BBC.com published a story on websites that are using well known names like Forbes and BusinessInsider.com to make ForbesBusinessInsider.com.
The maker of the ForbesBusinessInsider.com site actually replied back to the BBC and said it was a test to find ways of increasing search engine optimisation.
There are some other sites listed that seem to have a ton of page views. The BBC actually notified Google and they stopped allowing ads on some of these sites.
Another commenter went on to say that while they understand it’s a big job, Google has to do better.
From the article:
“We estimate each site is making at least $100,000 [£77,450] a month,” said Vlad Shevtsov, director of investigations at Social Puncher, the firm that exposed a number of fraudulent news sites. The organisation says ad fraud is a million-dollar industry.
So what new about FAKE in the internet!
I was told everything you read inside the internet is true
Until BullS comes along.
People are gullible, that in our genes
A story about nothing? For all we know it could be just some experiment by a web designer/web developer. The only ads I see were affiliate links and the site owner don’t get paid by views. I really don’t see anything wrong with it.
That’s not what the BBC reported, what yo see now is different Google was notified and took ads down.
You see nothing wrong with cybersquatting on forbesbusinessinsider.com? Interesting.
$100,000 per website seems high wonder how social punch came up with that?
Ok, forbesbusinessinsider domain name is cybersquatting, not good. Content scraping, not good. I did not read too closely, I thought the sites were just experiments (claimed by the owner) and all traffic and ad income numbers were all speculations. I thought Google was pretty strict about which websites they allow to display ads?