This drop in traffic seems to have affected the majority of us who transitioned here from Squidoo. After we updated our articles are traffic virtually stopped dead. The question is why? Was our redirect from Squidoo killed with the update?
What the heck happened? Please try to figure out why the sudden massive traffic drops for us importing our articles to Hubpages because this is so very disheartening.
How frustrating for you. I have seen no change in my traffic at all although my sales are slower.
I'm wondering if this isn't just a problem across the Internet; maybe not for everyone, but for a significant number of people. Because my traffic has dropped on my Hubs and also on my own websites. Does something go on in late September that causes a drop in traffic? Hope so.
Edit: Actually, not sure if my traffic drop is totally unusual or a normal fluctuation.
just checking in to say hi, hadn't seen your post, wanted to show support - feeling the pain too
Let me join with a strong 'me too'. After the 15th (i.e. 10 days after I transferred my lenses to hubs), I lost 90% of my traffic (from over 5000 down to 700 - today is 490 btw and still going steadily down.). And just 3 weeks ago we were discussing on another board how Squidoo traffic was increasing since June...and then the move and losing all our traffic and earnings.
Oh well, we'll weather this as well, hopefully.
Lorelei I have noticed this as well, but figured it was because my photo links to products were stripped with the tag words. I don't know if that could be a reason or not, but it sure has hurt sales.
@favored & @Lorelei, just to tell you two that I have noticed that as well! I used to get a lot of traffic from Google but now it is the opposite. Are my lenses on Hubpages very poor? I want to find a solution behind this. Thank you.
Be patient. It takes time for traffic to pick up. Certain hubs stay virtually dormant for a year, then suddenly jump in traffic tenfold.
Sharing the lowest scoring hubs on social media often boosts their traffic.
Is it really the majority of lensmasters seeing a drop? It is a serious problem for people getting hit, and I don't want to minimize that; on the other hand, I'm hearing from other people who are seeing traffic pick up after transfer.
It's a little challenging for me to make an apples-to-apples comparison, because I deleted about 140 lenses on 8/20-8/22 in preparation for the move. That said, all my lenses had transferred by 9/7. So, here's my two-week traffic.
Google Analytics for my 260 Lenses in their new home on Hubpages:
9/8-9/21 (14 days, Monday to Sunday)
And here's my two-week traffic before they were moved.
Google Analytics for 400 Squidoo lenses:
8/4-8/17 (14 days, Monday to Sunday)
Sessions: 20,257 (Hubpages increase = 137%)
Pageviews: 24,575 (Hubpages increase = 139%)
Google Analytics for 400 lenses trimmed to 260:
8/18-8/31 (14 days, Monday to Sunday)
Sessions: 18,247 (Hubpages increase = 152%)
Pageviews: 21,990 (Hubpages increase =156%)
So even though my Squidoo portfolio has 35% fewer articles than it did before the transfer, it's still drawing about 140% more traffic than it did before the transfer.
The other telling thing is this. Here's the Quantcast data for Hubpages & Squidoo over the past month and a half.
Quantcast's measurement of "Global Uniques"—
(A good chunk of lenses were transferred 9/2-9/7).
Keep in mind that many lenses and all of Squidoo's magazines and categories and HQ pages and forums are not being transferred, and a significant number of lenses were deleted by lensmasters preparing for the move. Despite that fact, overall traffic is rising.
That traffic may be partly seasonal, but at any rate, overall, it's not dropping.
I see the same increase in traffic using GreekGeek's dates. However, there has been a noticeable dip in traffic since last Wednesday, 9/17 from the beginning of the transfer on 9/8. Although in the last 2 days, traffic has been slowly increasing on my end. The dip is above the August traffic, however, that's always been the case on my end as traffic has always been greater in September.
