RealTechNews.com - Independent Tech

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Asbestos Blog Created Just for AdSense Clicks
Found this on BoingBoing. Looks like someone found a Google AdSense keyword - "Asbestos" that pays between $15 and $100 per click and so he created a real blog on the topic with real answers. Here are the details:

"Michael Buffington has started a topical blog on asbestos, a subject he's not all that interested in, because there's a high pay-per-click fee being paid by asbestos-lawsuit lawyers via Google's AdWords program. He finds his material through a keyword search on Google News.

He says, "Lawyers are paying anywhere from $15-100 per click through on Google ads. The second part of this big experiment is to see if I can capture some of that click through revenue while still providing a somewhat valid service to people who might arrive by search results.

"I say somewhat valid, because despite the fact that I read every article and summarize the article in every blog entry, the speed at which it all happens seems too good to be true. Quite literally, the current 20 or so articles on the site took me about an hour of cumulative time to produce. Granted, I'm making it easier on my self by allowing Google to tell me where the news is, but that's the point of their service right? Also, I'm not expert. But over the course of just 20 blog entries, I might know more than the average Joe about asbestos."

So, this one is legal, but does it seem creepy or smart?

# Permalink Posted at 7:14 AM 3 comments Email this Link

Comments on this Item:

Legal?
Urban Legend?

Kindly show ANY $100.00 clickthrough contract....

A&B, you had a click-through contract - did it pay $100.00/per?
Was that why Alice was in the boat with that sign?

OR, is this just a typical urban legend following the current political bashing of the asbestosis.

Why not cite a reliable source: http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/6_36.htm

The National Cancer Institute (a part of the National Institute of Health) facing a 9.3% proposed budget cut has been fighting the effects of asbestos in the environment.

Johns Manville Corp. made history by going Bankrupt when it was a liquid and profitable company - because it determined that it had massive liability for distributing unsave products.

The courts agreed (although, the scheme was hatched by the insuror and not directly by the Johns Manville Corp.) and a trust fund was established for victims (but, as with all bankruptcy actions, the fund paid pennies on each dollar lost).

Tens of thousands of US citizens have died, or are dying because of the pervasive medical problems caused by this mineral. The costs are either born by the government (VA benefits, Medicare, Medicaid, Worker's Compensation) or private health care and private liability carriers (who are fighting their duty to pay under their contracts).

See,
As Johns-Manville's primary insurer from 1947 to 1976, Travelers Property Casualty Corp. has been targeted with direct actions against it since the 1986 confirmation of Johns-Manville's bankruptcy reorganization plan, with suits in Texas, West Virginia, Hawaii and other states. Claimants nationwide argued that the agreement with Johns-Manville did not prevent Travelers from being sued directly, but only specified its role to indemnify claims against Johns-Manville in its bankruptcy case. The claimants argued that Travelers should be liable because it engaged in unfair settlement practices and entered into low monetary settlements in bad faith when it knew and suppressed knowledge of the dangers of asbestos over its nearly 30-year insurance relationship with Johns-Manville. Conversely, Travelers, a settling insurer in the 1986 reorganization plan, argued that it learned the risks of asbestos from Johns-Manville and that the insurance settlement within Johns-Manville's reorganization plan included a permanent injunction that bars any suits against it directly.

There is no issue about who the parties are. There is no issue about the scope of the damages. The only thing being litigated today is how the loss/damage is apportioned - to the insurors or the taxpayers. Is this an example of how the "free market" serves us best or is this an example of how the Courts can be the mechanism by which the public can demand that the people who did the damage pay their own way?

No attorney is paying $100.00 per clickthrough for a Google ad and this is just a silly, silly post.

# posted by Anonymous 8:55 AM

Dude, I think I can sum up your lengthy comment with three letters: WTF?

Don Mynack

# posted by Anonymous 9:09 AM

WTF?

WTF post #1!

As for you - hang around an old tire shop & do a few dozen brake jobs - or junk a few 1940-1960 era furnaces from the 'nice side' of town.

You will get "WTF" in 18 months or so.

# posted by Anonymous 4:24 AM

Post a Comment