naughty Google; bidding on competitor keywords, impeding investigations and surviving the angry mob
April 17, 2012Much has been made of ‘naughty Google’ in recent weeks, most notably the ruling earlier this month of the Federal Court, which found Google’s conduct in response to a user’s interaction with Google’s search engine was misleading and deceptive.
This has not been the only case, and is not a ‘new’ dispute; whether advertisers bidding on competitor brand terms as keywords (in order to allow their own brand ads to be returned in Google’s search results) has been a long-running question, though recently it has brought the spotlight down on many of Google’s wrongdoings; two examples being fines for impeding investigations into Street View data and Canadian Pharma advertisers, both of which are leveraged to boost the characterisation of Google as some sort of deceptive mafia Big Brother.
Ofcourse, when any big corp is brought to task over something like this, the proverbial bandwaggon is flooded by those eager to do a bit of bashing; those who view Google as the ‘Big Evil’; who profits from systematic and routine click fraud; argue that it’s
“…bad news for companies buying AdWords as they are paying for bogus clicks, bad news for consumers who pay higher prices as a result of companies passing on their costs, but great news for Google, which makes money regardless..”
And although this creates a nice picture of the ad/consumer world suffering at the hands of Google, this isn’t the case; advertisers aren’t charged for ‘invalid clicks’ (these are removed from the data and the charge -if any- is credited back to the advertiser’s account) ergo no charge is passed onto the consumer.
There is still a real issue worth watching out for; which is what makes the recent case so interesting – Google views itself as an ‘information retrieval system’ which endeavours to keep the web open and accessible (indeed, Sergey Brin this week has reeled against the encroachment of ‘walled Gardens of Apple and Facebook’) — and this opens a whole different can of worms when noted that Google vehermently opposed the recent SOPA bill, (while Apple leaned in the other direction).
The crux of the issue is though, that the court has rejected Google’s
‘publishers defence’, arguing that it is inextricably involved in the way that the message (or the rival brand’s ad text) is returned in results, and that it is solely responsible for the algorithm created to return such results.
Where does this then leave Google, and indeed the business of Search Engine Marketing, in which bidding on competitor keywords has long been business as usual? The real question remains whether Google can feasibly be held to account in every instance for what advertisers using the engine a) bid on and b) write in their ad copy.
reference articles;
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/google-adwords-accc-federal-court-trade-practices–pd20120417-TF23J
http://mashable.com/2012/04/16/google-fcc/
http://mashable.com/2012/04/16/sergey-brin-worried-internet/
Google’s introduction of ‘Top of Page’ bid estimates in Adwords – Visibility of so-called ‘optimum’ bids, or just way off the mark?
September 25, 2011Google’s announcement that Top of Page bid estimates are now available in Google Adwords has got me thinking.
Surely it can’t be as straight forward as here’s a magical figure you just need to set all your bids to this point and bingo – you’re done it. Because if you’re bidding on something competitive, (and lets face it, most PPC campaigns have some aspect that is competitive – if no-one else is in the space, why would we have a campaign?) surely you’re aiming to be at the top of the adspace, featuring in the highest possible space, dominating results. And this column is like the Grays Sports Almanac of where you should be. Shouldn’t it?
I can hear the laughter. Of course it’s not that simple. On the one hand, you’ve got the fact that these bid estimates have been made available to everyone – they are relative to the time you view them, and the argument goes that the more people up their bids to match these estimates, the higher CPCs will get across the board as everyone tries to reach that ‘optimimum’ position.
But even then – not everyone wants to be in position 1; it guarantees you visibility, particularly with ad extensions taking up more space and with the numerous resdeisgns of google’s SERP this is increasingly important when your KPI is brand awareness. But the same rule doesn’t necessarily apply when working towards direct response – conversion rate can be different in different positions, and can differ again depending on the product you’re offering. Holidays, cars, insurance and an abundance of other services are typically the products where the user will embark on an ‘information gathering mission’ before purchase, making whatever position you’re ad appears in somewhat irrelevant.
On top of that, the estimates are just that – estimates. They aren’t the golden ticket to the top of the auction and in actual fact they can be way off the mark; 
The example above shows that some bid estimates are far too low when compared with an actual CPC which is achieving position 1, and others are higher than they need to be. So it’s not an exact science.
I would suggest the answer is two-fold – firstly you need to work out what you’re looking to achieve, be it brand awareness or direct response. Then you need to test your ads in different positions and see which achieves best for you. There’s no quick fix for hitting the top spots, and there is no hard and fast rule for every single campaign or product. Its all about the testing! And obviously – using these estimates as a guide if your ads are languishing in positon 9.
I got access to facebook’s new timeline this morning and had a look around the new features. Many of my work-friends have been eagerly anticipating this overhaul of the platform itself and I have to say I got a bit curious.
See, me and facebook haven’t really been well acquainted recently. In fact, since a rather public, protracted and messy break-up I’ve found that not only did I perform something of a facebook ‘cleansing’ but I also deactivated for quite a while. Where once my friends list was a mix of around 800 people from all over the world (not the largest collection by anyone’s standards) post-cleasnsing it now hovers around the 400 mark. I think my login activity this past year probably averages 3 times a month since January. However, something about the hype and the tweets and everything around f8 yesterday pricked my curiosity and I found myself trying to get at the timeline I had seen in a promo video.
I have to say, it’s the first time out of all of the changes I’ve endured with the platform that I’m actually interested in it – I sought out a way of getting to the timeline before it launches next Friday. And while I have been guilty over a bit of facebook-bashing, same as the next person through all of the changes since I joined, it’s never really bothered me or irked me enough to make me want to use more or use it less than usual.The new timeline layout is crossed between a blog and a magazine, retaining the history foundation which enables you to flick through your activity much like an archive on a blog. The ‘cover’ image at the top is a step up from the top 5 photos which were introduced not to long ago. Many people have been using these 5 slots to arrange their favourite photos through a bit of jiggery pokery so this seems like a natural evolution. All in all, the new timeline is smooth.
Facebook has always been about presenting your version of yourself to the world – and anyone who disagrees is kidding themselves with statistics varying between a reported 28% – 49% of employers checking applicants out on twitter / facebook / google before hiring. And now, facebook is tapping into what people love most about the platform – the ability to re-market yourself to your own friends. Everyone loves to think that they are interesting, and that people are interested in them. On facebook this translates to your feed, your photos, and now, your timeline.
True to facebook form, you can bend the truth as far as you like, you can remove things you don’t like from your timeline and bingo, you can pretty much re-write your history.
What I’m interested in most, is the weighting and the significance of the details that pop up – as most of your status updates don’t feature – and some of your photos are larger than others. It’s likely to be those that have been interacted with the most, similar to the weighting given to which of your friends used to appear most prominently on your friends selection. Maybe with the photos its most comments or most ‘likes’ perhaps. While there are no-doubt more tweaks to come, I am still getting used to this sneak-peek preview.
It’s been billed as the one thing that could blow Google+ out of the water, but it remains to be seen. And something many people aren’t factoring in, is that Google may well have seen this little evolution coming. Who’s to say they don’t have something equally ‘big’ up their own sleeves?
Either way, I’m interested to see how it plays out. Because I view social networks a little bit like a goldfish – I have a limited attention span and I don’t want a collection of them, I don’t want to flit between 2 or 3, and I think most people think the same. In this ‘battle’ I think the winner really will take it all.