Yep, my lenses came from Squidooo with good traffic,and that traffic stayed until I edited them as hubs. Then zonk! Traffic zoomed down to practically nothing. Some with no visitors at all after 2,000 a week in their old home
The articles on my one account were seeing between 1500 and 2000 visits per day when they arrived and this past week have dropped to around 500 a day. That is a huge drop. I would say it might be fluke on one account but I have 3 accounts that have transferred over. The two that I have edited have dropped like flies in a hail storm. The other account which I am just beginning to edit is still doing fine. It appears to be the update that initiates the drop.
that's a big drop for sure - painful. I was up to 8000 but averaging 4000 a day and climbing - now since the drop started around the 15th, just under 1000 visits a day and very few from google - I expected an adjustment (to drop some, and have to regain some momentum, but honestly I did not expect this)
Mine were doing much better traffic-wise until the past day or so, when suddenly my traffic plunged! I don't understand what happened. (It's been a week or two since I updated my top articles.)
Not sure what the problem is, but it's extremely discouraging.
Yep, my Google traffic had been way up for more than a week, but two days ago it suddenly plummeted. Very odd! Google Webmaster Tools doesn't list any manual spam actions for me.
I'm checking my backlinks through Google Webmaster Tools and updating to the HP address where I can. We'll see if that changes anything.
In a related question, how often does the internal hub statistics update. Is it once a day or does it continually update?
My traffic went up dramatically, then afterwards went down dramatically. Waiting to see what comes next.
Neither. It semi-regularly updates. With stoppages when they happen.
That's why some of us use it for the very cursory tool it was meant to be and instead do our actual data mining from our Analytics accounts. Because that's how HubPages admin wanted it to work, because they use Analytics in real-time too.
Ah! I'm looking again at my stats on Hubpages and it says that it hasn't updated in 13 hours. So that may be part (or all) of the problem. Thanks so much for that explanation, Relache!
I'll learn how all these things work eventually. :-}
Okay, I went straight to Google Analytics and according to their stats, my overall traffic took a nose-dive yesterday. So I think the issue is more than just the reporting lag at Hubpages. :-(
I understand how frustrating it can be to see traffic fall and to feel the pain of not really understanding why something was getting quite a bit of traffic and now it's not. Over the last several years, we have studied this relentlessly and while we can't bring your traffic back or tell you exactly what each Hub needs, we can share a bit about what we have done and how we think about content strategy today.
It will take a while for things to settle down for all the content we transferred from Squidoo to HubPages. My expectation is it will be a bit bumpy until we hit a steady state over the next several months.
On HubPages, each user is given a subdomain and as the search engines process the 301s, it will take the various algorithms time to adjust and the rankings to settle in for the moved content.
For people that are new to HubPages, while we are one big community, subdomains make us a bit unique in that individual authors are generally treated as standalone sites by search engines. It's common for us to see some subdomains rise and others fall frequently. However, our data indicates that higher quality content is standing the test of time. We've done our best to show examples and educate people on how to think about content.
Many Hubbers have been through turbulent traffic times and several have adjusted and found ways to prosper.
What we have found that helps stabilize and grow traffic is updating content to a few basic rules.
- Ensure content is one of a kind (unique - can't get it elsewhere), helpful in that the users query is resolved clearly and efficiently.
- Copy edit Hubs - Twice:)
- Links are useful to the reader and enhance the reading experience (remove any semi or less relevant link)
- Affiliate links and content make a minimal part of the page's content and add value for the reader.
To all Squidoo transfers. Take advantage of HubPro. If it's offered to you, having a professional editor accompanied by illustrators and now photographers will transform your work into an exceptionally professional piece that will satisfy readers!
Thanks for this response. I have two questions:
1. What does this mean (above)?
2. I am a professional writer, not just on Hubpages, so the HubPro program scares me a little as it comes to editing out style and purpose in my writing. How is that handled?
Copy edit - fix grammar and spelling mistakes.
The analogy I use is if you write for the New York Times, you have an editor. Edits really depend on what the Hub needs.
We have found that there are several Hubs that need little in terms of editing the writing, but are greatly enhanced with original illustrations.
The feedback has been very positive and the results are excellent, so we are going to invest significantly more in HubPro.
I'm also apprehensive. I've had my craft instructions edited by an arts and crafts publishing company, and I've seen what happens when someone who doesn't have my breadth of knowledge about that industry tries to edit my writing. As a former editor at the world's largest craft company, I'm not sure you have anyone more qualified than I am to edit my work!
Thanks, that's helpful! I'm also getting a lot of traffic from social media. Those hubs are different from the ones that were getting a lot of Google traffic, but at least it's some kind of balance for the bad times.
