In this post you can find Top 20 List Of Highest Paying , High CPC, Most Expensive Google adsense keywords that have high advertisers and huge earnings . Try to write few articles with using below keyword topics to increase your ad sense earnings and revenue .
Insurance - Around 50$ Cost Per Click
Electricity – Around 50$ Cost Per Click
Loans – Avg. 40$ CPC
Conference Call – 42$ per click on average
Attorney – 45 Dollars
Lawyer – 40$
Mortgage - 47$
Recovery - 40$ Around
Web Hosting – 30$ CPC
Rehab – 33 Dollars
Classes – 35$
Claim - 45$
Donate - 40$
Trading – 30$
Transfer – 25$
Software – 25$
Online Degree – 30$
Electricity – 30
Just bookmark this post and check it monthly once to get more updates on this keywords topic . Always i will do some research to find high paying keywords to help Google ad sense publishers . This post will be update monthly once with new keywords .
How to get traffic and money with using High Paying Adsense keywords ?
First of all create few high quality back links from do follow sites to get good ranking for your site .
Try to improve search engine results page also called as SERP ranking . its very useful to improve your traffic .
After getting good ranking in Google search then write few articles with using above keyword topics . Finally you will get targeted traffic to your blog , then your ad senseearnings will double very rapidly .
Finally enjoy your ad senseearnings and subscribe to Way 4 Geeks feed to get new tips .
Google AdSense is a program run by Google Inc. that allows publishers in the Google Network of content sites to serve automatic text, image, video, and rich media adverts that are targeted to site content and audience. These adverts are administered, sorted, and maintained by Google, and they can generate revenue on either a per-click or per-impression basis. Google beta-tested a cost-per-action service, but discontinued it in October 2008 in favor of a DoubleClick offering (also owned by Google). In Q1 2011, Google earned US$2.43 billion ($9.71 billion annualized), or 28% of total revenue, through Google AdSense.
AdSense for search
A companion to the regular AdSense program, AdSense for search, allows website owners to place Google Custom Search boxes on their websites. When a user searches the Internet or the website with the search box, Google shares 51% of the advertising revenue it makes from those searches with the website owner. However the publisher is paid only if the advertisements on the page are clicked; AdSense does not pay publishers for regular searches. Web publishers have reported that they also pay a range from $0.64 to $0.88 per click.
AdSense for mobile content
AdSense for mobile content allows publishers to generate earnings from their mobile websites using targeted Google advertisements. Just like AdSense for content, Google matches advertisements to the content of a website — in this case, a mobile website. Instead of traditional JavaScript code, technologies such as PHP, ASP and others are used.
AdSense for domains
AdSense for domains allows advertisements to be placed on domain names that have not been developed. This offers domain name owners a way to monetize domain names that are otherwise dormant or not in use. AdSense for domains is currently being offered to all AdSense publishers, but it wasn't always available to all.
On December 12, 2008, TechCrunch reported that AdSense for Domains is available for all US publishers.
On February 22, 2012, Google announced that it was shutting down its Hosted AdSense for Domains program.
AdSense for video
AdSense for video allows publishers with video content to generate revenue using ad placements from Google's extensive Advertising network including popular YouTube videos.
How AdSense works
The webmaster inserts the AdSense JavaScript code into a webpage.
Each time this page is visited, the JavaScript code uses inlined JSON to display content fetched from Google's servers.
For contextual advertisements, Google's servers use a cache of the page to determine a set of high-value keywords. If keywords have been cached already, advertisements are served for those keywords based on the AdWords bidding system. (More details are described in the AdSense patent.)
For site-targeted advertisements, the advertiser chooses the page(s) on which to display advertisements, and pays based on cost per mille (CPM), or the price advertisers choose to pay for every thousand advertisements displayed.
For referrals, Google adds money to the advertiser's account when visitors either download the referred software or subscribe to the referred service. The referral program was retired in August 2008.
Search advertisements are added to the list of results after the visitor performs a search.
Because the JavaScript is sent to the Web browser when the page is requested, it is possible for other website owners to copy the JavaScript code into their own webpages. To protect against this type of fraud, AdSense customers can specify the pages on which advertisements should be shown. AdSense then ignores clicks from pages other than those specified
Panos Ipeirotis, a computer scientists working at New York University,attack on his Amazon web service using Google Spreadsheets and Panos Ipeirotis checked his Amazon Web Services bill last week - its was $1,177.76 !
He had accidentally invented a brand new type of internet attack, thanks to an idiosyncrasy in the online spreadsheets Google runs on its Google Docs service, and he had inadvertently trained this attack on himself. He calls it a Denial of Money attack, and he says others could be susceptible too.
On his personal blog Ipeirotis explained that it all started when he saw that Amazon Web Services was charging him with ten times the usual amount because of large amounts of outgoing traffic.
