Healthy Blog Reviews

Skype has partnered with Marchex to offer a new pay-per-call advertising service in the US, Canada and Western Europe. The Click & Call program works with a “Free Call” button that can be placed anywhere on the web. When a customer clicks the button, the Skype software launches and the call is connected at no cost to them. The advertiser pays a fee only for the calls they’ve received and they can set a budget so they won’t be surprised by a large bill at the end of the month. Skype’s Click & Call system might seem like a good alternative to acquiring an expensive toll free number, but there is a downside to the system and it’s a pretty big one. In order for the call to connect, the callee must have Skype software on their computer and Skype’s browser plug-in. The system is also not available for Macs and it won’t work on Skype mobile. On the other hand, since you only pay for the calls that come in, there’s really nothing to lose by setting up an account with Skype. If you’re running a service business that gets a large number of referrals on line, an instant, free phone call could be the deciding factor between you and your competition. Marchex will be handling the day-to-day operations of the program which include detailed call analytics. Skype emphasizes that only standard metrics will be included in the reports and that the personal information of the individual Skype customers will be kept private and protected but I can see that becoming a concern if the program takes off. You can click here to watch a short video that shows how the system works. Advertisers wishing to participate in Click & Call Advertising with Skype supported by Marchex, should visit www.skype.com/go/clickandcall . Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Tags: advertising, calls, competition, Display, flickr, individual, personal, program, Skype
Posted July 21, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

By Renée Revetta Facebook recently enabled a feature that instantly suggests a dynamically created Facebook ad based on a provided URL. I tested it out to uncover how Facebook set up this feature. As with most things, there are some pros and cons to the dynamic ad creation approach. Facebook creates the ad by searching the HTML of the provided URL for certain tags. Specifically, it pulls the title tag, meta description, and an image associated with the main content, similar to how it pulls information when Facebook users share a link. Title of ad: pulled from title tag Ad copy: from meta description Image: from embedded image After the advertiser provides the URL, the title, copy and image are generated. Facebook inserts the first 135 characters from the meta description into the ad copy, so web developers should keep this in mind when creating the page, if possible. The title is pulled from the first 25 characters of the title tag. Keeping these character limits in mind when creating your website pages will allow for easier Facebook ad creation down the road. However, if you can’t limit your title and meta description tags, Facebook does allow the advertiser to edit the auto-generated ad content. When using the “suggest an ad” feature, advertisers are also given several image options. Facebook allows advertisers to cycle through any available images from the page (much like the image feature when Facebook users share links), or advertisers may also choose to upload their own images. The suggest feature may work well in some cases, however, unless you’re using a targeted page (a landing page, promotion page, registration page), your meta description and auto-generated ad might lack the call to action that is so important for the proper impact.  You’re not likely to have a call to action within the meta description of your home page or about us page on your website, so keep in mind that the “suggest an ad” feature might work best for general exposure ads. In review, the Facebook Ad Suggest feature works well for marketers wanting to quickly advertise: URLs to a page with a targeted action as the main focus OR Brands seeking awareness rather than specific actions Both of these cases depend on the URL provided from the start of ad creation. If the URL provided is a general page but your ad requires a specific call to action, you’ll likely need to edit your auto-generated ad content. For example, if you entered your home page URL to create a “Like Us on Facebook”ad, the meta description and title tag might not be totally relevant for that ad campaign. Facebook also recently announced PayPal as a new advertising payment option: “Through a strategic relationship with PayPal, we’re able to simplify payments globally for advertisers purchasing Facebook Ads. In addition to the different credit cards that we accept, PayPal will be listed as another option for payment when you create your first ad. Or, if you’re already advertising, login to the Funding Sources in your Ads Manager and add PayPal as a funding source.” Instant ad creation along with the PayPal option for payment might just capture that small business owner or Facebook newbie to try out ads for the first time. What do you think? Will you give Facebook ads a try? Or do you feel like Andy ? About Renée Revetta Renée Revetta,  Search Mojo’s Social Media Specialist organizes social media efforts with the Search Mojo team and monitors daily social media activity. In addition to working on social media projects for clients, Renée manages the Search Mojo blog, Search Marketing Sage , and the company’s overall social media presence.

Tags: advice, auto, Display, facebook, image, manager, paypal, Search, search-mojo, Social, Social Media
Posted July 14, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

Google Chief Exec Eric Schmidt and his fellow media moguls talked to the Wall Street Journal last week about their plans to get creative with online advertising. After fifteen years as a part of the Internet landscape, the banner ad simply isn’t as effective as it used to be and though online ad spending is up again, it’s not where it should be given the amount of time the average person spends online. Last week, Schmidt and colleagues, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Jeff Bewkes of Time Warner, Walt Disney’s Bob Iger and Groupon’s Andrew Mason, headed out to Sun Valley for this year’s Allen & Co. mogul retreat.  In between the bike rides and the barbeques, the heavy hitters discussed “interactive video ads” and targeted advertising attached to content. The Wall Street Journal reports: “Schmidt championed “interactive video ads,” which he said are on the way. That means they could allow Web users to watch a video, leave a comment and see real-time updates within the ads that are more customized to their interests.” “Groupon’s strategy is to let businesses design an offer, such as half-price theater tickets, and email it to consumers together with commentary, such as a review of the play.” So it looks like the big guys have finally realized that content trumps a dancing hamster when it comes to attracting click-throughs. And for those who complain about the rampant spread of Google ads all over the net, Google says they’re working on that, too. In other words, they’re working on new ways to hide advertising in what looks like content. Are banner ads a thing of the past? Is it time to eliminate the standard Adsense ad unit in favor of targeted, advertising embedded in content? Or would you prefer to give up your sidebars in order to enjoy your content without commercials? Let us know in the comments below.

