Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 211 posts

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

#131

Post by snowwrestler »

fooqux wrote: post #63
null_ptr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly would you call it then, if not a banner ad? It's a large, colorful, rectangular 5:1 panel that advertises a company. Cut the doublespeak.

If I search for MLK, I see his picture on the side. I don't see how getting a picture of Southwest Airlines when I search for "Southwest Airlines" is that big of a deal. Now, if I were to search for "airlines" and saw that huge banner up there, I'd call that an ad and I'd be right there, handing out pitchforks. This? This is just returning searching results in a (arguably) prettier way.

The difference is that Google does not charge MLK to have his info show up in knowledge graph results. As I understand it, they are charging Southwest Airlines for this big banner.

If it was just a larger knowledge graph box I doubt anyone would care.

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

#132

Post by dragonwriter »

raldi wrote: post #124
pmelendez wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, let's try with another wikipedia article: [1] "A contract is a legally enforceable promise or undertaking that something will or will not occur. * The word promise can be used as a legal synonym for contract *,[2] although care is required as a promise may not have the full standing of a contract, as when it is an agreement without consideration" Emphasis is mine :) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_law

Whoever wrote that is wrong. Click the "[2]" citation, and you'll see that it in no way backs up the claim.

Well, along with the proper definitions from other (cited) legal dictionaries on that page, there's also an unsourced, thesaurus-like entry that does seem to suggest what the page is cited for, though the other definitions on the page make clear that that entry is only accurate in terms of loosely associated concepts and not proper synonyms.

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

#133

Post by gauravpandey »

jeffclark wrote: post #14

In related news: I am no longer with my college girlfriend, despite the fact that 8 years ago I told her I would never leave her.

If you find contradiction between my two statements then you can accept the latter, as I am also evolving. -M. K. Gandhi

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

#136

Post by socillion »

fooqux wrote: post #63
null_ptr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly would you call it then, if not a banner ad? It's a large, colorful, rectangular 5:1 panel that advertises a company. Cut the doublespeak.

If I search for MLK, I see his picture on the side. I don't see how getting a picture of Southwest Airlines when I search for "Southwest Airlines" is that big of a deal. Now, if I were to search for "airlines" and saw that huge banner up there, I'd call that an ad and I'd be right there, handing out pitchforks. This? This is just returning searching results in a (arguably) prettier way.

You're saying that whether or not it's advertising depends on the context of where the paid ad appears, which is an arbitrary and baseless distinction.

If a company rents a billboard that's right outside their office, isn't that advertising? Sure, you could have looked at the front of the building to see their logo, but that doesn't change the fact that the billboard is advertising.

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

#137

Post by edwintorok »

teaneedz wrote: post #121

Most of what Google does (beta or released) these days is sending me to other options. Thank you DuckDuckGo for taking a stand for users.

You can also use ixquick.com or startpage.com that doesn't show banner ads for me.

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

#138

Post by potatolicious »

pmelendez wrote: post #103
raldi wrote: 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

Like said, the word "exchange" is critical here, and isn't pedantic - this is a key part of the modern western understanding of contract law.

A contract must be quid pro quo to be valid.

"Bob, I'm going to come fix your fence this weekend" is a promise, but it isn't a legal contract.

"Bob, I'm going to come fix your fence this weekend for $100" is a promise, and because there is a quid pro quo exchange it can qualify as an enforceable contract. Bob can potentially come after you for damages if you renege on your end of it.

One-sided promises (like the one Google made) are generally not considered contractually obligated[1].

[1] http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/consideration-every-c...

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

#139

Post by snowwrestler »

peterwwillis wrote: post #51

I love how people continue to attach emotional investment to an arbitrary thing like a corporation. Apologists, fanboys, and people with a child-like innocence. Do you really expect a for-profit company will stick to a promise like it means something? The entire point behind a capitalist corporation is to make more profit, year after year. That is the entire idea behind the stock market. To think that they'd evade ev…

No one is complaining about profit or exploring ideas. People are complaining about this specific idea.

Profits only show up if customers like the decisions that corporations make. NBC picks its shows to make maximum profit, just like CBS does. But CBS has made more popular decisions.

Complaining about a corporate decision doesn't mean people are naive. It means they just don't like that decision. That is a data point for Google to consider as they think about whether to roll this out broadly.

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

#140

Post by xux »

shortformblog wrote: post #25

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.

While it may not be a banner ad, it's a foot-in-the-door technique. Display these branded search for a few years, so when they're ready to implement real banner ads, users won't be shocked.

Just imagine the press release.

"This isn't something new we're doing. We've been experimenting with showing users highly targeted banner image when querying for specific terms. We're only expanding that target to help users find what they need faster."

Bam.

Post reply on HN