Due in part to the current state of the economy, it seems that every day we're hearing new complaints and seeing new studies that decry the rising rates in click fraud. In fact, in response to the issue, the IAB recently unveiled its "Click Measurement Guidelines" in an effort to "provide the detailed definition of a 'click' and the standard by which clicks should be measured and counted, including the identification of invalid and/or fraudulent clicks."
This intense focus on curbing click fraud, however, seems to lose sight of the bigger picture. After all, click fraud is on the rise because the recession has prompted many marketers to focus resources on pay-per-click ads because they are seen as being more measurable and cost-effective. But at the same time, more and more studies are pointing to the fact that the click is, on its own, a dead measurement.
In iMedia's recent interview with Gian M. Fulgoni, chairman and co-founder of comScore, Fulgoni noted, "Whoever thought up the click and then positioned it as the definitive measure did the industry a disservice." Later, he added, "The click... just drives me nuts. Maybe it never had value. It says nothing about the branding impact of a display campaign."
So, in the end, is the real answer to click fraud simply that we need to stop caring so darn much about clicks in the first place?
