Google's fraud squad battles phantom clicks

Page II: Google and others are under scrutiny as advertisers fret about phony clicks.

In recent documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company also acknowledged the problem as a threat to its revenue, of which 95 percent is derived from advertising. Google and other search networks provide refunds to advertisers when click fraud has been discovered.

"If we are unable to stop this fraudulent activity, these refunds may increase," Google said in its SEC filing. "If we find new evidence of past fraudulent clicks we may have to issue refunds retroactively of amounts previously paid to our Google Network members."

Google and Overture employ "fraud squads," or teams of people dedicated to fighting click schemes. But at least two marketing executives say such countermeasures are missing fraudulent clicks that are responsible for between 5 percent and 20 percent of advertising fees paid to all search networks.

Overture spokeswoman Jennifer Stephens refutes that estimate, saying that the numbers likely represent acts of fraud that are ultimately caught. She added that Overture filters most fraudulent clicks with the best anti-fraud system in the industry, which combines technology and human analysis.

"We take this very seriously; it's the foundation of what we do," Stephens said. "If an advertiser has a question about it, we look into all matters."

Cost-per-click advertising comes in many forms, but it essentially lets marketers gain exposure on a Web site and pay only when people click on their ads. Google and Overture let advertisers bid for placement of paid links, which appear when certain keyword searches are conducted on the networks' sites or those of third parties that partner with them. Keyword ads can also be distributed according to the content of partners' sites and displayed on non-search pages. (CNET Networks, ZDNet Australia's parent company, partners with Google for shared advertising revenue.)

Most advertisers are aware of the click-fraud issue but have not delved into it because of the technical complexities involved. Others are concerned that they could jeopardise their relationships with the powerful search networks if they complain too loudly.

"It is a bigger problem, but folks just don't want to take the time to track it down because it's a complex problem," Coremetrics' Squire said. Given that some of the largest marketers manage up to 1 million keywords in a campaign, he added, the data can be difficult to crunch.

Danny Sullivan, who runs a quarterly search-industry conference, said many advertisers do not raise their concerns with the ad networks because "they're afraid that if they complain, it will hurt their free listings."

Still, more fraud-detection technologies are emerging to help advertisers analyse their campaigns and traffic. Some advertisers and search-engine marketing companies say they are compiling lists of sites that generate a high number of clicks but not sales.

Coremetrics, Urchin and Whosclickingwho.com are just a few that sell technology to examine click rates and sales that result from paid searches. Alchemist Media, which charges flat fees for its consulting services, has detected fraud while acting as an intermediary between search networks and marketers.

In general, Alchemist's Stricchiola estimates that 10 percent of all search ad clicks could be fraudulent. But she said the rate can reach 20 percent in particular businesses that have been targeted for click fraud.

Roy de Souza, CEO of advertising technology firm Zedo, said his company's geotracking systems have traced Internet Protocol addresses to detect click operations in China. In describing one common scheme, he said a legitimate site is duplicated under another name, complete with text ads from a search network. A bot would then be trained to click on the ad links that appear on the bogus site, said de Souza, who estimated that click fraud affects 10 percent to 20 percent of today's search network ads.

Many policing technologies can counter click fraud by analysing Web traffic logs or surfing behavior. If a page is turned every 1.8 seconds over a period of time, for example, fraud-detecting systems will flag the traffic as suspiciously uniform.

Covert clicks
Human operations can be more difficult to detect because a wide network of people can click on ads from different computers across many regions, without a steady pattern. According to a report in the India Times, residents are being hired to click paid links from home, with the hopes of making between $100 to $200 per month.

In other instances, the source of bogus clicks can be much closer to home.

Joe, the chief executive of an Internet marketing company, enjoys clicking on his rivals' text ads on Google and Yahoo because his competitor must pay as much as $15 each time he does it. Eventually, such phantom clicks can add up and drain a rival's budget.

"It's an entertainment," said the executive, who asked to keep his name and company anonymous. "Why do you run into a store without dropping a quarter in the meter? You know it's wrong, but you do it."

Kevin Lee, chief executive of search marketing firm Did-It, estimates that fraud from such "drive-by" competitive clicks and affiliate scams makes up about 5 percent of the industry's total sales. Lee concedes that he can only guess at the number, but he does know one thing for sure:

If it gets much higher, he said, "then we should all be getting worried."

Advertisement

Talkback 7 comments

    Who is paying who for the clic ...Anonymous -- 21/07/04

    Who is paying who for the clicks?

    If Google gets paid by the advertiser, who is paying the people making the fraudulent clicks?

