We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE RUBICON PROJECT, the programmatic ad tech company that went public last year, has filed for an interesting patent that could encourage more people to click on ads.
Clicks are ad tech companies’ raison d’être. But their challenge is that there are so few clicks actually happening. Average click-through rates on display ads online are just 0.06%, according to Google.
So here’s the solution The Rubicon Project is proposing: It would begin displaying additional information alongside the ad to encourage — or discourage — users to interact with it.
That kind of information could include things such as: Whether the ad has been found to be free from malware; information about the advertiser such as customer satisfaction information; or extra details about the goods being advertised, such as how they compare with competitor products.
Essentially, The Rubicon Project would be creating a series of certificates that would sit on or next to web ads. Its system would provide an audit of each web ad to indicate whether it leads to a trustworthy source, using third-party surveys, opinion polls, and reports.
Here’s how the certificates would look on a web page, according to the patent. The “Graphic Server” is serving up the trust certificate:
The patent explains why the company thinks this certification system would improve click-through rates:
Current viewers of online advertisements appear to have no means of gaining additional information about a particular advertisement, the advertiser, and/or the good and/or service being advertised.
By comparison, a user who can verify that an advertisement, an advertiser, a good or service, or a destination Web page or Website are in fact trustworthy or more positive due to some other characteristic may be more likely to click on that ad, an action to the benefit of the advertiser. Therefore, it is with respect to these considerations and others that the present invention has been made.
Rubicon Project's patent implies that trustworthy advertisers would sign up to its scheme, in order for the certificate to be added to their ads.
The flow-chart below shows how it all works. The advertiser signs up with a third-party auditor. Rubicon provides the technology to make all of this happen.
The Rubicon Project's patent was first filed back in 2008, but it was updated in June this year and published by the US Patent and Trademark office on 24 September.
What do you think? Is there anything that would encourage you to click on ads online?
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The only time I ever click on an ad is when I click on the X button to close them down. Nasty pieces of work.
Yet you expect content for free.
“Yet you expect content for free.”
No – they can serve me ads – I just don’t click on them. But they can assume I’ve seen it and get paid for the hit. Like how any ad works. It’s all about eyeballs – you can’t guarantee clicks.
Stop trying to manipulate my life!!!
Adblockers.
You can put as much ads on site as you like, but I’m not going to click on them if I’m not interested. I’ve never once made a purchase from an advert, literally not once. So, I don’t know how anyone is making money by having an advert on a site that I’m just going to ignore. It’s a false economy.
I would suggest that the advertisers focus more on offers for clicking the advert and making a purchase rather than just a generic message about the product that I’m not interested in.
It’s against most advertisers policy to ask people to, or offer awards for, clicking ads. Google wants quality original content on a site , it doesn’t want that content diluted with text and images advertising an ad.
that’s easy pay us five cents everytime we click on one you know what they speculate to accummalate
tech companies and the journal I’m sure.
It’s not that I’m not looking to buy stuff – it’s that I don’t trust any of the ads I see. They could be scams or phishing links. If I want to buy something, my 3 goto sites are Amazon, adverts, and eBay.
Ads are considered intrusive and people don’t want to click. If people are ever given the option of avoiding ads they do. The best thing my father loved about pausing live TV was pausing ads and fast forwarding through them. Before that it was kettle on or loo time. same with the no junk mail sign on my letterbox. If I didn’t I would have the equiluvant of a small rainforest in pizza advertising Leaflets. You have to change the change that culture first. Nobody wants stuff stuck in their face. If I give companies like say lifestyle my email address I will happily click on those Emails. It was with my consent they contacted me. If I dont actively sign up everything goes to spam or gets crossed out of. It’s as simple as that for a lot of people.
Pay me to look at them and I will.
It needs to be more tailored. Amazon have it down very well. They send out personalised e-mails with suggestions I often DP end up clicking on because they relate to what I’ve purchased in the past. Not always, but often enough.
Ad blocker on the desktop & now iOS has a built in adblocker on safari too. I’m currently exploring using the mobile versions of Facebook & The Journal. If found only one ad [which wasn't on the blacklist yet] so far. Also found battery improvements.
Think I’ll be sticking with this method in future. Much more pleasant experience.
have your say