Live data from Hacker News

Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

theguardian.com

101–110 of 211 posts

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#101

This isn't a banner ad. This is essentially a branded search. It's not like Google is targeting users with Flash-based crud here. To call it a banner ad is kind of silly.

> This isn't a banner ad. This is not a duck, its merely an animal that came from a female duck that happens to live in the water and share a nest with other ducks. A banner ad, by definition, is a paid add that is an image. Google is showing banner ads for any definition of the word.

It walks like a duck but it doesn't quack like a duck. It shows up upon your specific input of the company name. I'm not sure what to call it, but 'advertisement' seems ill-fitting.

Now if it showed up when you typed a generic term like 'airline' I would agree it was an ad. But does it?

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#102
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://imgur.com/ddGJeaI Most of keywords with any commercial potential looks similar. Unfortunately, I tried using other search engines, but for technical questions Google still provide superior experience.

What 10 links would a hypothetically perfect search engine return for that query? Edit: Judging from the replies, many of you seem to think my question was "how many ads would a perfect search engine show?" Please note that this is not what I asked.

The "hypothetically perfect search" has absolutely zero ads and only shows results based on merit, not how much somebody was willing to pay. Why is that so hard to understand for Google employees? Your founders wrote a bit about this back in the day you know:

Currently, the predominant business model for commercial search engines is advertising. The goals of the advertising business model do not always correspond to providing quality search to users. For example, in our prototype search engine one of the top results for cellular phone is "The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention", a study which explains in great detail the distractions and risk associated with conversing on a cell phone while driving. This search result came up first because of its high importance as judged by the PageRank algorithm, an approximation of citation importance on the web [Page, 98]. It is clear that a search engine which was taking money for showing cellular phone ads would have difficulty justifying the page that our system returned to its paying advertisers. For this type of reason and historical experience with other media [Bagdikian 83], we expect that advertising funded search engines will be inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of the consumers.

Since it is very difficult even for experts to evaluate search engines, search engine bias is particularly insidious. A good example was OpenText, which was reported to be selling companies the right to be listed at the top of the search results for particular queries [Marchiori 97]. This type of bias is much more insidious than advertising, because it is not clear who "deserves" to be there, and who is willing to pay money to be listed. This business model resulted in an uproar, and OpenText has ceased to be a viable search engine. But less blatant bias are likely to be tolerated by the market. For example, a search engine could add a small factor to search results from "friendly" companies, and subtract a factor from results from competitors. This type of bias is very difficult to detect but could still have a significant effect on the market. Furthermore, advertising income often provides an incentive to provide poor quality search results. For example, we noticed a major search engine would not return a large airline’s homepage when the airline’s name was given as a query. It so happened that the airline had placed an expensive ad, linked to the query that was its name. A better search engine would not have required this ad, and possibly resulted in the loss of the revenue from the airline to the search engine. In general, it could be argued from the consumer point of view that the better the search engine is, the fewer advertisements will be needed for the consumer to find what they want. This of course erodes the advertising supported business model of the existing search engines. However, there will always be money from advertisers who want a customer to switch products, or have something that is genuinely new. But we believe the issue of advertising causes enough mixed incentives that it is crucial to have a competitive search engine that is transparent and in the academic realm.

http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#103
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And... Did you leave her? or just break up as a common agreement? In legalese language, I am pretty sure that a promise is synonym of contract, and contracts might be dissolved if both sides of the contract agreed. This being an open promise is not a contract but a reaffirmation of a goal, since people change is regrettable but OK to break promises to ourselves sometimes when the interest of the goal had changed.

> In legalese language, I am pretty sure that a promise is synonym of contract You are 100% wrong.

From Wikipedia article: [1] "In the law of contract, an exchange of promises is usually held to be legally enforceable, according to the Latin maxim pacta sunt servanda."

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an ad because it's an organic search result, which is directly relevant to what I'm searching. It's essentially the same as Google Image search result, only better suited for this particular page and request.

Today I learned you can pay Google to appear at the top of the organic search results.

1. Prove it. Don't make up examples.

2. Official pages already have the ability to skip the queue, for free.

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#106
post #98
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good to know that the company that holds my email, appointments, two-factor-auth, credit card number, and search data has the reliability of a flaky college freshman. Also good to know that there will literally ALWAYS be people willing to minimize the broken promises of corporations (when they're not insisting that no corporation would ever be so stupid as to break a highly visible promise because the outcry would be…

As it turns out, corporations are made up of people and, like people, have the tendency to change.

No reason to abstract it. Corporations are people, obviously. We are just seeing Google get over that idealist phase so many of us have in our youth.

This is just Google, all grown up.

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#107
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good to know that the company that holds my email, appointments, two-factor-auth, credit card number, and search data has the reliability of a flaky college freshman. Also good to know that there will literally ALWAYS be people willing to minimize the broken promises of corporations (when they're not insisting that no corporation would ever be so stupid as to break a highly visible promise because the outcry would be…

> Also good to know that there will literally ALWAYS be people willing to minimize the broken promises of corporations At some point, people realize that corporations exist to maximize profit and not necessarily for the good of the customer.

Then why are they making promises for the good of the customer?

There are plenty of corporations who don't make such promises.

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#108
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In legalese language, I am pretty sure that a promise is synonym of contract You are 100% wrong.

From Wikipedia article: [1] "In the law of contract, an exchange of promises is usually held to be legally enforceable, according to the Latin maxim pacta sunt servanda." [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise

"Exchange" is the critical word. A single promise is extraordinarily different, in the legal world, from a contract.

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#109
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good to know that the company that holds my email, appointments, two-factor-auth, credit card number, and search data has the reliability of a flaky college freshman. Also good to know that there will literally ALWAYS be people willing to minimize the broken promises of corporations (when they're not insisting that no corporation would ever be so stupid as to break a highly visible promise because the outcry would be…

> Also good to know that there will literally ALWAYS be people willing to minimize the broken promises of corporations At some point, people realize that corporations exist to maximize profit and not necessarily for the good of the customer.

>that corporations exist to maximize //

Some, probably most, not all.

Re: Google breaks 2005 promise never to show banner ads on search results

#110
post #35

It's arguable that queries like [southwest airlines] are even a search. The vast majority of instances are probably URL-illiterate users merely trying to get to Southwest Airlines' web site. (And Google must know rather precisely just how many.) For these users, search is really operating as a natural-language alternative to DNS so such a clickable banner will help them get there. More than just advertising, this rep…

Let's follow through on this thought. What searches will result in a banner ad for pets.com? "pets.com"? "pets"? "pet supplies"?

If pets.com is the second result for "pet supplies", are they allowed to buy the banner ad? Or do they have to wage an SEO campaign first to claim the top spot, then buy the ad?

Bonus question: Is Black Car Limo (URL blackcar.com) allowed to buy a banner ad for "black car"?

Post reply on HN