5 ms·

It's a digital protection racket.

by kevmo 6y ago

pb7 6y ago
Is this any different from putting up a billboard next to a restaurant for a competing restaurant?
- topicseed 6y ago
  It is, because it is not always perceived as an Ad. Looks like a duck, talks like a duck, and Google has it #1, so it must be my duck. So in principle, you're right, but in my opinion, it's a lot more powerful than a billboard (clear ad) next to a real storefront.
  - pb7 6y ago
    That's the cost of directing customers to your website even if they misspell your brand name or don't remember if you're a .com or .net or many other things. After all, if they knew to go to topicseed.com, why didn't they type that URL in and go directly there? I certainly don't search for Hacker News or Apple.com or Twitter on Google each time I go there, do you?
    - topicseed 6y ago
      Most people going to a specific store do Not know its address. You just know where to find it. You trust that the storefront you're roughly familiar with belongs to the actual shop you're wanting to get into. You are right but in practice it's just not the same as street stores and restaurants.
- fuzxi 6y ago
  It's more like asking for directions to a restaurant and getting directions to a different restaurant.
  - pb7 6y ago
    It's really not. You're asking for a seafood restaurant and are given directions to various seafood restaurants. You are not shown directions to one (a link) and when you show up there, it's another (link was fake).
    - zo1 6y ago
      To follow the GP's point ITO this being a protection racket: You "pay to be at the top" of that list of seafood restaurants. Let's not pretend like google aims to find you the "best" answer to your search question.
      - pb7 6y ago
        No contest, just don't see how this is unique to Google. When you go to a store and you look at an aisle at eye level, do you see the objectively best products or the ones that paid the most to be there? Before you get to that aisle, do you see the best product on the endcap? Do you grab that item regardless or only if it's what you're looking for anyway? It's okay to have a problem with advertising -- I think it's pretty healthy to do so -- but this is a societal problem and not one with any single player.
    - fuzxi 6y ago
      I disagree. We're not talking about an instance where you search for "search engine" and the first result is Google. We're talking about searching for "Bing" and the first result is Google.
      - pb7 6y ago
        And that's the crux of our disagreement. I don't think you have any right to be the first result for any query. If you want Bing when you search for "bing" then go directly to bing.com. You are using a third party's service so you accept the terms of use (and therefore monetization). If I search "apple", should I get apple.com, a Wikipedia article on apples, or recipes using apples on allrecipe.com, or something else? You see how that doesn't work? What about "caviar"? At what point is Google obligated to show you Caviar the delivery service as the first result? I say never. Note here that I'm talking about first being first whether it's an ad or organic result.

It's a digital protection racket.

by kevmo 6y ago

It's a digital protection racket.

pb7 6y ago

Is this any different from putting up a billboard next to a restaurant for a competing restaurant?

topicseed 6y ago
It is, because it is not always perceived as an Ad. Looks like a duck, talks like a duck, and Google has it #1, so it must be my duck. So in principle, you're right, but in my opinion, it's a lot more powerful than a billboard (clear ad) next to a real storefront.
- pb7 6y ago
  That's the cost of directing customers to your website even if they misspell your brand name or don't remember if you're a .com or .net or many other things. After all, if they knew to go to topicseed.com, why didn't they type that URL in and go directly there? I certainly don't search for Hacker News or Apple.com or Twitter on Google each time I go there, do you?
  - topicseed 6y ago
    Most people going to a specific store do Not know its address. You just know where to find it. You trust that the storefront you're roughly familiar with belongs to the actual shop you're wanting to get into. You are right but in practice it's just not the same as street stores and restaurants.
fuzxi 6y ago
It's more like asking for directions to a restaurant and getting directions to a different restaurant.
- pb7 6y ago
  It's really not. You're asking for a seafood restaurant and are given directions to various seafood restaurants. You are not shown directions to one (a link) and when you show up there, it's another (link was fake).
  - zo1 6y ago
    To follow the GP's point ITO this being a protection racket: You "pay to be at the top" of that list of seafood restaurants. Let's not pretend like google aims to find you the "best" answer to your search question.
    - pb7 6y ago
      No contest, just don't see how this is unique to Google. When you go to a store and you look at an aisle at eye level, do you see the objectively best products or the ones that paid the most to be there? Before you get to that aisle, do you see the best product on the endcap? Do you grab that item regardless or only if it's what you're looking for anyway? It's okay to have a problem with advertising -- I think it's pretty healthy to do so -- but this is a societal problem and not one with any single player.
  - fuzxi 6y ago
    I disagree. We're not talking about an instance where you search for "search engine" and the first result is Google. We're talking about searching for "Bing" and the first result is Google.
    - pb7 6y ago
      And that's the crux of our disagreement. I don't think you have any right to be the first result for any query. If you want Bing when you search for "bing" then go directly to bing.com. You are using a third party's service so you accept the terms of use (and therefore monetization). If I search "apple", should I get apple.com, a Wikipedia article on apples, or recipes using apples on allrecipe.com, or something else? You see how that doesn't work? What about "caviar"? At what point is Google obligated to show you Caviar the delivery service as the first result? I say never. Note here that I'm talking about first being first whether it's an ad or organic result.