As part of an experiment in how to use crowdsourcing to generate descriptions of images, he had posted thumbnails of 25,000 pictures into a Google document, and then he invited people to describe the images. The problem was that these thumbnails linked back to original images stored on Amazon’s S3 storage service, and apparently, Google’s servers went slightly bonkers. “Google just very aggressively grabbed the images from Amazon again and again and again,” he says.
After analyzing traffic logs he was able to determine that every hour a total of 250 gigabytes of traffic was sent out because of Google’s Feedfetcher, the mechanism that allows the search engine to grab RSS or Atom feeds when users add them to Reader or the main page.
After speaking with Google representatives, Ipeirotis believes that the company is trying to balance user privacy with a desire to present fresh content. It seems that Google doesn’t want to store the information on its own servers so it uses Feedfetcher to retrieve it every time, thus generating large amounts of traffic.
“Google becomes such a powerful weapon due to a series of perfectly legitimate design decisions,” Ipeirotis wrote in a blog posting on the issue.
Megaupload, one of the world's largest file-sharing websites, was shut down today and its founder is facing charges of violating piracy laws. Four others linked to Megaupload were also arrested in New Zealand.
Megaupload.com is accused of costing copyright holders more than $500 million dollars in lost revenue from pirated music, movies, and other content. All of this comes after the proclaimed "largest internet protest" of the SOPA that happened on Wednesday.
Soon after the news that Megaupload had been sued, the website of the DOJ (Department of Justice) went offline. Other websites such as the RIAA's (Recording Industry Association of America) website, MPAA's (Motion Picture Association of America) website, and now WMG's (Warner Music Group) website later joined the state of being offline.
Anonymous, in an operation dubbed 'OpMegaUpload', has claimed credit for the attack.
A Russian news service is claimed to have stated that "this is the largest coordinated attack in Anonymous' history."
Within minutes of the megaupload, site being shut down, and DOJ releasing its statement, Anonymous sprang into action and started taking down a ton of sites -- including websites for the DOJ, the US Copyright Office, Universal Music, the RIAA, the MPAA and a bunch of other sites. Most of the sites are back up at the moment, but the war will continue.
Anonymous launches largest attack ever, crippling government and music industry sites. Hacktivists with the collective Anonymous are waging an attack on the website for the White House after successfully breaking the sites for the Department of Justice, Universal Music Group, RIAA and Motion Picture Association of America, as well as fbi.gov
Many members of Congress have just changed their stance on the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, the raid on Megaupload Thursday proved that the feds don't need SOPA or its sister legislation, PIPA, in order to pose a blow to the Web.
LOS ANGELES (AP) — In a move that heightens the growing tension between Silicon Valley and Hollywood, Wikipedia and other websites went dark Wednesday in protest of two congressional proposals intended to thwart the online piracy of copyrighted movies and TV programs.
The web-based encyclopedia is part of a loose coalition of dot-coms and large technology companies that fear Congress is prepared to side with Hollywood and enact extreme measures — possibly including the blocking of entire websites— to stop the online sharing and unauthorized use of Hollywood productions.
The fight will test which California-based industry has the most sway in Washington.
This screen shot shows the home page Google.com. A campaign whose backers include tech heavyweights like Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. has successfully portrayed the bills _ the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect Intellectual Property Act _ as an attack on a free and open Internet rather than a way to protect the jobs of Americans in the movie and music industries, in a protest Wenesday, Jan. 18, 2012. (AP Photo/Google.com)
For now, Silicon Valley appears to have the upper hand. Supporters of the legislation — called the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House and the Protect Intellectual Property Act in the Senate — say the bills are aimed at protecting jobs in the movie and music industries. But a campaign including tech heavyweights such as Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. has successfully portrayed the bills as an attack on a free and open Internet.
"It has nothing to do with stolen songs or movies," said Justin Ruben, executive director of MoveOn.org, which is participating in the blackout. Ruben says tougher legislation — even directed overseas — could make domestic cultural commentators more prone to legal attack.
The one-day outage by Wikipedia, Reddit and other sites was timed to coincide with key House and Senate committee hearings as they prepare to send the bills to the full floor for debate.
However, sponsor Rep. Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican, moved last week to remove a controversial provision from the House bill that could force Internet service providers to interfere with the way Web addresses work for foreign sites deemed to be dedicated to online piracy. He postponed work on the measure until February.
Critics believe such tinkering with core Internet technology treads into dangerous territory that could lead to online censorship. It might also give hackers a new way to wreak havoc.
The White House raised concerns that the bills could stifle innovation. Over the weekend, the Obama administration reacted to two online petitions, saying it "will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet."
At the same time, the administration called on all sides to "pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S. borders."
That nuanced stance is President Barack Obama's attempt at "threading the needle" between two important constituencies as he seeks re-election in November, said Jeffrey Silva, a technology policy analyst at Medley Global Advisors in Washington.
