7 ms·

Here's a hypothesis that is more generous to Google (I don't know the real reason): some Google campaign that pays per download of Chrome is prompting site owne

by evmar 15y ago

Here's a hypothesis that is more generous to Google (I don't know the real reason): some Google campaign that pays per download of Chrome is prompting site owners to generate this low-quality content. It seems more plausible to me than Google paying directly for this, because it's a terrible marketing campaign. There's an onclick handler on the link to the Chrome download site on the blog that is in the screenshot on that page. I can't figure out what it does, though I did see when I clicked on it that my browser hit some URLs containing the substring "googleadservices", "conversion", and the Chrome download URL.

dholowiski 15y ago
Yeah, I bet that's what is happening. I went to this site: http://www.humphriesnation.com/ http://www.humphriesnation.com/ and clicked on the Google Chrome link, and got sent here: https://www.google.com/chrome/?brand=ECSB&installdataindex=no-apps-no-promo https://www.google.com/chrome/?brand=ECSB&installdataind... Looks like an affiliate link to me.
FrankBooth 15y ago
That seems plausible. However, whatever the true reason is, the end result is that Google is paying people to generate junk content. That's not good for anyone.
- GigabyteCoin 15y ago
  So Google is not allowed to offer incentive for anything? Any sort of affiliate program brings it's share of junk content.
  - zizee 15y ago
    The problem is if google treats the chrome affiliate junk content differently from other junk content. If it is all treated the same, then it should be ok. I imagine that Google's search algo team is in a separate silo from their chrome marketing team (much like the search algo team is separated from the Adsense team) to try isolate them from the corrupting influence of their marketing team. That said, Google would be risking their search cash cow by the mere existence of this sort of campaign as it undermines the perception of the independence of their search results, so perhaps they should steer clear of offering incentives of this sort.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- patio11 15y ago
  Google is paying people to generate junk content It seems silly to me to get mad at Google for paying, what, ten thousand dollars in affiliate payouts, incentivizing cruddy posts, when they simultaneously collect (and pay out) billions for the ubiquitous AdSense ads which you find on sites which, charitably, span a wide range in terms of content quality.
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    I think the problem isn't that they're doing both of those things at the same time. The problem, instead, is that the third thing they're doing at the same time is issuing guidelines, (hopefully?) backed by their ranking algorithm, written specifically to combat this type of behavior. If it were a free-for-all, sure, no problem. But Google doesn't want other parties doing this. Doing it themselves puts them in a position that's a little difficult to explain.
dmaz 15y ago
Google had a similar, but more widespread paid referral program for Firefox with Google Toolbar for a few years. http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ctx=as2&answer=97402&rd=1 http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ct...
brudgers 15y ago
Regardless of the theory, Google is not filtering low quality content from which it has the appearance of benefiting...and the apparent double standard being applied, I believe was the point of the original article.
- EricBurnett 15y ago
  Are you suggesting the search algorithm is tailored to detect pro-google content and promote it, or that someone manually altered the rankings for these pages? Both are wildly unlikely. I think the double standard suggested is that these pages shouldn't exist at all, not that anything is biased in their favour.
  - showdog 15y ago
    The Google algorithm just isn't that good. Certainly not as good as many people think.
  - brudgers 15y ago
    What I am saying, not suggesting, is that there is the appearance of a double standard irrespective of Google's intent or actions. If in fact (and I am not saying that it is actually the case), Google has a double standard, there is little likelihood that these pages were manually promoted since the search phrase is rather obscure.
blasdel 15y ago
Bingo -- and the "sponsored by Google Chrome" text was pulled out of the ass of the blogspam originator based on their interpretation of the FTC regulations governing this kind of stuff. All of the instances are likely the work of a single organization, or possibly the result of cargo-culting by a group of independents in a webmaster forum thread somewhere.
justinschuh 15y ago
Linus Upson responded on a public G+ with "News to me. Looking in to it..." https://plus.google.com/113217924531763968801/posts/3XUWkLVN1na https://plus.google.com/113217924531763968801/posts/3XUWkLVN...

by evmar 15y ago

dholowiski 15y ago

Yeah, I bet that's what is happening. I went to this site: http://www.humphriesnation.com/ http://www.humphriesnation.com/ and clicked on the Google Chrome link, and got sent here: https://www.google.com/chrome/?brand=ECSB&installdataindex=no-apps-no-promo https://www.google.com/chrome/?brand=ECSB&installdataind... Looks like an affiliate link to me.

FrankBooth 15y ago

That seems plausible. However, whatever the true reason is, the end result is that Google is paying people to generate junk content. That's not good for anyone.

GigabyteCoin 15y ago
So Google is not allowed to offer incentive for anything? Any sort of affiliate program brings it's share of junk content.
- zizee 15y ago
  The problem is if google treats the chrome affiliate junk content differently from other junk content. If it is all treated the same, then it should be ok. I imagine that Google's search algo team is in a separate silo from their chrome marketing team (much like the search algo team is separated from the Adsense team) to try isolate them from the corrupting influence of their marketing team. That said, Google would be risking their search cash cow by the mere existence of this sort of campaign as it undermines the perception of the independence of their search results, so perhaps they should steer clear of offering incentives of this sort.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
patio11 15y ago
Google is paying people to generate junk content It seems silly to me to get mad at Google for paying, what, ten thousand dollars in affiliate payouts, incentivizing cruddy posts, when they simultaneously collect (and pay out) billions for the ubiquitous AdSense ads which you find on sites which, charitably, span a wide range in terms of content quality.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  I think the problem isn't that they're doing both of those things at the same time. The problem, instead, is that the third thing they're doing at the same time is issuing guidelines, (hopefully?) backed by their ranking algorithm, written specifically to combat this type of behavior. If it were a free-for-all, sure, no problem. But Google doesn't want other parties doing this. Doing it themselves puts them in a position that's a little difficult to explain.

dmaz 15y ago

Google had a similar, but more widespread paid referral program for Firefox with Google Toolbar for a few years. http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ctx=as2&answer=97402&rd=1 http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ct...

brudgers 15y ago

Regardless of the theory, Google is not filtering low quality content from which it has the appearance of benefiting...and the apparent double standard being applied, I believe was the point of the original article.

EricBurnett 15y ago
Are you suggesting the search algorithm is tailored to detect pro-google content and promote it, or that someone manually altered the rankings for these pages? Both are wildly unlikely. I think the double standard suggested is that these pages shouldn't exist at all, not that anything is biased in their favour.
- showdog 15y ago
  The Google algorithm just isn't that good. Certainly not as good as many people think.
- brudgers 15y ago
  What I am saying, not suggesting, is that there is the appearance of a double standard irrespective of Google's intent or actions. If in fact (and I am not saying that it is actually the case), Google has a double standard, there is little likelihood that these pages were manually promoted since the search phrase is rather obscure.

blasdel 15y ago

Bingo -- and the "sponsored by Google Chrome" text was pulled out of the ass of the blogspam originator based on their interpretation of the FTC regulations governing this kind of stuff. All of the instances are likely the work of a single organization, or possibly the result of cargo-culting by a group of independents in a webmaster forum thread somewhere.

justinschuh 15y ago

Linus Upson responded on a public G+ with "News to me. Looking in to it..." https://plus.google.com/113217924531763968801/posts/3XUWkLVN1na https://plus.google.com/113217924531763968801/posts/3XUWkLVN...