Discussion of Online Advertising, CPA, SEO, Affiliate and Next Generation Marketing
  • NAVIGATION
  • TOPICS
  • THE REVENEWS BLOGGERS
  • QUICK CONTACT
ReveNews Online Revenue News & Opinions Since 1998

AffiliateFairPlay.com Contextual Advertising Case Study

May 2nd, 2007 by Jamie Birch

I recently came across the Impact of Contextual Advertising Adware in Affiliate Marketing: A Case Study by my friends over at AffiliateFairPlay.com on contextual advertising and it’s effect in affiliate marketing, primarily the Zango (180Solutions) adware application. It is a great case study that is well done, thorough, and provides some intriguing and surprising information. Here are some tidbits:

- They tested 785 domains from the Top 500 Retails Web Sites as designated by Internet Retailer. (some merchant sites had parent sites that they tested).
- 1070 separate tests were made on those domains.
- 39% of domains experienced Zango pop ups.
- 42 affiliate networks had popups going through them.
- 37% of popups resulted in the same url being displayed in the pop as the site it was poping up on.
- Over 78% of ads were from affiliates either using their urls or their affiliate tracking urls.
- 63% of all pop ups resulted in a forced click and many multiple forced clicks

“In our testing sample, it is obvious that affiliates are responsible for an overwhelming amount of the pop-ups delivered by Zango. They were responsible for 78%, or 238, of the pop-ups we received during our tests.” You heard that right. 78% of the pop-ups they received came from affiliates!

“Since basically any affiliate who is willing to do so can open an advertiser account with a third party contextual adware company, this presents unique challenges for compliance teams. While many networks and merchant preclude such practices in their Terms of Service, it would seem apparent that the industry has yet to adequately address their detection, monitoring and enforcement policies.” Have we addressed this effectively so far?

There are many professionals outside of our affiliate niche that look down on affiliate marketing. They regard this area as the wild wild west and have made statements, or repeated others who have said that affiliates aren’t driving new customers and that they merely piggyback on orders that the merchant would have received anyway. Have you heard that argument before? After reading this report, I can see where some of this comes from.

Do you think of affiliatemarketing like that? I can’t stress enough to you how wrong that is. A well managed program with top notch affiliates can definitely be an important, and profitable part of your acquisitions toolbox.

This can’t be good for the industry. I know thousands of affiliates that do not do this and drive incremental sales and new customers to the merchants they work with. Example after example can be shown. They provide a value added service to the customer and to the merchant. This sort of stuff really rots the whole barrel of apples, ultimately hurting affiliates, merchants, OPMs and the entire industry.

AFP says it well: “It is obviously not enough to just say that a practice is unacceptable. We do not feel, given the information presented in this report, that our Industry can be apathetic towards the issues and impact.” Merchants need to watch out for this in their affiliate programs and their own media buying. 37% of those pop ups were shown on the urls that they were showcasing in the pop ups. What value does that add to the merchant or the customer?

Networks should be doing a better job of identifying this sort of stuff when it violates contracts. Affiliate managers need to be more educated to identify this and put in place processes to test for this and not be afraid to lose sales temporarily, which can often be the case. Knowing that your affiliates won’t hang around if you have other affiliates overwriting clicks and forcing clicks should be motivation enough.

You can read the entire report here, and I encourage you to do so. Kellie and her team did a great job and I look forward to seeing more studies like this from AffiliateFairPlay in the future.

What are you thoughts after reading it?

4 Comments

Kellie said:

Exactly Jamie. It is both an image and quality blight for our Industry because there is no way to justify those “super-targeted” ads (popping on the same site). And for the merchants, the potential liabilites associated with such ad displays have increased over the last couple of years with government entities making it pretty clear the merchant is responsible for the ads regardless if an affiliate originated the ad. While I used Zango in my study, there are several even more “rogue” contextual adware applications out there that are prime targets for the FTC or an Attorney General to put in their sites next. Aside from the fact that there is just no value.

It has to be an effort between all of us though. Networks, managers and even other affiliates. I’ve found that the most effective instances of dealing with a “bad affiliate” have been in those instances where I’ve been able to get several Networks *and* Merchants/Managers/OPMs working at the same time to get the affiliate out and then quickly catch them when they come back again under a different identity, limiting their options of just moving their activities to another program/network. And it’s the collaberative information that comes to light to be able to detect them more quickly (i.e. not necesarily having to wait for someone to catch them on video with an infected system).

As our Industry has matured,we really need to also mature the area of quality control/assurance which is an integral part of any established industry and take it seriously.

JMO of course. :)

As an affiliate having consulted for merchant programs, I have seen the size of this problem. It is gargantuan. It’s weight has the ability to squeeze everyone (who is not popping cart urls) out. Too many programs have adware manipulators in their top 10 and don’t see the obvious (lack of site, traffic, seo/ppc positions, referral urls) signs of it going on.

Some steps I’ve taken:

Supporting AFP - I am a paying, particpating member of Kellie’s service and constantly encourage merchants that want to work with me to join. I have also sponsored memberships at AFP that Kellie has given to others. AFP is specifically aimed at this problem and is centered on our industry, if you do only one thing to contribute, this is that thing!

Coming out - I enjoy my income and my anonymity, but seeing this problem grow and seeing it threaten affiliate marketing’s future, I have come out of the shadows (my private, unbusy world, nothing shady) to attend Conferences to form personal relationships with merchants and networks. Personal relationships are the key to real education.

Protesting, even when it’s painful - I have refused to work with the rotten apples, even though as an advanced affiliate, I know that I have the skills to make a profit in crapped up environs. Real sacrifices must be made or principles are meaningless.

Supporting orgs that make a difference - I regularly donate to orgs that strive to stop malware tactics of every type. I donate money and time to AFP, CDT, Project Honeypot, ABW forum posts about malware, SiteAdvisor and many, many others. There are people out there attacking the problems in our industry, supporting them is a must-do if you’re serious about building your own business into something sustainable.

Jamie, I applaud your post here at Revenews covering AFP’s report - it is EXACTLY the type of support we all can and should do, to educate others and create sufficient momentum for change!

Unfortunately does the affiliate marketing have no shortage of those kind of examples and too less of the good ones on the other side.

Positive numbers are not publicly reported. Success stories are kept secret or only make it to industry publications.

An industry without a voice can’t be heart. The cries are loud if decisions are made by others for our industry, others that only know about the negative examples and the dark side of affiliate marketing.

Jamie Birch said:

You guys make some great points.

I know that it has always been so difficult to find these types of activities, I’m glad that Kellie and her team have put this together and the services she provides.

Patrick, I think you hit on some good points. There are a lot of affiliates that won’t “come out”, don’t want to be contacted and definitely don’t want the merchants to know what they are doing. I would bet that the vast majority are above the board and only protecting their business models and revenue stream, but that level of self protection does not give many merchants a good feeling about working with those type of partners. I can understand why they keep things close to the chest, but it sometimes hurts.

Maybe you guys could share with me here, or offline, the top ten things to look for to recognize this type of behavior before it gets out of hand. I can put together a decent list and post it here in another blog. I think that would give everyone a good idea of what to watch out for.

I agree to we need to support those organizations that help identify and fight this problem and everyone needs to do what they can to pitch in. Education is the most important thing. Merchants - learn as much as you can. Affiliates - continue to educate the affiliate managers that you work with on this type of activities.

It still blows me away that there were so many pop ups promoted on the same url that was promoted in the pop up. There can’t be any value in that.

Leave a comment

(required)
(required)

Search Through 10 Years of ReveNews Content: