Re: Invalid Clicks [4-7821000036681]

From
Alexa Graziani <agraziani@thekey.com>
To
Timothy Thomas <tt@thekey.com>
CC
Louise Scanlan <louise@20eight.ca>, Reyna Lopez <reyna.lopez@thekey.com>, Carmina Pulliam <carminap@google.com>
Date
Wed, 8 May 2024 10:09:12 -0700
Folder
INBOX
--0000000000003469cd0617f45d15 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Update - Just spoke to Reyna and she agrees with this analysis and next steps. On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:43=E2=80=AFAM Alexa Graziani wrote: > Hi Louise, > > Tim let me know that more caregivers are coming through via the search > term "home care assistance". I reviewed Callrail again and they are comin= g > through our BR Max Clicks campaign. I also that they all come from the > referrer https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/14201307?hl=3Den, whic= h > I believe means it was served outside of the Google Search ads. > > Do we have Search Partners turned on for our settings? If so, let's remov= e > that and restrict ads just to Google Search. This seems to be a > partner site and we can't exclude specific ones. I searched for this site > online and found this Reddit article > of > others who have had similar issues and the recommendation was also to tur= n > off search partners. > > I've added Carmina, who I work with from Google, directly to this chain. > Carmina - does this seem like a Search Partners website to you? > > Reyna - is this something you've come across with Search Partners? > > Thanks, > > On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 12:56=E2=80=AFPM Alexa Graziani > wrote: > >> I confirmed with IT and legal and we will have weblogs by the end of the >> week (or an update on timing if it proves to be more difficult). However= , >> our weblogs don't differentiate between sources. I'm not sure if that wi= ll >> help but it will at least complete the ask so hopefully that will allow >> them to move forward. >> >> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:53=E2=80=AFAM Alexa Graziani >> wrote: >> >>> I'll reach out to Phil to see about the logs and my Google rep to see i= f >>> this is the type of response she expected. >>> >>> The link the support person sent has this section at the end: >>> >>> "Reporting invalid traffic >>> >>> There are many common reasons for increased traffic that don't involve >>> invalid interactions. However, if you suspect that your account is inde= ed >>> affected by invalid interaction activity, we'll investigate your accoun= t. >>> >>> Our team of specialists use a variety of different signals including >>> click and impression information to identify sources of invalid activit= y. >>> Because of the large number of data points we look at, an investigation >>> into your account may take several business days to complete. When you >>> request an investigation, please share as much information you have abo= ut >>> the traffic you're concerned about." >>> >>> >>> It also says the following, which is what we are trying to do. >>> >>> "You=E2=80=99ll be credited for any invalid interaction that escaped ou= r >>> automated detection in the past 2 months." >>> >>> >>> Louise, please let them know that we want to move forward with a full >>> account investigation with the goal of getting credited for invalid >>> interactions that escaped automated detection and that we'll followup w= ith >>> the weblogs. >>> >>> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 8:11=E2=80=AFAM Timothy Thomas w= rote: >>> >>>> That's above my IT paygrade. Alexa? >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:02=E2=80=AFAM Louise Scanlan >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> And here is their nonsensical response... it's as if they didn't read >>>>> anything. >>>>> >>>>> Timothy, am I wrong in thinking even if you pull the server logs we >>>>> will not see IP addresses if they were masked? Are you able to pull t= hose >>>>> logs? >>>>> >>>>> Louise >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 613.228.2028 | 20eight.ca | Louise@20eight.ca >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>> From: >>>>> Date: Mon, May 6, 2024 at 7:44=E2=80=AFPM >>>>> Subject: Invalid Clicks [4-7821000036681] >>>>> To: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [image: Google Logo] >>>>> Hi Louise, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for contacting Google Ads. I sincerely apologize for the delay >>>>> in response. >>>>> >>>>> I understand that you are concerned regarding the invalid clicks in >>>>> your Google Ads account 458-886-9031. >>>>> >>>>> Upon reviewing your query and the files shared by you, I have checked >>>>> that you have taken most steps to make sure invalid clicks are filter= ed out. >>>>> >>>>> If you're worried about invalid interactions in your account, there >>>>> are a number of things you can do to monitor your account's activity. >>>>> >>>>> - Track invalid interactions in your account statistics: Add the >>>>> invalid interaction data columns to your campaign statistics table= to >>>>> review the number and percentage of invalid interactions in your a= ccount. >>>>> Remember that you aren't charged for these interactions, so they d= on't >>>>> affect your account statistics. >>>>> - Optimize your account: Your first line of defense against >>>>> invalid activity is to optimize your account >>>>> so >>>>> your ads receive only the most targeted clicks and impressions. >>>>> Keep in min

Thread (3)