Hey, I'm Jordan Cooper.
Stand-up comic. Web marketer. Tech douchebag.

Only You (The Client) Can Prevent Getting Scammed

Posted on June 17, 2013

“Can you imagine the outcry if it was found that gas pumps were showing 20 gallons pumped when they were only pumping 10 gallons?”

This what Bob Hoffman ponders after a recent comScore study found that 54% of display ads paid for by advertisers the past year were seen by absolutely no one. Sure, they may have technically appeared on a page, but were never actually visible to a human eye. Yet by all means of measurement, these are counted impressions as shown in thousands of CPM display analytic reports on the desks of chief marketing officers everywhere.

Penning it the ‘$7.5 Billion Ad Swindle‘, Hoffman isn’t shocked by any means (he’s a staunch advocate against the effectiveness of display advertising on the web altogether) but finds the silence in the industry to these facts as the most disturbing part. Essentially, half of client’s ad budgets are being stolen out from under them, either through fraud or incompetence, yet no one even wants to acknowledge it. It’s the steroids in baseball dilemma of 1998. In a time when digital ad budgets are increasing in all verticals, it would be in no one’s best interest (at least for agencies and exchanges) to kill the golden goose.

While the ‘Ad Contrarian’ has a penchant to conjure up default blame in nefarious, shyster activity by unscrupulous marketing firms, I tend to veer in the other direction – that most of these people just don’t have a fucking clue. To compound the issue, the clients of these hapless folks have even less of a clue. Even worse, the client doesn’t actually give a damn and holds no one to any sense of accountability at all. And you wonder how half these ad budgets disappear into the ether?

I may just be a small player dealing with small ‘mom & pop’ businesses with small budgets on a small scale, but I’m constantly amazed at the shenanigans, intentional or not, that are perpetrated on unsuspecting clients who place a ton of trust in agencies with little care in conducting any due diligence. In no way am I even talking about advanced-level work with multi-faceted strategies and many moving tactical parts. It’s the basic, fundamental shit that’s being botched.

I’ve seen phantom SEO work with doctored monthly reports. I’ve seen free WordPress themes as-is peddled as two-thousand dollar products. I’ve seen PPC accounts set up so poorly and mismanaged (if managed at all) that thousands of dollars of a client’s money is practically flushed down the toilet.

I’ve seen web development companies charge co-location prices for “hosting and maintenance” for what turns out to be shared hosting reseller accounts. I’ve seen expensive industry-specific web platforms with e-mail marketing funnels that have a deliverability rate under 20%. I’ve seen a marketing agency downright steal a fucking domain name from a client and charge them over a thousand bucks a year to simply keep their website from disappearing.

Sure, some of these instances were knowingly pure scams, no doubt about it. Some, however, are just a case of total ineptitude or poor sub-contractor accountability (which is a whole ‘nother story – as clients rarely know behind the scenes how much work is being arbitraged to third-world countries). But in all cases, the business being served wasn’t even aware that anything was out of the ordinary. They’re not experts in the technical sense by any means and just assume it’s the normal ‘cost of doing business’ and the way things are done. Until someone with a speck of domain experience actually takes more than a passing glance at what’s happening under the hood, the charade will continue with them being none the wiser.

Although I’m typically not involved with display media buying (yes, I am very much aligned with Bob Hoffman in its ineffectiveness), it’s not a surprise at all that so many counted ad impressions are going unverified with both the agency and client in the dark. Yet it’s too easy to blame just the marketers for this. At some point, clients must hold their agencies, vendors, partners, consultants and any other party in the process accountable – both in the proposal stage and initial sign-on as well as on a regular basis throughout the course of the relationship. [1]

Trust me, I’m not trying to make excuses for shitty third-party work and scapegoat the client to blame fully. But really, do you think such shenanigans – like a few billion dollars of display ad budgets being ‘scammed’ away – would be able to continue if businesses kept up more closely in what was being executed on their behalf?

I highly doubt it. That is how the problem gets solved. Survival of the fittest ensues. The industry regulating itself? That’s a lost fucking cause.

1. This is why my agency’s marketing services are always on a month-to-month basis, no yearly contracts. We have to sell ourselves and show our value every single month when meeting with our clients.

Who Made You A Designer?

Posted on June 16, 2013

Doling out the brutal truth that no matter if the government has the public under surveillance, you’re not important enough to spy on in the first place.

Subscribe to the podcast in iTunes if you give a damn!

I rant about the leaked NSA secret spy program, the real reason why Edward Snowden outed himself, how the public overestimates the government’s competence executing anything tech-related, how congressional oversight is only a game of “cover your ass”, and question if terrorism is truly worth fighting at all.

In addition, I quickly run through Apple’s power user-friendly announcements at WWDC and bemoan the spoiled fanboys focusing on design over functionality, try to understand the point of Google’s billion dollar acquisition of Waze, and in the midst of recently released smartphone ownership figures, explain that the reason many people do not purchase apps is due to the built-in expectation of a product.

play audio Who Made You A Designer?

