Google in the crosshairs: it would charge advertisers for fake views on Youtube – from botnets. This is the opinion of the Financial Times, citing specific and new European research.
The Financial Times has published an article that is causing a lot of chatter and attention.
According to the newspaper’s journalists, Google charges advertisers who spend budget to promote services and products on YouTube even for fake views.
The article in question cites research conducted by a European working group, according to which YouTube’s video view counting system considers fake views, generated for example by botnets, for advertising purposes.
In the team that carried out the experiment, there is also an Italian: Stefano Traverso, working alongside Ruben Cuevas, Albert Banchs, Miriam Marciel, Roberto Gonzalez, Mohamed Ahmed, and Arturo Azcorra.
The team first uploaded some videos to a YouTube channel and created specific bot software. Meanwhile, they purchased advertising on the platform.
At this point, the core of the experiment was effectively launched: the bots were directed to these specific videos.
Upon checking the view counts for these videos, the team noticed that Google indicated only 25 views as real. However, the AdWords counting system – relating to advertising – showed a very different figure: 91 views.
This, in essence, means the advertiser paid for 91 views through AdWords, even though another Google tool had perfectly identified the fake visits by bots.
The experiment reveals a dual approach from the search engine giant: strict terms when it comes to paying YouTubers, indicating the real number of views and discarding fake traffic from software. Lenient terms when Google is the one collecting from advertisers.
To delve deeper into the numbers, thesis, methods, and results, we recommend viewing the official document available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1507.08874v1.pdf.
Google has reacted, and truthfully, not much time has passed: after the appearance of the Financial Times article, Mountain View first explained that the issue of invalid traffic is taken very seriously, as they use tools and personnel dedicated to correctly filtering clicks and data.
It was then stated that the results of the study will soon be discussed with the entire research team to address the issue in detail and find new valid tools to work better.
The issue is both sensitive and very interesting, and it will certainly set a precedent soon, for Google, YouTubers, and advertisers alike.
It is important to note that Google has not yet made an exhaustive and detailed statement regarding the research results, so it is likely that, after meeting with the research team and taking appropriate counter-measures, more specific clarifications will arrive, which we will certainly discuss again.
Be the first to comment