On the one hand, his administration has defended a free, open Internet as it watched repressive regimes fall in the Middle East with help from social media such as Twitter. It has also been a proponent of the concept of "net neutrality," which prevents Internet service providers from slowing online traffic that comes from file-sharing sites known to trade in pirated content.
On the other hand, Obama and other Democrats have gone to Hollywood dozens of times to raise campaign funds over the years.
"The administration is trying to fight to protect the Internet space," Silva said. "But at the same time, it doesn't want to disenfranchise Hollywood and the business community."
Indeed, behind the protests and public posturing, both Hollywood and Silicon Valley spend generously to lobby causes in Washington. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the movie, television and music industries spent a combined $91.7 million on lobbying efforts in 2011, compared with the computer and Internet industry's $93 million.
In the 2012 election cycle, the movie, television and music industry offered up $7.7 million in direct campaign contributions to congressional candidates. The computer and Internet industry contributed $6.6 million.
Despite the uproar on websites and blogs, PIPA remains firmly in play. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said Tuesday that he intends to push the bill toward a floor vote on Jan. 24. He said much of the criticism of the bill is "flatly wrong."
It remains to be seen whether the two industries can come to the table and negotiate a compromise.
"There are good companies, and then there are companies simply out to preserve the Wild West, free-to-steal business model," said Recording Industry Association of America CEO Cary Sherman. He expects to know "within the next few weeks" whether the legislation can survive.
Lawmakers may have a personal incentive to keep online piracy on the nation's political radar, said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a non-partisan government-accountability watchdog. If the issue stays alive through the current election cycle, it may help bring in campaign contributions from high-tech donors and Hollywood later this year.
The issue "becomes an opportunity for raising more money from these groups," Wertheimer said. "If you're into an important issue and money is flowing in on both sides, then both sides can up the ante."
Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.
Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.
The Senate will begin voting on January 24th. Please let them know how you feel. Sign this petition urging Congress to vote NO on PIPA and SOPA before it is too late.
NEW YORK (AP) — January 18 is a date that will live in ignorance, as Wikipedia started a 24-hour blackout of its English-language articles, joining other sites in a protest of pending U.S. legislation aimed at shutting down sites that share pirated movies and other content.
Reddit.com shut down its social news service for 12 hours. Other sites made their views clear without cutting off surfers. Google blacked out the logo on its home page, directing surfers to a page where they could add their names to a petition against the bills.
Local listings site Craigslist took a middle route, changing its local home pages to a black screen directing users to an anti-legislation page. After 10 seconds, a link to the main site appears on the home page, but some surfers missed that and were fooled into thinking the whole site was blacked out.
The Internet companies are concerned that the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House and the Protect Intellectual Property Act under consideration in the Senate, if passed, could be used to target legitimate sites where users share content.
The 24-hour Wikipedia blackout is an unprecedented move for the online encyclopedia. The decision was reached after polling the community of contributors, but dissenters say political advocacy undermines the site's mission as a neutral source.
However, it's not complete: the block can be bypassed by changing browser settings to disable JavaScript, or by using the version of the site designed for cellphone screens.
There's also a "mirror" or copy, of Wikipedia called The Free Dictionary, but it's not up to date.
Though Facebook itself hasn’t made much of a public stance for or against SOPA and PIPA, it’s safe to say that the company has now made its feelings known, through the words of its CEO. Mark Zuckerberg, on his personal Facebook profile, has stated the following:
“The internet is the most powerful tool we have for creating a more open and connected world. We can’t let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet’s development. Facebook opposes SOPA and PIPA, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet.”
Zuck then continues with his thoughts, saying that we need better representation in Government:
“The world today needs political leaders who are pro-internet. We have been working with many of these folks for months on better alternatives to these current proposals. I encourage you to learn more about these issues and tell your congressmen that you want them to be pro-internet.”
The post had gathered over 75,000 likes in 10 minutes, and by some accounts had topped 3,000 likes in under 60 seconds.
There’s considerably more discussion on a page that he links concerning Facebook’s stance on piracy bills. Specifically, it addresses SOPA and PIPA, but then goes further to talk about how you can report IP infringement on Facebook.
“We understand the concerns of the film and music industries, as well as other content creators and trademark owners, and we have been engaging in a constructive dialogue on the most effective ways to combat piracy. However, we must ensure that Congress does not do anything in this area that threatens the security of the Internet, hampers U.S. innovation or competitiveness, or sets harmful precedents for other governments to follow.”
The issue is so important to Zuck, it would seem, that he’s broken Twitter silence for the first time in nearly three years:
Facebook has chosen to not “black out” for the day, but with potential losses topping $11 million if it did, it’s understandable. There’s still plenty or representation, however, from sites like Reddit, TNW and even Google.