Links from this episode:

We Are Shocked
Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic
The Irrationality of Giving Up This Much Liberty to Fight Terror
Why Google Wanted Waze: The Local Ad Market Is Going Mobile
Thoughts On iOS 7 “Why Wasn’t I Consulted?” Edition
56% of American adults are now smartphone owners
Customers need to help fix the App Store economy

Death Of Photographers In The Age Of Pageview Journalism

Posted on June 15, 2013

Want to know how to best piss off a professional photographer? Show off your Instagram-filtered iPhone shots taken in a brief period of lucidity during a drunken stupor. “Doesn’t this one looks awesome?” you proclaim, flashing a quick glimpse to your accredited four-year degreed photojournalist buddy. As he attempts to hold back the rage towards this demeaning display, yet unintentional minimizing of his craft, you blurt out “these seem as good as the ones you shoot, huh?” Commence hate crew death roll.

While I do have respect for those skilled in the photographic arts, it’s this perception, true or not, that’s financially devaluing the profession – leading to outfits such as the Chicago Tribune laying off their entire photo staff (yet they’re continuing to employ them on a freelance basis). I can’t blame them, though.

Except for the very rare poignantly-taken iconic photograph, I really can’t tell the difference between a good amateur shot and a professional one. Even worse for the industry, I frankly don’t give a shit.

The public doesn’t either – at least when it comes to news. Do I really care what image is used when reading about the U.S. arming Syrian rebels or what shot is plastered on the Amy’s Baking Company train wreck I rubbernecked for a few days?

Print newspapers naturally have a fixed space available for stories. Even less for smaller, local happenings. Having photos to frame these narratives properly are important when you’re limited to four-hundred words of text allotted for it. The visual imagery also helps veer reader’s eyes towards worthy pieces amongst the pages of newsprint vying for attention. In this method and medium, an amateur iPhone shot won’t do. But both are becoming deprecated at an extremely quick pace.

For journalism on the web, there’s infinite space available for stories. From important world news to the local high school’s bake sale, outlets can cover anything on any day and it all “makes the paper”. Instead of only three stories able to be featured on the cover, hundreds can be showcased on a site’s home page. Readers aren’t bound anymore to the confines of a print package with the news organization guiding the way. In this case, the image included in a particular piece is drastically minimized in importance. Actually, many times it can hinder the reading experience.

Never mind the fact that even on the web, other than the top stories showcased in each category, visitors won’t even see the image of the piece until actually clicking to view the article. Based on the sheer quantity and choice of content daily, with a few hits and a ton of misses, most of these photos (no matter how great they may be) are just disappearing into the ether barely viewed. Can you then really blame a news outlet from cutting back on professional photography when it goes under-utilized, under-appreciated and does nothing to increase readership or the bottom line?

Photographers can whine all they want, but I guarantee that I won’t be able to tell the difference between their work and shots taken by journalists on their iPhone. Don’t blame the newspapers. Blame me. Blame the public.

While one profession is on the decline, another should see a proportional upturn. With the shift inside news organizations towards digital-first journalism, the money is better spent on copywriters. Like it or not, a picture may speak a thousand words, but a headline speaks a thousand clicks.

Start Buttons Fix Everything

Posted on May 31, 2013

Doling out the brutal truth that being outraged over someone else’s speech is purely based on insecurities over how much it can potentially influence you.

Subscribe to the podcast in iTunes if you give a damn!

I rant about the recent Tumblr acquisition, why the platform has not come anywhere close yet to being fully matured regardless of the perception by early adopter types, how it doesn’t make Yahoo “cool”, and why the majority of users frankly don’t give a damn who owns or makes the products they use.

In addition, I laud Microsoft’s half-ass attempt to spur Windows 8 adoption rates, explain why the XBox One will not be the device that owns the living room despite its lofty claim, expose the hypocritical perception that Google operates nefariously, and comment on the latest round of feminist bloggers attacking male comedians.

play audio Start Buttons Fix Everything

Links from this episode:

How Yahoo Will Wring $1.1B Out of Tumblr
Marissa Mayer Has Already Made One Big Mistake With Tumblr
Tumblr, you should have taken my money
Microsoft Gives In To The Old Guard
Windows isn’t a feature, it’s a liability
Xbox One: Microsoft’s new console, Kinect, and a big bet on TV
The Future Of Television Isn’t About the Hardware
Why we can’t quite seem to make up our minds about Google
Google, The Villain
Facebook Should Not be in the Business of Censoring Speech, Even Hate Speech
Feminst writer calls comedy clubs ‘dark basements full of angry men’

The Inception Of Douchebaggery

Posted on May 12, 2013

Doling out the brutal truth that when you’re only one disgruntled consumer out of many satisfied millions, your money means jack shit to a company’s bottom line.

Subscribe to the podcast in iTunes if you give a damn!

I rant about Adobe killing Creative Suite for it’s cloud subscription service, how it’s a win-win-win for casuals, professionals and the company itself, and that anyone complaining must be pirating the software to begin with and not admitting it.

In addition, I explore the reasoning behind YouTube’s new paid subscription channels, why there’s way too much content out there for “extras” to succeed, and describe a utopia that no mainstream media company would ever allow to happen.

Plus I explain how the nationwide online sales tax will end up backfiring royally on brick-and-mortar establishments and share the real reason certain folks are outraged over the recent comments made by Abercrombie & Fitch’s CEO.

play audio The Inception Of Douchebaggery

Links from this episode:

Adobe: 5 Reasons We Killed The Creative Suite
Adobe’s Subscription Model & Why Platform Owners Should Care
Can YouTube succeed with its paid channel subscriptions?
YouTube to advertisers: We’re the new TV, because we’re nothing like TV
Senate passes nationwide online sales tax bill
Abercrombie, Fat Chicks & Polarization in Marketing

Older Posts