TWCL

[n9uxu]

Here's an odd question.

Have you guys ever disapproved a PW ad on your site simply for another comic because during your pre-approval visit you decided that the comic was just really a cartload of crap?

Poorly drawn, poorly written and just basically an assault on the senses?

My initial instinct is to just say everyone starts somewhere and approve it (because let's face it, I started here), but sometimes it's just... damn, are you sure you want to advertise this thing yet?

Anyway, just curious if others have the same urge from time to time.

Dave

[vulpeslibertas]

I think that's a pretty natural reaction. Most of us who really want to improve our art develop some kind of standards for how we want our comic to look. When someone else's art violates our webpage, it clashes with our self-imposed standards.

I guess it really depends on a couple of things.

One, how much you want to give the other guy a leg up, versus how much you want to cater to your reader's expectations.

Two, if you can mentally separate your comic from the advertisements around it. After all, everyone who visits your page realizes that the advertisements are advertisements. It's not like you are selling Uncle Joe's Balding Cream, well you're not writing so-and-so's comic either. That it shows up on your web pages is just coincidence. If it happens to be bad, then let the buyer beware.

Three, maybe your comic isn't all that pretty either. Maybe your readers come to it because of something else. If that other comic has the same essential whatever-it-is, then maybe you're doing your readers a favor by letting them see the ads.
_________________

[smbhax.com]

If the site/comic was awful just in the painfully awkwardly designed sense, probably not. If the theme of the content was awful--mostly toilet jokes, for instance--then yes, I would have declined to run the ad.
_________________

[CannibalJesse]

I'd love to know how many sites have blocked our comics. It's possible I shouldn't have started advertising so early, for fear that we'd get blocked before we had time to get better.

[n9uxu]

Vulpes,

I never have actually blocked someone from the site yet for the reasons I brought up, but I've been close. As per your specific comments, #3 makes absolute sense. I do have a certain hesitation that anything appearing in the ad box would seem to have a tacit "stamp of approval" from me. Clearly, not the way to regard the box. Regarding #1, I will often try and dig through the archives of the really awful ones and try and leave a comment or two when I find something that really works (always through the filter "for me") to offer some positive feedback where I can.

As per #2, webcomic folks proclivity towards being self-critical aside, I've never assumed anyone is coming to Slightly Off-Topic of Saggy Man Breasts for the art! Hopefully, just a chuckle now and again.

smbhax,

I have banned many a site for non-family-appropriate content, but have avoided banning anything just because their humor doesn't appeal to me.

Dave

[vulpeslibertas]

Of course, on the other hand, to some extent you might be endorsing advertisements on your page. It's really how involved you want to get with it. Some readers probably will consider you to be endorsing the ads no matter what you say or think.

So that's the other side of the coin.
_________________

[smbhax.com]

n9uxu wrote:

smbhax, I have banned many a site for non-family-appropriate content, but have avoided banning anything just because their humor doesn't appeal to me. Dave

It went a little beyond humor in the cases I'm vaguely remembering...it was more like the comics just radiated foulness and immaturity without regard for anything approaching good taste, to the point where I would have felt bad channeling my readers there. I don't have a humor comic myself so perhaps that was part of it, I dunno.

It didn't actually come up that often; what *did* come up with a regularity that surprised me was people bidding with ads splattered in digital blood and gore. I guess a lot of PW bidders don't know that *other* ad services expressly forbid that on sites where you're showing their ad boxes--so if you had say a Google ad on the same page that would be showing the PW ad, gore in the PW ad could potentially be a red flag for the other advertising service...I would think.

But I suppose loads of PW-ad-serving sites either don't care about that or have such things themselves so those banners still find plenty of places to get shown.
_________________

[graffitionthesun]

Nope

I'm just happy that someone wants to advertise on my site.

But I might block a site if it's too porn-y or something not that I'm anti-porn but I'd like my site to be safe for everyone

[Bjork]

i don't even look at the ads on sites so i don't think you need to turn any ads down. it's like commercials on tv no one really pays attention

[ewomack]

A very small percentage do pay attention and do click on ads. I put some money into Project Wonderful recently and was pretty surprised at the traffic it generated. Nothing world changing, of course, something like 0.01% clicks, but significant enough to make it seem worth it... once in a while, at least... we'll see.
_________________
Ed Womack

[smbhax.com]

Also, if you're running ads from other networks as well, I would think most of those *will* care about what the content of the other ads is--ie if it doesn't meet their own site requirements, stuff like no gore, profanity, etc.
_________________

[NobbyNobody]

I'm pretty picky about what banners Odd-Fish shows both through PW and ADSDAC

• I blocked several advertisers for overly sexualised girls (or furries *shudder*) on their banners.. which invariably lead to a comic with no sexuality in the content. Trust me, I've looked.
  
• I've blocked banners for inappropriate language. Odd-Fish is PG-13 for focks sake.
  
• I've blocked banners for 'get rich quick' and dubious health/meds/pharmacy content. (One old fashioned rule to whiten your teeth, I'm looking at YOU, Mom makes $20gabillion a minute working from home; you're on my list too)
  
• I've removed banners that glorify smoking, drinking or drugs (Cancer and liver disease aren't not big or clever)
  
• Banners that mislead by pretending to be something else are gone (You are the 100000 visitor you may have won a iped!!!!)
  
• I've blocked one banner that had such appalling sub-manga-wannabe art that it hurt the eyes. (I hate kiddy manga at the best of times) Example of one of the better ones. I've seen worse.
• And lastly I've blocked a banner for the incorrect usage of the word 'your.'

Harsh, but fair.

At the time of writing this, I'm advertising:

• Rock, Paper, Cynic,
• Station V3
• Buttersafe
• Carpe Chaos
• My Life at War and
• Biff Zongo

while while they may not all be to my taste are all quality webcomics.
_________________

[smbhax.com]

NobbyNobody wrote:

I blocked several advertisers for overly sexualised girls (or furries *shudder*) on their banners.. which invariably lead to a comic with no sexuality in the content. Trust me, I've looked.

Man that is always a downer.

EDIT: Ooh see that skyscraper running at the moment is a perfect example of what I meant with blood-spattered ads:



There are *so* many people who do this. SO MANY. It's like I missed Marketing 101 where they said "And remember: blood sells ANYTHING. Especially webcomics."
_________________

[TonyDiGerolamo]

I've never blocked a banner. Why would you stop someone from giving you money?

[n9uxu]

TonyDiGerolamo wrote:

I've never blocked a banner. Why would you stop someone from giving you money?

I don't know... standards?