5 ms·

> Apparently in 2020, Google conducted a study looking to see what would happen to its bottom line if it “were to significantly reduce the quality of its search

> Apparently in 2020, Google conducted a study looking to see what would happen to its bottom line if it “were to significantly reduce the quality of its search product.” The conclusion was even if the company made search shittier, the revenues from Search would be fine. Just because they could, doesn't mean they should. But I guess they decided to anyway - it was around that time that adverts shifted from being clearly labelled to being disguised as search results.

xnx 2y ago
> it was around that time that adverts shifted from being clearly labelled to being disguised as search results. This has been a 20 year process with no single step-change. Ads used to be on he right side in colored boxes. Gradually, they started to appear above results and with no background color.
- 0xcde4c3db 2y ago
  I recall that someone made a compilation image showing the gradual progression from an obviously offset box (with a different design and solid colored background) to a design that's virtually identical to a search result other than the "Sponsored" label. Of course, I can't find it because search engines are garbage now.
  - xnx 2y ago
    Might be this? https://searchengineland.com/search-ad-labeling-history-google-bing-254332 https://searchengineland.com/search-ad-labeling-history-goog... Found it in the first page of results for "evolution of google search ads display"
    - 0xcde4c3db 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure the one I'm thinking of was arranged differently and covered a slightly different time period, but that's close enough. My results might have been thrown off by my searches including "google ads", which is the name of the ad platform itself.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
exe34 2y ago
they have a fiduciary duty towards shareholders to reduce the cost (and if needed the quality) to the point of maximising profit.
- falcolas 2y ago
  Theoretically, they also have a fiduciary duty to remain solvent, to which killing their biggest traffic driver would be highly detrimental.
- 39896880 2y ago
  Please please please stop repeating this meme. It’s not true, and it never has been. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-value-myth/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-v...
  - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
    the law may not be this explicit, but I assure you that shareholders are
    - GeekyBear 2y ago
      Google is a special case where most of the shares sold to the public have no voting rights. The founders and early investors got the shares with voting rights, plus non voting shares they could sell to cash in, while retaining their control of the company. > A Summary of Alphabet's Class Structures Class A: Held by a regular investor with regular voting rights (GOOGL) Class B: Held by the founders, with 10 times the voting power of Class A shares Class C: No voting rights, typically held by employees and some Class A stockholders (GOOG) https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052615/whats-difference-between-googles-goog-and-googl-stock-tickers.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052615/whats-differ...
  - cosmic_quanta 2y ago
    To be clear, the post you linked does not argue that 'fiduciary duty' ISN'T about shareholder value maximization; rather, that maximizing shareholder value goes beyond short-term thinking
ChocolateGod 2y ago
> But I guess they decided to anyway Having to search through more pages to find what you want = more time spent on search = more ad revenue. The word "google" has become so synonymous with searching the web that any competition among non-technical users is near impossible. Google directly benefits from making their search results worse.
- jodleif 2y ago
  Until people are fed up with it of course… once something is clearly better I assume it won’t take long.
  - maxwell 2y ago
    They've already lost most of their brand equity among technical and non-technical users. Their Gemini commercial feels like a death knell. They never had to advertise when their products were good.
    - more_corn 2y ago
      And yet their market cap…
    - ChocolateGod 2y ago
      Everyone knows what "ChatGPT" is, and its becoming to AI what "Google" is to search. Speaking of Gemini, I can't really remember the last time Google launched a successful product. Why bother using and depending on it when you know it will be replaced by another product within a year.
- immibis 2y ago
  Those same non-technical users will call anything "google" as long as they can type in a box and get some answers. They'll just as well google things on the blue google, or the orange google with the funny mascot, just like I'll hoover my floor with a Dyson.
josefritzishere 2y ago
It seems self-evident from the current experience they only took half of that to heart.

xnx 2y ago

> it was around that time that adverts shifted from being clearly labelled to being disguised as search results. This has been a 20 year process with no single step-change. Ads used to be on he right side in colored boxes. Gradually, they started to appear above results and with no background color.

0xcde4c3db 2y ago
I recall that someone made a compilation image showing the gradual progression from an obviously offset box (with a different design and solid colored background) to a design that's virtually identical to a search result other than the "Sponsored" label. Of course, I can't find it because search engines are garbage now.
- xnx 2y ago
  Might be this? https://searchengineland.com/search-ad-labeling-history-google-bing-254332 https://searchengineland.com/search-ad-labeling-history-goog... Found it in the first page of results for "evolution of google search ads display"
  - 0xcde4c3db 2y ago
    I'm pretty sure the one I'm thinking of was arranged differently and covered a slightly different time period, but that's close enough. My results might have been thrown off by my searches including "google ads", which is the name of the ad platform itself.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

exe34 2y ago

they have a fiduciary duty towards shareholders to reduce the cost (and if needed the quality) to the point of maximising profit.

falcolas 2y ago
Theoretically, they also have a fiduciary duty to remain solvent, to which killing their biggest traffic driver would be highly detrimental.
39896880 2y ago
Please please please stop repeating this meme. It’s not true, and it never has been. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-value-myth/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-v...
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
  the law may not be this explicit, but I assure you that shareholders are
  - GeekyBear 2y ago
    Google is a special case where most of the shares sold to the public have no voting rights. The founders and early investors got the shares with voting rights, plus non voting shares they could sell to cash in, while retaining their control of the company. > A Summary of Alphabet's Class Structures Class A: Held by a regular investor with regular voting rights (GOOGL) Class B: Held by the founders, with 10 times the voting power of Class A shares Class C: No voting rights, typically held by employees and some Class A stockholders (GOOG) https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052615/whats-difference-between-googles-goog-and-googl-stock-tickers.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052615/whats-differ...
- cosmic_quanta 2y ago
  To be clear, the post you linked does not argue that 'fiduciary duty' ISN'T about shareholder value maximization; rather, that maximizing shareholder value goes beyond short-term thinking

ChocolateGod 2y ago

> But I guess they decided to anyway Having to search through more pages to find what you want = more time spent on search = more ad revenue. The word "google" has become so synonymous with searching the web that any competition among non-technical users is near impossible. Google directly benefits from making their search results worse.

jodleif 2y ago
Until people are fed up with it of course… once something is clearly better I assume it won’t take long.
- maxwell 2y ago
  They've already lost most of their brand equity among technical and non-technical users. Their Gemini commercial feels like a death knell. They never had to advertise when their products were good.
  - more_corn 2y ago
    And yet their market cap…
  - ChocolateGod 2y ago
    Everyone knows what "ChatGPT" is, and its becoming to AI what "Google" is to search. Speaking of Gemini, I can't really remember the last time Google launched a successful product. Why bother using and depending on it when you know it will be replaced by another product within a year.
immibis 2y ago
Those same non-technical users will call anything "google" as long as they can type in a box and get some answers. They'll just as well google things on the blue google, or the orange google with the funny mascot, just like I'll hoover my floor with a Dyson.

josefritzishere 2y ago

It seems self-evident from the current experience they only took half of that to heart.