5 ms·
That's not quite what happens. https://podnews.net/article/bbc-blocks-google https://podnews.net/article/bbc-blocks-google does go into the actual user experien
by jamescridland 8y ago
That's not quite what happens. https://podnews.net/article/bbc-blocks-google https://podnews.net/article/bbc-blocks-google does go into the actual user experience, rather than what the BBC is claiming.
- atonse 8y agoBut this brings up a good point. What is the value of google showing you the play buttons in the search results? They're trying to keep you on google's site.
- TheCraiggers 8y ago>They're trying to keep you on google's site. But why? I don't see a financial motivator here, unless there is some long-game that I'm not aware of. In theory, driving users to websites in a search result is likely just going to make Google more money from displaying ads. The only thing I can currently think of is they actually are trying to improve the user experience.
- fenwick67 8y agoIf you stay on a search results page you're more likely to do another search after you're done listening, rather than browsing around on BBC's site.
- beaner 8y agoIt is also a better use experience.
- Mindwipe 8y agoI'd be fairly surprised if the metrics resulted in any measurable difference there tbh.
- captn3m0 8y agoEven a minute change in this might convert to a non trivial difference in ad revenue for this feature. This is the company that decides shades of blue by conversion numbers.
- ForHackernews 8y agoWhy does Google do anything? They want to keep you on Google properties longer, record more "engagement" data and use it to sell ads against you. Maybe they indirectly want to 'improve user experience' (so you're less likely to leave) but it's not their terminal value.
- msquog 8y agoThe adverts are right there on the page still. Why would it be more profitable to send users to the BBC website?
- Mindwipe 8y agoIt wouldn't in the BBC's specific case, but in general the behaviour sending users to the site where they would likely be exposed to more advertising (probably by Google) would be the more profitable scenario.
- untog 8y agoIt's pretty clearly not the path Google has followed for some years now, though. They clearly have incentive to keep people on the search results page.
- dagw 8y agoBut why? I don't see a financial motivator here If you listen via Google they not only know what you listened to but for how long you listened, which parts you skipped over or stopped listening at, and whether you listened to the ads or not. All that information has value to them. Being able to say these people googled your product within 72 hours of hearing your ad on these podcasts is very valuable.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- jamescridland 8y agoEither: 1. You see a podcast you're interested in 2. You go to the BBC's website 3. You discover you need to download BBC Sounds (if in the UK) 4. You download the app 5. You register with a username and password (and UK postcode, which narrows you down to the street where you live) 6. You press play and start listening or 1. You see a podcast you're interested in 2. You press play and start listening Wouldn't anyone prefer #2? Including the BBC's programme makers?
- RugnirViking 8y agoYes. thats why the podcasts are available on wide range of services not owned by google, for example my preferred client at the moment, spotify.
- jscholes 8y ago> though BBC Sounds remains unavailable to non-UK listeners I'm a non-UK listener and use the BBC Sounds app all the time. The only thing that's unavailable are program downloads.
- jamescridland 8y agoThe BBC Sounds app is only available within the UK. You may be talking about the BBC iPlayer Radio app, which is the only one available outside the country. Unless you're side-loading on Android, which is perfectly possible too, but that's not quite "being available".