As a squidoo refugee myself I will also chime in that I am seeing slight increase in traffic and not a decrease. Sorry to hear some are experience severe drops.
I'm not seeing any drop in traffic - other than for the few days when the Google Ad Sense earnings dried up for some reason.
My figures are not unlike GG's re overall percentage increase.
Plus I've also done a calculation on earnings to date averaged to a daily rate and multiplied up to the equivalent of an average month and while not an improvement it's certainly no worse than some of the better Squidoo payments in recent months. If we get a normal month for AdSense I'm hopeful that monthly payouts might even improve.
I'm entirely unconcerned right now and just trying to focus on my regime of trying to address and improve 2-3 hubs per day
My visitor numbers increased about 5-fold in the month following the transfer from Squidoo. About two hours ago, my 1-day traffic plummeted to less than half of what I'd been experiencing since the transfer. I understand this is due to a new Panda rollout. Not all of us are getting hit at the same instant. But we probably all will at some point It just takes Google a while to crawl every Hubber's pages.
Or it could just be Friday - one of the quietest days of the week.
No, the drop started Tuesday and has continued.
Swisstoons mentioned a new Panda update and I suspect that's the problem. :-( I was able to do a few minutes of research last night and it sounds like the timing is right. I only have a couple of articles that are a bit thin, but maybe that was enough for my whole account to get hit? Or maybe Hubpages as a whole is being affected because of the Squidoo migration? I'm sure there were more than a few thin lenses that got brought over.
I've unpublished both of my thin content articles and I'll be reviewing the rest thoroughly with an eye to removing extra Amazon modules. Not sure what else there is to do at this point.
It seems to be affecting some people badly, some moderately and others hardly at all.
I'd tend to look at the type of hub being produced.
My work is quality. The one account used to garner between 20,000 and 30,000 visits per week before the Google slap. After the Google slap it was sitting between 7000 and 10,000 and now it shows at less than 400 visits here which adds up to less than 3000 visits per week. The content is still good. It is obviously other factors which have changed.
I have visited articles of other writers who have voiced concerns over their drop in traffic and can say they show excellent quality not worthy of this type of drop.
I wonder if Google has "switched off" Squidoo so the redirects aren't actually generating any traffic?
Is that possible? That might then explain why it affects some more than others
I was also wondering if the redirects had somehow been affected or broken at some point along the pathway.
something's definitely not right in the state of Denmark because it's happening to most of us (all of us who were on subdomains at squidoo, not sure about those who weren't in terms of the drop?) - it's absolutely brutal, much worse than when I was switched to subdomains on squidoo a few years ago (I grew to love my subdomain too, it was doing very well)
Perhaps the redirects are all fine and working just dandy but anything with a Squidoo url is now worthless in the SERPs so if no-one is finding the url in the first place then the redirect is really just moot
I'm getting referrals from Squidoo. The drop is in Google organic search. So was the sudden rise a couple of weeks ago.
What this looks like is what they used to call the "sandbox effect"--new domains getting a rush of traffic as Google collects data, then losing it abruptly as they're placed. I speculate that Google treats each subdomain like a new domain.
yep, for me purely organic - as well as the 12 new pages I built BEFORE the transfer, which ranked almost immediately for their music search terms and are now no longer ranking for those same terms - they were not part of the transfer, but they are on my transfer-subdomain.
So, I have an old hub account I rarely used, and I'm going to build a new music page there to see if it ranks for what it's suppose to within a similar time frame that these previous 12 did. If it does, I'll be very reluctant to continue building on my transferred subdomain - ok, over time it may recover, and I can dabble at it, fix it of course, and I will, but in the meantime, if this works better for new pages, I'll use it. Will post if it works out better on my old hub account (in terms of google ranking)
I was just going to delete my old account to combine it with my new accounts but perhaps this is a bit hasty then? I just have too many accounts here now it is getting kind of crazy trying to manage it all.
HubPages is not a new domain.
Google's Matt Cutts: "Subdomains are now treated just like folders (subdirectories)."
A new subdomain on HP is no more significant than a new folder on any other website, and this has been true at least since late 2012.
Not everyone agrees with you.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/125277? … ost2645231
They don't have to agree with me or with Matt Cutts. But, if you would like to disagree with Matt Cutts, and tell him he's wrong, you can leave a comment on his blog.
