6 ms·

Sorry, but what? What does an ad that shows between levels of angry birds on your phone have to do with ads blocking you from getting your search result? This

by YokoZar 11y ago

Sorry, but what? What does an ad that shows between levels of angry birds on your phone have to do with ads blocking you from getting your search result? This sounds like some weird sort of misdirection attempt.

manigandham 11y ago
Edited for clarity: Google is claiming to do this to improve user experience, however: - they do these exact ads on every site they have - they arent stopping other interstitials so sites can be just as annoying on the first page - a site with great content should not be penalized for the site's own choices on ads - they're forcing a change that affects everyone else except them The PR signal doesnt match the execution. It's a monopolistic move and raises questions about their involvement in so many layers of the ads/web stack.
- magicalist 11y ago
  The only thing you just said that made sense was: > the signal is that they don't want their search results to annoy users by showing them app install ads on the first hit which is absolutely great. Well done Google. Everything else in your post is weird and contradictory. They're apparently fine with advertising and non-annoying app install banners but they're going to make annoying app install banners less visible in search results. I'm really not seeing the problem. > It might be good for the consumer but that's just a side effect. See what I mean? So it's a great move and should be celebrated, but lets not congratulate Google on their motives? OK, I think we can all live with that.
  - manigandham 11y ago
    I think I just wrote too much, edited the other comment for clarity.
- Drakim 11y ago
  > a site with great content should not be penalized for the site's own choices on ads Yes it should! If those ads are hostile to the user they should definitely be penalized no matter how great their content is.
  - manigandham 11y ago
    Again, Google does this on their own sites. And where does this line stop?

by YokoZar 11y ago

manigandham 11y ago

Edited for clarity: Google is claiming to do this to improve user experience, however: - they do these exact ads on every site they have - they arent stopping other interstitials so sites can be just as annoying on the first page - a site with great content should not be penalized for the site's own choices on ads - they're forcing a change that affects everyone else except them The PR signal doesnt match the execution. It's a monopolistic move and raises questions about their involvement in so many layers of the ads/web stack.

magicalist 11y ago
The only thing you just said that made sense was: > the signal is that they don't want their search results to annoy users by showing them app install ads on the first hit which is absolutely great. Well done Google. Everything else in your post is weird and contradictory. They're apparently fine with advertising and non-annoying app install banners but they're going to make annoying app install banners less visible in search results. I'm really not seeing the problem. > It might be good for the consumer but that's just a side effect. See what I mean? So it's a great move and should be celebrated, but lets not congratulate Google on their motives? OK, I think we can all live with that.
- manigandham 11y ago
  I think I just wrote too much, edited the other comment for clarity.
Drakim 11y ago
> a site with great content should not be penalized for the site's own choices on ads Yes it should! If those ads are hostile to the user they should definitely be penalized no matter how great their content is.
- manigandham 11y ago
  Again, Google does this on their own sites. And where does this line stop?