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

New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#21

Post by larrys »

thetrb wrote: post #16
spindritf wrote: post #6

Someone searching for Southwest Airlines is probably looking for... Southwest Airlines. So the very first result is a useful one. With sections of the official website conveniently linked and a pretty picture on top. This sounds to me like a complete non-issue. If you don't like ads, install AdBlock. Of course if you need clicks for your website, carry on.

But if you're searching for Southwest Airlines then why do you want to get an ad for Southwest Airlines instead of just a neutral link to their homepage? I understand ads for terms like "cheap tickets", but why would I want an ad for the term "Southwest Airlines"?

"why do you want to get an ad for Southwest Airlines"

From what the example shows it's not so much an ad as a really quick way to visually see that when you click you will be going to the right place.[1]

I mean visually it's probably quicker to see the big honking ad and airplane and focus and click than it is to read type. I'm guessing. User testing would prove or disprove this. (After all why do people use icons for that matter?)

[1] If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#22

Post by Goronmon »

rosser wrote: post #8
eliben wrote: post #7

What are "actual results" for Southwest though? To me it seems like links to check-in, flight status, schedules and customer services is exactly what I'd want to see there. Is the image what you find distracting? But doesn't this give you immediate indication that you got into the right place?

I think the thing people are objecting to is less the image or its associated links, but that that whole thing is an ad . Yeah, it's probably the most relevant result, but it's giving the user (especially if that user is, you know, non-technical ) little choice but to click on the thing that puts money in GOOG's pocket. I can't speak for anyone else, but I find that a little evil.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I find that a little evil.

I'm having a hard time not reading this as effectively saying that it's evil to compensated for providing a service.

Yeah, it's probably the most relevant result, but it's giving the user (especially if that user is, you know, non-technical) little choice but to click on the thing that puts money in GOOG's pocket.

But the user made the choice to use Google in the first place. If people don't want Google getting money for clicks in their search results, then they should use a competing search engine.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#23

Post by larrys »

ColinWright wrote: post #4

This seems largely the same as the item submitted just 3 hours ago, still on the front page, and discussed at considerable length: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6605312 Same story (but no real discussion) was submitted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6604925 Call me cynical, but I suspect it will still be upvoted and discussed here because any comments on that earlier discussion will get lost in the…

"but I suspect it will still be upvoted and discussed here"

Sometimes when there is a story that is a day or so old it's almost as if it doesn't pay to comment for that exact reason.

Edit: By "exact reason" I mean an old story with 200 comments isn't as attractive to make a comment on as a new story with 15 or 20 comments that is 2 or 3 hours old.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#24

Post by aroch »

Finster wrote: post #14
spindritf wrote: post #6

Someone searching for Southwest Airlines is probably looking for... Southwest Airlines. So the very first result is a useful one. With sections of the official website conveniently linked and a pretty picture on top. This sounds to me like a complete non-issue. If you don't like ads, install AdBlock. Of course if you need clicks for your website, carry on.

It becomes problematic when these companies get control over the content of a brand search. There are ramifications for consumer advocacy. What happens when I start searching for "apple sec ruling" and I am given a full page sponsored ad courtesy of apple? I see that as giving companies a chance to bury insightful or informative content that may not be positive.

"Apple SEC ruling" is a fairly specific keyword search whereas searching, blanketly, for a company name is not.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#25

Post by dragonwriter »

That's misleading, because they are counting the whole result box that is labelled "Sponsored", but of that box, everything but the actual graphic banner at the top of the box is exactly the organic search result which is the top hit for the search (including the subordinate links) served to users that aren't getting the new experimental ads. So, everything but the graphic (not everything but the sponsored box) is "actual Google results".

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#26

Post by dragonwriter »

larrys wrote: post #21
thetrb wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you're searching for Southwest Airlines then why do you want to get an ad for Southwest Airlines instead of just a neutral link to their homepage? I understand ads for terms like "cheap tickets", but why would I want an ad for the term "Southwest Airlines"?

"why do you want to get an ad for Southwest Airlines" From what the example shows it's not so much an ad as a really quick way to visually see that when you click you will be going to the right place.[1] I mean visually it's probably quicker to see the big honking ad and airplane and focus and click than it is to read type. I'm guessing. User testing would prove or disprove this. (After all why do people use icons fo…

> From what the example shows it's not so much an ad as a really quick way to visually see that when you click you will be going to the right place.[

The banner at the top of the box is a traditional (and somewhat large) banner ad.

The rest of the content of the box is exactly what you get as the top result of the same search on Google when you aren't getting the experimental ad.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#27

Post by tedunangst »

spindritf wrote: post #6

Someone searching for Southwest Airlines is probably looking for... Southwest Airlines. So the very first result is a useful one. With sections of the official website conveniently linked and a pretty picture on top. This sounds to me like a complete non-issue. If you don't like ads, install AdBlock. Of course if you need clicks for your website, carry on.

Should Banana Republic be able to buy an enhanced search experience for people searching for "banana republic"?

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#28

Post by the_watcher »

Finster wrote: post #14
spindritf wrote: post #6

Someone searching for Southwest Airlines is probably looking for... Southwest Airlines. So the very first result is a useful one. With sections of the official website conveniently linked and a pretty picture on top. This sounds to me like a complete non-issue. If you don't like ads, install AdBlock. Of course if you need clicks for your website, carry on.

It becomes problematic when these companies get control over the content of a brand search. There are ramifications for consumer advocacy. What happens when I start searching for "apple sec ruling" and I am given a full page sponsored ad courtesy of apple? I see that as giving companies a chance to bury insightful or informative content that may not be positive.

This would not qualify as a branded search term, so this extension would not be available.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#29

Post by ColinWright »

larrys wrote: post #23
ColinWright wrote: post #4

This seems largely the same as the item submitted just 3 hours ago, still on the front page, and discussed at considerable length: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6605312 Same story (but no real discussion) was submitted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6604925 Call me cynical, but I suspect it will still be upvoted and discussed here because any comments on that earlier discussion will get lost in the…

"but I suspect it will still be upvoted and discussed here" Sometimes when there is a story that is a day or so old it's almost as if it doesn't pay to comment for that exact reason. Edit: By "exact reason" I mean an old story with 200 comments isn't as attractive to make a comment on as a new story with 15 or 20 comments that is 2 or 3 hours old.

  > Sometimes when there is a story that
  > is a day or so old ...
Indeed, but in this case the other submission is just 4 hours old.

I had a rant about this in another comment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6606955

As I say, this rampant duplication (which I admit doesn't happen often, but still often enough) offends my sense of taste. I know others don't care, but it irritates me.

And now I'm going to have to step away from the keyboard and let it all die down and go away. At least with on-line irritations like this you can just walk away.

Re: New banner ads push actual Google results to bottom 12% of the screen

#30

Post by tedunangst »

eliben wrote: post #7

What are "actual results" for Southwest though? To me it seems like links to check-in, flight status, schedules and customer services is exactly what I'd want to see there. Is the image what you find distracting? But doesn't this give you immediate indication that you got into the right place?

If the whole point is to enhance the search experience, why doesn't Google do it for free? Why does Southwest have to pay to make Google better?
Post reply on HN