Is Matt Cutts God? No. Is he going to respond to me? I bet he won't. Google is famous for obfuscation. I'd believe the actual experience of webmasters over the word of one spokesperson.
The purpose of that video was to discourage webmasters from using sub-domains to game the search engines - it was in his interest to exaggerate or over-simplify to achieve that goal.
Did you actually study all of those links or are you just determined not to listen to any other views?
By the way, Paul Edmonson thinks sub-domains are treated separately too:
Matt Cutts' title at Google is Distinguished Engineer and Head of Search Quality. In the video, Matt explains why subdomains are treated just like folders now: because subdomains were used to game the system when they were treated like separate sites. Now, they are not. At one time, links between subdomains were considered external links by Google. Now, they are treated as internal links.
And, yes, I've read all the old information you posted. Did you notice that Rand did away with subdomains on his site? It's up to you whether or not you want to listen to Google.
The links I posted were a lot newer than that Matt Cutts video.
Yes, Rand did way with subdomains on his site because he found that when he moved the content to sub-directories, it ranked much better because it was considered as part of the main site instead of separate - that's the whole point. What's your explanation for that? Same with that case study from March 2014?
Isn't the point that it's the ADDED VALUE of the sub-domain which means that it is treated better by Google.
Thus if you have a sub-domain which is primarily about ONE SUBJECT AREA and creates a cluster of sites about topics within that subject area PLUS the content is good quality then Google is likely to love you and treat you better.
The way I look at it is if you have a sub-domain where the only thing that links the topics on that sub-domain is the person who writes the content, then there is no obvious and clear identity for the sub-domain (because bottom line Google really doesn't care who you are - it only cares about sorting queries in relation to subjects). It therefore has no obvious reason to treat your sub-domain any better than individual sites on any old domain.
To me that just makes common sense. Google has always liked clusters around subjects and weight of content - and authors who know what they're talking about.
What better way to demonstrate this then through a lot of hubs on the same subject area which cluster under one HubPages sub-domain?
That sounds like a logical argument, however again, I haven't found it to be the case on HubPages.
Everyone knows that if you're writing your own blog, you MUST stick to one topic, otherwise you've got no hope. When the first Panda hit in 2011, there was a lot of debate about whether the same should apply here - and many Hubbers felt the sub-domains should've been arranged by topic, not by author.
However, as it turned out, the author sub-domains seemed to work - because as soon as they were introduced, each sub-domain started behaving individually (some soaring, some improving slightly, some bombing), whether or not they were on a single subject.
In 2012, Matt Cutts came out with the statement that sub-domains would no longer be considered separate, but as each Panda update came out, we continued to see sub-domains rising and falling individually. So Hubbers have always held the view that for some weird reason - perhaps due to HubPages' interconnected topics - it seems to be possible to get readers even without specialising.
Personally, given HubPages vulnerability to theft and the lack of control I have here, if I wanted to concentrate on a specialist subject I would do it on a blog, not on HP.
So has there been a detailed analysis of subdomains relative to categories and overall performance?
Are you saying there is no correlation?
There is certainly no correlation with overall performance - you only have to look at Quantcast. As for categories - no, I've never done a scientific analysis as I don't have access to those figures. However Paul Edmonson must have access to them - and I notice he still maintains that sub-domains are treated separately. Which is why he was willing to take on all the Squidoo sub-domains "as is" and give them a long grace period. You'll notice he also posted that while Squidoo traffic fell, traffic to established sub-domains didn't - though that seems to have changed now, but that could be a Panda effect.
The stumbling block with the theory about sub-domains all being part of the main domain, for me, is other multi-user sites like blogger.com, wordpress.com, tumblr etc. If it's true, that would mean that all blogger blogs are treated as one big blog, all wordpress.com blogs are treated as one site, etc. I can't believe that Google really does that, and therefore it must have some mechanism to recognise when a site has multiple individual members. And if that mechanism exists for other multi-user sites, why wouldn't it apply to HubPages?
I don't have this experience. Every new subdomain I ever created (and most were created after 2011) on any available service (mine sites or free blogging service or whatever) started with authority 0 and none gained authority without content, time and backlinks.
