Skimlinks on Talk

[AmyGMumsnet]

Hi folks,

Some of you might have spotted a few more links in discussions across the site - this is because we're testing out a programme called Skimlinks, which auto-converts some of your brand mentions into links.

This makes it easier for you to have a look at products that other MNers happen to mention on the boards, and, if you decide to make a purchase from one of these links, Mumsnet benefits from a small commission.

Thanks all - let us know if you experience any issues that you think might be related.

MNHQ

[SoupDragon]

The "own previous user name" is because the poster typed my own previous username but without the spaces after the brackets.

[Seeline]

Not a fan. It is intrusive, interrupts the flow of posts, and is often totally irrelevant when a normal word happens to be brand name. If there is a link in a post, I want to know that it has been placed there by the poster because it is relevant to their post.

[leccybill]

Would rather have a paywall and subscribe to Mumsnet ten times over than have skimlinks.

[Waltons]

Thanks, soup, that occurred to me, but I've seen a couple of other random ones. I can't remember exactly where though - I'll post any that I do find.

[AQuietMind]

Someone has posted a thread HERE Saying she nodded off reading MN but has woken up to have accidentally bought 2 albums from iTunes, Could this have something to do with these links?

[SoupDragon]

Unless the links can log a person into iTunes and select and download two separate albums, I doubt it.

[AQuietMind]

I'm rubbish with Tech just thought I'd mention it :)

[specialsubject]

Skimlinks for me just stops on their landing page, so never goes further. Maybe due to ad blocker. Anyway, if I see it I just close the tab and leave the site so I won't be buying anything.

[JustAnotherSilentOldNumber]

Halfords
huggies
Pampers
mars bars
rolex
tescos
mumsnet

[JustAnotherSilentOldNumber]

[Soubriquet]

They don't show on the mobile site. Not the app, the old fashioned mobile one that you get to by scrolling down to the very bottom of the main site and clicking the "mobile site" button

Aaah that explains why I am not seeing them

[OokSaidTheLibrarian]

I really dislike these. I actively avoid using any site that has them, they look awful and you accidentally click on them... Horrible.
Would definitely pay for ad free access though.

[SandyDenny]

I agree with the poster above who said they make a site look cheap.

It reminds me of some of the clickbait sites

[60sname]

As a pp said it looks so cheap and reminds me of porn sites with endless links everywhere. I don't like wrap ads either as a user but they don't affect my perception of the 'quality' of the site.

[Chippednailvarnishing]

So if I keep posting that cadburys chocolate tastes like shite since kraft bought them, MN gets money and Cadburys and kraft ads will flood my screen?

I'm sure there's a flaw in your plan somewhere MNHQ.

[IAmNotAUserNumber]

I posted this on another thread. I didn't know they were called Sminlinks so hadn't picked up on this thread:-

You
Why does typing in names of certain companies automatically cause them to hyperlink to their websites?
Like here - Sainsburys
and here - Halfords

I appreciate MN needs revenue to survive, but actually hyperlinking on words in people's threads seems a bit much. It's like a parody of a movie where absolutely every product is brought in as sponsorship - hero drinks from cans clearly marked Coke, Budweiser; eats from MacDonalds take-away bags, visibly puts on his Nike trainers.
hmm
I don't like it.
It's tacky.

[WipsGlitter]

It's not on the app. Do most people access the site on a desktop??

[geekaMaxima]

MNHQ, please rethink this decision.

People discuss a lot of moving and sensitive stuff on MN. Imagine how intrusive and just plain awful it would be to have links inserting themselves into posts about bereavement, sexual assault, seriously ill children, etc. Do you really want someone posting for a support when their premature baby has died in NICU and the thread is shoved full of links to baby clothes and baby cots and baby foods?

Just... no.

[AliceInUnderpants]

Mumsnet, can you please respond to the point I raised days ago in a reported thread, and through email....

WHY are these affiliate links 'hidden' from plain sight? Usually with an affiliate link, when you hover over them, it would be obvious. Why is this being done in such a sneaky way?
And also, where in the signup process did we agree to you sharing details with marketing companies such as the content and value of our shopping purchases?

[DJKKSlider]

Could there be a pay to ensure scum bag journos don't copy and paste threads into shit rags?

[AliceInUnderpants]

For reference for MNHQ:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2846336-Is-anyone-else-finding-the-word-sainsbury-s-as-a-link-to-the-website

And to everyone else, there's details there of what information MNHQ are selling about our usage, and also details of how you can block or opt out of this intrusion.

I'd also quite like a response to my question about whether we are to expect from now on that all clicks on this website are now hidden marketing attempts, despite not being apparent.

[GoodyGoodyGumdrops]

Deeply dislike this advertising strategy. Makes an individual's post into an free advertisement - even if they do not in any way endorse the product. At the very least it should be made blatantly clear that this is not a link inserted by the poster themselves.

[JustineMumsnet]

@AliceInUnderpants

For reference for MNHQ:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2846336-Is-anyone-else-finding-the-word-sainsbury-s-as-a-link-to-the-website

And to everyone else, there's details there of what information MNHQ are selling about our usage, and also details of how you can block or opt out of this intrusion.

I'd also quite like a response to my question about whether we are to expect from now on that all clicks on this website are now hidden marketing attempts, despite not being apparent.

Hi Alice - this is not something we've tried to hide from users. Hence this conversation. As said, we need to generate revenue somehow as this is a large site and expensive to run. We're not passing your data or putting big intrusive ads up - things that many sites routinely do - we're turning a few mentions of shops into links which may even be useful sometimes.

In truth, none of these decisions are easy. I'd rather Mumsnet was completely devoid of marketing but it's just not realistic so until some rich philanthropist comes along and offers to bankroll us we do need to generate revenue somehow.

[SealSong]

MNHQ, if you want to go ahead with these word links, could they please be in a different colour to the links people create in their posts? That would really help avoid confusion.

[PencilsInSpace]

I dunno, Justine. Skimlinks have been lurking in the background of the site for ages before the introduction of these autolinks, along with a few other ad trackers. I questioned this on the 'why is MN so slow?' thread and asked what data they are collecting.

Your privacy policy says:

Passive Information Collection

As you navigate through this site, certain anonymous information can be passively collected (that is, gathered without your actively providing the information) using various technologies, such as cookies*, clicktags, beacons and other navigational data collection (such as server logs). Your internet browser automatically transmits to this site some of this anonymous information, such as the url of the website you just came from and the IP address and the browser version your computer is currently using. Via the IP address we may also determine your rough geographical location, such as town or city.

This helps us analyse data about our site traffic, so we can improve Mumsnet and tailor it more to our members' needs. All information is anonymous and only used for operational purposes.

Clearly Skimlinks and the others are collecting passive data for reasons other than 'operational purposes', we've been to their site - it's their whole business model. Does it not count if it's a third party to whom you've given permission, rather than MN itself?

I do think this is a bad move. There have been problems with stability, speed and security which I wouldn't mind betting are down to the ads and ad-related scripts that are running and this latest development looks like the kind of thing that happens when you get a virus. It makes the site look cheap and nasty and IMO damages your brand. I think it's likely that more and more people will just start blocking ads and ad trackers altogether.

I realise MN needs to make money. Several of us have said we'd pay for an ad-free version. It could be offered as an option, then people who don't want to pay can continue to see ads. Worth a try?

I think at the very least you need to update your privacy policy.