Live data from Hacker News

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

arstechnica.com

31–40 of 142 posts

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

#31
Page and Brin themselves once pointed out the problems of accepting ads or paid placement, with some rather ironic examples:

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

The main difference seems to be that today even getting the top organic search result doesn't provide enough clicks for advertisers, so they feel obliged to purchase ads for their own brand names even when they already rank first. If people searching for Southwest Airlines on Google aren't ending up on the Southwest Airlines website without a huge great banner ad (despite it being ranked at the top of the results) then something is going badly wrong on the Google search results page.

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

#32
post #8
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 doubt Google gets much for it, because they want to provide the most relevant results to their users. This is how they keep their users. If the front page doesn't show all kinds of stuff for Southwest Airlines when the user typed "southwest airlines", then Google becomes less useful.

Southwest probably knew this when they negotiated with Google for the giant front-page ad.

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

#33

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.

Does it need to be 1/4 of the page, though?

I think at this rate Google will only show one result on the page in the future, with a 90 percent chance that result being a big brand, and with a "See more results" link at the bottom. I'm not sure I'd like that future, even if it wasn't compromised by Google's push towards showing big brands at the top, and if it were in fact showing the "best of the best" result.

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

#34
post #8
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.

You find it evil that people are using the service to quickly find exactly what they're looking for and the service provider gets paid for it? As someone mentioned above, if these were the results for "cheap flights" this would be evil, but they aren't; they're the results for "southwest airlines," and these results are helpful and relevant — that Google is getting paid for them doesn't strike me as relevant when this is the case.

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

#35

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.

I don't know.

Look during normal days, having big "southwest airlines" banner ad is ok. But if there is a current event involving "southwest airlines" which might not be beneficial to them (some review, revelation about safety, etc.) this ad will be basically make this event on the second page of the search...

Look, Southwest AirLines are not stupid. Nor Google.

It is just that we are annoyed because there is less and less of "free internet".

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

#36
I was worried when I saw this headline, and then very relieved when I saw what was actually going on.

So long as Google only returns these sponsored ads for searches for the company name, I don't see this as being a problem at all, given the fact that many users are using the address bar integrated search in place of bookmarking or typing URLs.

Where this would become a problem is if they start expanding this to searches beyond simply the company name, and I think there is a bit of a gray area there. As someone else pointed out in this thread, showing the Southwest banner in response to a search for "cheap airfare" pretty unambiguously crosses a line, but what abut something like "book southwest airlines flights." One could argue that the user was attempting to get to the southwest airlines website to book a flight, so showing the Southwest banner would be appropriate, however, companies like Expedia, Kayak, and so on, whose links would now be much further down the page, would likely disagree.

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

#37
post #19

goolge quote: “There will be no banner ads on the Google homepage or web search results pages. There will not be crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up all over the Google site. Ever.” http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2005/12/about-aol-announcem...

Gruber pointed out today that it was Marissa Mayer who said that.

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

#38
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

As much as I agree with you, what competing search engine?
Post reply on HN