I don’t know Any Beal, but I just read his “exclusive” report about Google’s click fraud being “less than 2%“. I think Andy Beal has been drinking too much Gool-Aide™. The “report” reads like a combination of informercial and Google Press Release. Think Happy Thoughts: Click Fraud is not a problem.
Promotional language aside, the “report” is based on graphical “data” reminiscent of a Ross Perot speech - colored blocks, big perfect circles around smaller, colored circles, with nary a numeral in sight. In the end, several paragraphs seem intent on persuading the reader that “click fraud” (whatever that is) is very, very small. Way small. Almost tiny. Really, really small, Mom & Dad. Not a problem.
Since this report comes from a very skilled online marketer and not just some blogger, I suggest we cut through the copy and simply look at the “h2″ copy. That’s the bold, paragraph header text that summarizes for the lazy reader just what the “take away points” are for the paragraphs. A good marketer knows that the bold text alone delivers the desired message. What do we see when we take only the bold paragraph headers?
Exclusive: Google’s Click Fraud Rate is Less than 2%”
The click fraud rate - as discovered by most AdWords advertisers - is on average, less than 2% of all clicks through Google’s system.
Proof Google’s Click Fraud is Less than 2%
Google’s Four Layers of Click Fraud Filters
A click fraud rate of less than 2% is a world away from the 20% number given by some click fraud detection companies.
Not All Click Fraud is Click Fraud
Google Becoming More Transparent
That’s it folks. That is all of the bolded paragraph header text. That’s the message delivered by Google in collaboration with Andy Beal. Unfair analysis? What do you think?