    >>If Google gets paid by ...Anonymous -- 03/08/04

    >>If Google gets paid by the advertiser, who is >>paying the people making the fraudulent clicks

    If I am understanding the article correctly, there are two different frauds going on.

    The first one mentioned seems a bit far-fetched for mine. It seems to be suggesting that the machines hosting the ads for google are not owned by google but some evil organisation who clicks on adds hosted by them to generate more revenue. Even if the mystery third party was doing such a thing, it would be painfully easy to trace.

    The other one is where a competitor keeps clicking your add to waste your marketing budget. Again, that would be an easy thing to trace, and at 10c per click, it would not be a viable way of bankrupting anyone.

    About the only company with a financial incentive to accept phantom clicks is google. I somehow doubt that.

    Who would pay? Third party sit ...Anonymous -- 24/08/04

    Who would pay?

    Third party sites that display google's content want to show "what good results advertisers are getting to their ads" so they would want as many clicks as possible.

    Competitors would pay the "evil" party to click on their competitor's links to drive up their ad costs - and this is not to say that 10 cents is the usual fee, our company has paid $4-5 for clicks (good ones and fraudulent ones) and we are not alone. The "average" cost per click may be low but many advertisers are paying in the higher range and losing big $$ by fraud.

    Great for Google. I sit here ...Anonymous -- 23/10/04

    Great for Google. I sit here looking for a wizard to replace that annoying paperclip to finish a proposal so I can buy some food. Flat broke because my name was spelled incorrect. Someone was waiting for me to activate my credit
    card. When I did, my account was maxed out. Now the bank has re-issued check and cards on all of my accounts. MEANWHILE I HAVE TO WAIT 7-10 DAYS TO
    HAVE ACCESS TO ANY FUNDS WHATSOEVER. Investagators report that it's an inside job. It's either inside my very own home (which is foolish) or inside of the bank. As I said to the
    Bank, it the MEANWHILE CITY, I Do not appreciate!?!?!!

    I never cease to be amazed by ...Anonymous -- 02/05/05

    I never cease to be amazed by the general publics ignorance. I am currently paying in excess of $10 per click. And yes your funds and your business could be wiped away by fraudulent and search engine in accuracies. Example being billed for clicks when you are switched off!!!
    Account showing you owe $116 dollars when you have not had one click through.
    Why should google or the rest do anything, they dont loose either way. It is so easy to fix but they dont want to.If a search is done by google on a specific computer, if that computer does the same search again it should not be charged.

    LIBEL Anonymous -- 31/07/08

    I AM WRITING TO YOU AS I AM GOING TO START AN ACTION FOR LIBEL SHOULD YOU NOT REMOVE THE ARTICLE OF THE 7TH JULY 2008 BY AUGUSTO CAÑA MAMANI, CALLED INFIMAS MENTALIDADES, INFIMAS VIDAS. THIS ARTICLE IS TOTALLY DEFAMATORY ABOUT MY PERSON AND I WILL NOT PUT UP WITH IT. THIS PERSON IS A RACIST AND HAS PUBLISHED IN SPANISH AN ARICLE WHICH CONTAINS NOTHING BUT LIES ABOUT ME. SHOULD THIS ARTICLE NOT BE REMOVED I WILL START AN ACTION IN THE NEW SOUTH WALES SUPREME COURT AGAINST GOOGLE AS YOU ARE THE AGENT OF WHAT PEOPLE WRITE AND THIS IS PURE DEFAMATION AND BECAUSE IT IS PUBLISHED, IT WILL BE A CASE OF LIBEL

    Fradulent web page Anonymous -- 03/06/09

    I recently purchased a very expensive ink from FILLSERV web page. I fill out all the forms . at the end of the transaction it said that your credit card will be charged however your address does not match the billing address and will not be shipped. Yes my credit card was charged . The contact numbers on FILLSERV does not work . I wish we can sue Google for encouraging false advertisement.

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Suzanne Tindal Love me, tender
    Considering how expensive and drawn-out tender processes can be to solve problems that might be very immediate, it's little wonder that the Victorian Police IT department tried to work the tender exemptions system.
  • Array 2009 funding drought rolls on
    For Australian start-ups looking for venture capital, 2009 was a very bad year. 2010 may be no better.
  • Array Can not-so-smart meters help the NBN?
    It was interesting to witness Conroy's recent enthusiasm to spruik the NBN's role in supporting the Smart Grid, Smart City initiative. What a pity that Conroy hadn't yet seen the damning report from the Victorian auditor-general about that state's smart-meter roll-out.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured