4 ms·

Facebook is a damn business, Google+ is competition. The fact that this ad was blocked isn't really news, it's just how business plays out. It's not in Facebook

• code_duck 15y ago
  Perhaps you should glance at the article before posting - the ad is an individual advertising his own profile.
  • Klonoar 15y ago
    I'm well aware of what the article says, thanks. If I ran a Ford lot, I wouldn't want someone selling their Chevy on it, as it can send any number of messages that downplay the quality and/or relevancy of my wares. This is business, plain and simple.
    • nuclear_eclipse 15y ago
      Except I see plenty of car dealers that sell used cars from different manufacturers on their lot. There's even an Acura dealer in my town who dedicates the entire front row of their lot to selling used cars that are always something other than an Acura. To a dealer, a car sale is a car sale.
• haberman 15y ago
  What competitor's ads do Google block? People respond to a story like this because it belies an attitude of weakness/protectionism from Facebook, not so much because of some kind of moral outrage about how things "should" be.
  • Klonoar 15y ago
    This is different; Google created an advertisement solution for the entire web and pushed it as such, necessitating that it be fairly open and non-judging. Facebook's exists solely on their website, and while some will try to argue that Facebook has by and large become "the web" for people, the point is that it's still their site, their rules, their game, and in turn you play by their rules. They don't hide this fact in the slightest. It's simply good business for Facebook to block these ads.
    • esrauch 15y ago
      I'm not sure if I follow that logic. Why wouldn't it similarly be good business for Google to block all ads to Facebook and Twitter across their entire network at this point?
      • hackinthebochs 15y ago
        Would that not cause anti-trust issues? Google pretty much owns the online ad space. Blocking competitors ads is not in their interest.
        • esrauch 15y ago
          Maybe if they blocked their ads on the internet, but it just doesn't seem like there is much difference in blocking bing from advertizing on google.com and facebook blocking ads for google+. I think Facebook has even more market share in social than google has in search, and both are decisions about advertizing on their own destination pages with their own in-house advertizing systems.
    • haberman 15y ago
      Google does not block competitors' ads even for ads appearing on Google.com.
  • Natsu 15y ago
    I don't know that they do. I keep getting an advertisement for "alternatives to adsense" in my Google ads. The only exception, such as it is, would be that Google booted Copiepresse after that company sued them. They claim to be required to do so by court order, though Copiepresse disputes this. I haven't read the court order myself, so I don't know, but I can easily see it being badly worded.
• AltIvan 15y ago
  Oh yeah? This is just bussines? Well, then maybe Google Search should be starting redirecting users to Google+ every time someone clicks a Facebook link.
  • loganlinn 15y ago
    I'm sorry, but that is a terrible analogy. Redirecting a link is blatantly deceitful and dishonest. Not to mention we are talking about advertising space here, not search results. The comparison would be if Google did not allow Facebook to advertise in Google. Either way, I think it's hard to compare their advertising spaces due to their very different natures.
• law 15y ago
  Right, Facebook is a business, and they were being paid to run an advertisement. It turns out that the ad (albeit indirectly) is for their competition. Blocking on the presumed basis that the advertisement may encourage users to leave Facebook is bad business. The advertisement is legal and honest, but the problem is that it 'might' cause people to leave Facebook. I think we all 'get' that Facebook is running a business, but this practice is anti-competitive.