Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 40
- Sphinn It!
Went Hot: May 15, 2008 - 12:07 am
Posted By: Aussiewebmaster 55 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://blog.searchenginewatch.com)
Category: Google AdWords
14 Comments
Went Hot: May 15, 2008 - 12:07 am
Posted By: Aussiewebmaster 55 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://blog.searchenginewatch.com)
Category: Google AdWords
14 Comments
Top 10 Most Sphunn
In What's New
- 10 Emergency SEO Tips For When Thin... (20)
- Positioning yourself using SEO and ... (20)
- Importance of Documenting Your SEO ... (20)
- 5 ways to improve rankings through ... (19)
- Fixing duplicate content in SEO sit... (18)
- How to Switch Your User-Agent to Go... (18)
- PPC Advertising: Art or Science? (18)
- Top 10 URL Design Failures of Famou... (17)
- Google passes second link’s anchor ... (17)
- Enterprise SEO and the art of the p... (16)
Latest Comments
- Cool - one thing I have to add is to analyze your conversion rates by scree…
- So BOTW hiring editors from the world's most pathetic directory is a good t…
- Maybe the poor soul meant this link:
- Yeah... did nobody notice this is from July 2007? Caused quite a stir back …
- I think it makes sense but not really sure it is coming to an end... Is Goo…
- Ok, only thing I have to say on this has to do with the comments, not the p…
- Publicity? Dr. Pete's 24 Hours of Twitter is coincidentally on the same day…
- When I saw this title I immediately geared up for a blog post calling it ou…
- - read more -
Save the date for:
• SMX Local & Mobile - San Francisco, CA (July 24-25) See the agenda, and register now!
• SMX Sao Paolo - Brazil - (Aug. 7-8)
• SMX China - September 23 & 24, 2008
• SMX Stockholm - September 23 & 24, 2008
• SMX East - NYC - (Oct. 6-8) Registration is now open.
• SMX London - November 4 & 5, 2008
Comments
I can appreciate the irony, but to be fair, this isn't apple to oranges.
First, that's not a "Google Checkout" box that's appear. It's Google Shopping results, like here. Just like regular Google web search, you have paid and unpaid results in shopping. Notice in that link I gave how there are no paid results.
Now that box showing up in Google's web search results that's "promoting" particular vodka sellers? That's just Google Universal Search integrating the unpaid results from shopping search. Google's not selling those products, nor are they being advertised.
If you want to consider unpaid listings as advertisements, then a general search for vodka on Google should bring up no merchants in the unpaid results at all, right? But that's not the case -- and hasn't ever been the case despite the no ads policy being in place. So what's the news now? Nothing has changed -- in fact, we've even had shopping results inserted even before Universal Search just like now.
You could argue that if Google wants to ban things in ads, they should ban the same things in editorial results. But Google's never claimed to be consistent here, when I've talked to them about it in the past. Some things they don't want ads for (some things they also by law can't take ads for), and that's it.
I suppose you could also argue that aside from Google Shopping, there's the completely separate Google Checkout payment system, and Google shouldn't allow vodka or alcohol to be sold through that system. But that might be the case already. I haven't checked there terms, but if I restrict a vodka search on shopping to just merchants that sell also through Google Checkout, I only seem to get things like books and posters.
http://www.buycostumes.com/Category/0/Product/21166/ProductDetail.aspx?REF=SCE-froogle
Heh. But not actual alcohol.
FYI, I did check the actually Google Checkout policy, to see if they accept merchants that sell alcohol. They don't. So not only are the Google Shopping Results being discussed not ads, but Google Checkout merchants (a subset of those listed with Google Shopping) are specifically prevented from using that to sell alcohol.
Okay but they are promoting the sale of alcohol and other advertisers can't.
Why has Google banned advertisers from selling alcohol via Adwords, whereas Yahoo and MSN have not done so via the YSM or Adcenter program? Is it that Yahoo and MSN cannot afford to take the hit on the lost revenue?
No, they're not promoting anything. Look, you can't advertise cigarettes on Google, right? So do this search:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cigarettes
Those are 10 web-wide listings. Not paid, just 10 listings that come from crawling the web, some of them from places that sell cigarettes. Are they promoting anything in there? Not to me -- it's standard ranking.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=earthquake
That gives you a news unit at the top of the page, news results that are being inserted because they're deemed relevant by the universal search algorithm. It's making an automatic decision to insert the unit there, and an editorial one. It's not a paid thing.
So here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=vodka
Same algorithm decides to do a special unit to show editorial links out of Google Shopping Search. If that's "promotion," then Google had better not be showing the news results I pointed out earlier (cause they'd be promoting news content) or listing anything from the web about cigarettes as I pointed out, because that could be argued as promotion as well.
Bottom line to me -- these aren't ads. These aren't listing Google is selling to anyone. So I just don't get the idea that some advertisers are being treated special much less the idea that Google itself is selling alcohol.
Great debate, thanks for your input Danny, and, Danny, thanks for commenting at Search Engine Watch!
http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/080514-014838
Feel free to post the balance of your comments over at SEW Blog
Ironically, I need to buy some more vodka :)
@dannysullivan It's on me! For you that is, not the whole 4th of July shindig...
It wouldn't just be vodka for the record, try adding "buy" before your alcohol of choice
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enCA233CA233&q=buy+rum&btnG=Search
I'm with Danny on this one - those are Product results. Not ads. No-one's promoting anything (although why Google stops people bidding on booze terms is a whole other discussion)
Hey, what about these ads?
http://www.marketposition.com/blog/archives/cheap_tobacco.gif
The first one, perhaps since it is promoting a place rather than a product it glides through? Second one, dynamic insertion perhaps, but still...
The way I read the article was that Frank thinks that it is inconsistent that Google wouldn't allow one thing in AdWords that they do allow in the product listings. As Danny said, there is inconsistency here and that is the argument. I do not think Frank ever suggested that these were AdWords ads, but rather that the rules should be consistent. Make no mistake about it, the listings generated here are from Google Products (formerly Google base).
What irks me is people are turning this into a "right and wrong" about the listings being AdWords. That was not the intention. The intention was to focus on the inconsistency. Everyone agrees, Ciaran, that these are product results, so you are both "with Danny" and with Frank.
To be clear, I don't think Google's being inconsistent. I think some people might want to argue that, but I'm not. I'm saying the opposite. The consistently do not try to enforce their ad policies on editorial results in web wide search, and they are not trying to do the same with editorial shopping results.