Great thing about HubPages is fact you can build authority much faster than at Wordpress or Blogspot (weeks against months), but on Squidoo, publishing in the right folders, I could make it in hours!
Mr. Cutts said a lot of things, but I only believe in traffic.
Because HubPages links them all together in a mass of spam.
So they are sort of subdomain and sort of not subdomain.
You shouldl write a hub about that.
Marisa - looks like we've run out of reply space!
I'm with you. That's what I think - plus I know for a fact that some places recognise my blog as a site in its own right because it's got its own profile on Quantcast. Incorrect as it happens but then Quantcast has never been brilliant about counting outside the USA!!
On the other hand lots of blogs are not recognised in their own right by various sites - because they are too small, too young, not got enough quality content etc etc.
My personal theory is that recognition is a function of age, quality of content and traffic and associated indicators of same.
My guess is subdomains work in the same way. Fill them full of rubbish and Google goes off you. Keep them filled with good quality content and Google loves you.
It was interesting to note that some of the lensmasters on sub-domains commented on how traffic rose in the last days of Squidoo as people turfed old lenses which had lost the plot and/or not been updated and/or got rid of stuff which they didn't want to transfer for various reasons. Hence those who had their cull before they came to HubPages enjoyed better traffic towards the end at Squidoo.
There were those of us who also thought Squidoo as a whole enjoyed better traffic in the final weeks as the rubbish got turfed.
For lots of people there was too much work involved in backing up to do the cull before the transfer - hence that's what's happening now (as I referenced in another post).
It makes me wonder about the impact on traffic of those who have culled vs those who have still to cull.
The other thing that I'm wondering about is the lenses which came over late and what impact they've had on the site. I think you tended to bring the 180,000 featured lenses first and the rest over later. However I think I'm correct in saying HubPages is operating a differential reception to featured lenses as opposed to to those who were "the rest". Is that right?
My understanding is that all accounts with even one Featured lens have been transferred. However, only the Featured lenses have been published, the rest are unpublished and therefore have no impact on HubPages.
I'll have to let you all know in November . . . Because my pages are primarily Christian Devotions and Bible Studies, I always have a surge at the beginning of every Month (especially on the 1st and 2nd Monday - Wednesday, and the end of the month is scarce. October is always TERRIBLE - everyone is searching for Halloween stuff - I'm guessing that has already started, so if you don't have Halloween geared pages (and I only have one with an unpopular opinion) our numbers will drop. Compare your numbers to last year during the last week of September and see where you are.
UPDATE - After hitting an all time high one day last week, this week I can't even get 100 hits on my highest performing page.
I haven't been this low on that page since I created it.
I now that I'll be dropping in traffic because it's October, but I've never seen a drop like this.
Frustrating . . .
I do not see a change due to editing on HP at all, but have seen a drop the last three days due to HP technical issues. Traffic is picking up again today at least for me.
Hubpages is showing a -46% loss in traffic due the recent Panda update so that is pretty significant. There is definitely a traffic loss. http://blog.searchmetrics.com/us/2014/0 … oogle-u-s/
The link you gave had Hubpages as a loser but their figures actually showed visits increased nearly 400% so they are an unreliable source as one of the sites in the gainer section shows a similar decrease in their numbers. I would not believe this site!
I believe there was a typo in their Hubpage number in the "before" column.
Quantcast also shows a huge drop in traffic to Hubpages last week -- I'm looking at their reported numbers from 9/21 to 9/27 and based on those numbers and my calculations, the 46% drop in traffic is correct.
I think you are right, but Google Panda update rolled out on 23rd September and the drop was later than that. I think we may well see a recovery as the bigger factor is the server updates HP are doing right now and the technical issues the site is having.
My personal figures have recovered today after falling in just the last 3 days. As far as I can see from Google Analytics Panda 4.1 had zero affect on my Hubs! This may not be true for all Hubbers though.
Another positive note is that a majority of the people who have transferred in from Squidoo have been working diligently to bring their articles up to Hubpage standards. That has to help as well. That much effort cannot go unnoticed.
This Panda was an odd one as Google said it would roll out over about 10 days.
Mine is dropping quite dramatically today as well. Hoping things perk up a bit a little further into the week.
