised all manner of hell when their cash cow was busted, many Paid to Read program owners, and the members and promoters who've been profiting from the status quo, are crying foul. When Charis Johnson's little Ponzi scam was first exposed, the members harassed and abused Brent Huntsaker, the ABC4 reporter in Utah who broke the story. Before it was over, they'd created a huge conspiracy theory involving the FBI and the SEC deliberately going after Johnson to put an end to an "honest business" that made it possible for "the little guy" to make "easy money" just like the folks at the big end of town. Now some of the Paid to Read people are doing the same thing with Ben Elgin, BusinessWeek, and the "traitors" who talked to him and aired their little cottage industry's dirty laundry in public.
One member at GetPaidForum, ptrhost, started the ball rolling by accusing the authors of the article of not doing enough research and not reporting alternative views:
I'm sorry to be the naysayer here, but while some may believe a lot of forethought was put into this article, I disagree.Then there's another familiar tactic -- trying to convince everybody that their own involvement in the "industry" will get them into trouble with the government if they don't keep their head down and their mouth shut.
It was done in haste out of strong convictions that their beliefs were the only beliefs that were correct when it comes to click fraud...............leaving no thought as to how this could impact the entire PTR industry on a whole.
As a final thought, I don't know that those who told of how they were committing click fraud within PTR are thinking that the government will give them immunity or not, but I think it was as well not given much thought on how it could ultimately impact their own lives should the government decide to act hastily in this matter. I also, am not impressed by it because I feel that it shows a certain mentality of either "I'm the Mother Theresa for PTR" or great ignorance in thinking placing themselves in the open will circumvent either jail time, restitution to those supposedly hurt by this so called click fraud or whatever else may have been circulating within as to rationalize to justify the actions for this article.No, of course she doesn't mean to be negative or put anyone down for their efforts. She just thinks that the article was a load of crap and that anybody who helped this reporter is a traitor to all the good people of the PTR industry who either did it as a way to attack people they don't like, or to try to cover their own asses when them nasty revenuers and G-men start kicking down doors and hauling folks off to the hoosegow!
I do not mean to be negative and put anyone down for their efforts, although, I wish people would think as some say outside the box and consider the ramifications these types of actions have for everyone and not use it as a way to in essence be somewhat seeking vengeful retribuition to those sites and or people that they dislike, should that be the case.
When it comes to money, it brings out the worst in many people. Why share the wealth so to speak by advertisers offering to pay PTR members say 2 cents or 5 cents per click as well as giving them a cash rebate on purchases when they can pay a pay per click search engine less and keep 100% of the profit???? I'm not saying they are not entitled to it, however, I think people would find that sometimes giving a little returns more in the long run.See, it's not fair to blame all the human clickbots! It's the advertisers who are being greedy! They don't want to "share the wealth" and give the clickers a bit of money so they can buy their kids a Happy Meal or something!
PTRHost then goes on to point out some other ways PTR members can rip off advertisers, like getting paid to sign up for free or nearly-free trials and then cancelling just before the trial period ends. Doing these sorts of "sign-ups" can pay a lot better than doing hundreds of paid searches a day, that's for sure.
How many people do you think signup for a one month trial for the extra money at Inbox Dollars along with the little perks offered by the companies............do people really believe they are signing up because they truely want to try the trial membership? (I doubt it......if I recall correctly one of the so called advertisers who frequents forums and has made posts on how to make money......actually gave out tips on how to use your credit card to sign up for trial offers to get the kick backs and then cancel before the trial ends so they do not incur a monthly fee........now that is another thing that gets my goat............while they do not wish people to click on their paid for search link listing..........they have no problem signing up for this or that then cancelling memberships..............if thats not the pot calling the kettle black) I would imagine there are more people signing up for those free trials and then canceling the accounts before time is up just to receive those $5, 8, 10, etc bonuses................ The sole intent being to reap the monetary reward which is a far cry from a penny search reward.........and no intention of ever keeping a companies membership past the trial period....... Call me what you will...........but I find it wrong to focus on one area of click fraud when larger areas of click fraud prevail which cost companies much more than paying for non interested clicks on a search engine.And then it's people who try to manipulate paid surveys:
What galls me to no end is the fact that click fraud is taking place by some of those involved if we should chose to twist it that way.................how many survey sites do people belong to that fill out presurvey questions designated to give the questioneer the impression that they fit the criteria just so they can collect the money involved in the survey?Talk about digging the hole deeper! The same woman who's so upset that PTR is being named as one of the sources of PPC click fraud is more than happy to point out the same human clickbots are also more than happy to participate in paid sign-up scams and rip off online survey companies as well! Anything for a buck!
Of course, the simple fact is that in the vast majority of cases, she's absolutely right. The very same people who will happy click on PPC search results for a fraction of a cent are most likely more than happy to get paid $6.00 to sign up for a free trial at Netflix or whatever. And if they can convince some survey company that they're a 26-year-old stay-at-home mom with 4 kids under the age of five and the regional manager of a multinational company with direct responsibility for an annual IT budget of $1,000,000 or more, then they'll do it! And in all of these cases, the bottom line is that they do all these things because they want the money, and they will lie, cheat and steal to get it. Because doing it that way is much more profitable than participating honestly, accepting the incentives provided by the advertisers and responding in good faith.
In the vast majority of cases, that's the way it is. But not in all cases. The Paid to Read "cottage industry" also has lots of honest people who are involved at every level. As owners, advertisers, and as members. And in many cases, as all three. While the most fundamental nature of the business - the incentives themselves -- may make it difficult to be done honestly, it's not completely impossible. That's why I'm still involved in it, and I know that's why others are as well. Because we hope that one day when all the people who are looking for "easy money" have gone to look somewhere else, those of us who are left can be involved in a small, but essentially honest, form of e-commerce and online advertising.
<< Home