Tags: cloud-computing, cloud-hosting, dancing hamster, Display, facebook, google-chief, internet, more-customized, Online Advertising, plans, street, street-journal, video, words, working-on-new
Posted July 13, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

In economics any time there is an abundance of supply the price for that particular good goes down. The easier to obtain, the less ‘valuable’ that resource is. In today’s online world there is no shortage of traditional Internet measures like ad impressions because of the huge amount of traffic being run through social networks. The trouble is that another traditional measure for advertising, cost per thousand or CPM then gets taken down with it. Of course, not all sites on the Internet are created equal when it comes to what kind of ads are served and how they are received but when clumped together, social network traffic is the high volume low cost drag on the overall market pricing. AdAge reports ( with a hat tip to paidContent ) A recent analysis by ComScore shows social networks, primarily Facebook and MySpace, have over the last year drawn an average CPM of only 56 cents, compared to the $2.43 average for the internet at large. Looking more closely, the ComScore data show that the average pricing for online ads exclusive of social-networking sites, namely Facebook and MySpace, would be much higher, about $2.99 for every 1,000 views; social sites dragged down the average online CPM by as much as 18% over the last year. The chart below from comScore shows this in an historical context. The reality of the nets’ new world order because of social networks may very well turn out to be putting these two sources, publishers websites that want to have a more ‘in depth’ experience for their users (which usually translates into some kind of an annoying expanding banner that should be made illegal by anyone with any concern for web experience) vs. social network which are much more ‘wham bam thank you mam’ in their experience especially when it comes to advertising. “There’s just an overall glut of page views on the internet,” said Richard Jalichandra, CEO of ad network Technorati Media. “And with all that inventory, there’s an overall drop in CPMs.” Still, Mr. Jalichandra said social networks may be a large part of that inventory production. Among the top five U.S. publishers of display advertising, Facebook delivers the largest share of online ad impressions — serving 16.8% of total online ad impressions in the U.S. for the month of May, according to ComScore. Fox Interactive Media, a property that is primarily made up of MySpace, served 6.3% of total impressions for the same period. To put it another way, in the United States, Facebook and MySpace together are responsible for more than a fifth of all advertising traffic, while at the same time bringing in the lowest rates for those ads. Using the term display ads to describe Facebook’s ads may be a misnomer and that’s where the industry may need to look into this in more detail. By the way was anyone else surprised that MySpace still gets mentioned in this conversation? So what’s your take? Are all online ad impressions built alike? Should there be this ‘drag’ on overall numbers when in reality they could be so very different that they shouldn’t be clumped together at all? I’m sure you have an opinion on this fine Monday morning. Why not share it?

Tags: analysis, average, Display, facebook, namely-facebook, over-the-last, price, Social, thousand-or-cpm, United States
Posted July 12, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

I’ve never run a Facebook advertising campaign. Why? Because, based on the crappy ads that are served to me, each time I log in, I have no faith that my ads will be served to those that are actually interested in what I have to offer. Now I know why : We have designed Facebook to provide relevant and interesting advertising content to you in a way that protects your privacy completely. We never share your personal information with advertisers. We never sell your personal information to anyone. These protections are yours no matter what privacy settings you use; they apply equally to people who share openly with everyone and to people who share with only select friends. So, that explains it. Facebook protects your privacy–even if you want the whole world to know who you are. But, is that the best approach? I’ve often suggested that I’d be willing to share more of my private information, if it would lead to better targeted ads. Not just better targeted ads, but ads that match up so perfectly with my interests, I actually look forward to see them each day. When was the last time you looked forward to seeing an ad on a web page? I know we’re in this tricky age of trying to determine how far we should go to protect our privacy, but has Facebook gone too far? I mean, it won’t share information with advertisers “no matter what privacy settings you use.” You could tell the whole world that you’re married, have two kids and are trying decide on a family vacation to Six Flags or Disney, but an advertiser can’t deliver you a customized offer for 3 nights at DisneyWorld, no matter what. Sounds kind of crazy to me. I guess my point is this. Yes, go ahead and protect the privacy of those that want it, but where’s the freedom? If I tell you it’s OK to share what I publicly post to Facebook with advertisers–in order to get better offers from them–what’s wrong with that?

Tags: better-targeted, Display, facebook, family-vacation, flags-or-disney, freedom, interests, often-suggested, personal, Social, your-personal
Posted July 8, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media