Just thought I would update this thread to say "nope things have not improved despite working diligently to improve articles and to promote them."
The it's not me - it's you" attitude no longer seems to apply to this traffic situation. This crash seems to be hitting almost everyone on Hubpages whether they arrived here from Squidoo or were a part of the site previously. I just wish Google had not hit at the time of year when those who work online experience their highest income. This Panda update is going to hurt a lot of real people.
Well, I must say that I never thought my views would go down even further, but yes they have! this is the lowest since I started here five years ago, really fed up now, not sure how to sort it out.
Still dropping... Truly hope that traffic will pick up again. I keep on going on traffic sources pages and sadly I am only getting few hits from google on a daily basis.
I've been reviewing my HubPages traffic relative to the daily traffic for my Squidoo lenses towards the end of their time there.
I'm noticing two things:
1) a number of hubs which have been "sorted" are now pretty much on a par with the traffic they enjoyed at Squidoo. Some are better and some are worse but by and large much of a muchness for these lenses/hubs
2) Those sites which have not been sorted yet (eg big hub and complicated 'refurbishment' required which takes time) are not doing as well. However I think they'll be fine once sorted as they are still picking up reasonable traffic even if it's only c.60% of what it used to be
...and another point.
It's pointless to review traffic on a day by day basis as there are significant fluctuations within each week. For example I always ignore any dips at the end of the week as that's entirely NORMAL!
It's always best to look at 30 days traffic at least and compare that to the typical monthly traffic on Squidoo.
Three months traffic provides an even better picture.
Bottom line you are either in for the long haul or you're not. Getting traffic to take off for any site takes a long time. The same thing happens when it gets transferred to a new URL. The same thing happens in relation to building up a portfolio of sites around a significant niche topic which - apart from quality content - is probably the single biggest influence on your overall traffic. (ie if you have been deleting lenses/hubs you have also been deleting traffic if they are related to ones that remain).
Competition from other good sites on the same topic on HubPages may also account for traffic loss. Why not take a look at who's tackling your topic better than you are and upgrade your content?
Bottom line for me - I'm not doing any sort of serious review of traffic until the end of the year and after I've got all my old lenses/new hubs fixed.
I have been seeing a gradual increase in traffic on all of my Hubs. These all came in as lenses and I have converted all to meet QAP. have found that changing the incoming links from Squidoo to HP has quite a marked affect. Therefore I am of the opinion that Squidoo is "persona non grata" at Google now!
by Katherine Tyrrell 6 years ago
I'm 100% on the side of doing a proper beta test and taking time to make sure every kind of lens transfers with ease - from the small simple ones to the big long complex ones - like mine! I'm less bothered by WHEN my lenses transfer to HubPages than I am about WHETHER they all transfer intact -...
by Tony 6 years ago
There has been a lot of discussion in the last few days about HP changing the rules and people being un-featured or even un-published for spam and over promotional activity. So I just want to add my thoughts......Whether people (writers) like it or not most of their traffic will be coming from...
by Georgie Lowery 6 years ago
I'm not knocking anybody (or maybe I am) but I have seen several "Hubs" that transferred from Squidoo that are composed of nothing more than very thin content and a whole bunch of merchandising links (and even one lady who pimped her own Etsy page multiple times in her "Hub")....
by Don Bobbitt 6 years ago
After over a month of careful watching, here is what I have observed as an HP writer;1- My "reads" on HP are steady at 400+ daily.2- Google (US, AU, NE, UK, CA, etc) have all but abandoned my articles with a dramatic decrease in Google Traffic. 3- All of my other sources of traffic are...
by Writer Fox 6 years ago
Now that the transfer is finished and the HP site has been evaluated by both the new Google Panda and Penguin algorithms, the effects of the transferred content to HP can be dissected.1. In the week before the August 15th announcement, HP had 335,638 featured Hubs averaging 4 unique views per...
by Dedicated Content Curator 8 years ago
Oh the joy of seeing traffic rise ..... I set out to increase traffic two weeks ago and saw it increase by 40% per day.Trouble is ... today, for no good reason, it's dipped 20% below the starting point.Oh such a sad day Maybe the world is holding its breath because my hubs are so awesome...... and...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|