4 ms·

What exactly would you call it then, if not a banner ad? It's a large, colorful, rectangular 5:1 panel that advertises a company. Cut the doublespeak.

golergka 13y ago
It's not an ad because it's an organic search result, which is directly relevant to what I'm searching. It's essentially the same as Google Image search result, only better suited for this particular page and request.
- tedunangst 13y ago
  Today I learned you can pay Google to appear at the top of the organic search results.
  - Dylan16807 13y ago
    1. Prove it. Don't make up examples. 2. Official pages already have the ability to skip the queue, for free.
    - tedunangst 13y ago
      http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-breaks-promise-banner-ads-search-results http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-bre...
- rmxt 13y ago
  Care to elaborate on how its better suited? Why return what you are calling image results on a page that historically has been text only, especially when there exists a perfectly functional Image Search already? Plus, why insert an image at all if not to convert people that would otherwise miss (or not be looking for) the text result?
- eCa 13y ago
  > Google said that it won't be charging more for the banner ads - which take up large parts of the screen: "they are part of AdWords" [from the linked article] "they are part of AdWords" -> Google considers them to be an an ad. Ads doesn't, per definition, need to be irrelevant.
TheCraiggers 13y ago
If I search for MLK, I see his picture on the side. I don't see how getting a picture of Southwest Airlines when I search for "Southwest Airlines" is that big of a deal. Now, if I were to search for "airlines" and saw that huge banner up there, I'd call that an ad and I'd be right there, handing out pitchforks. This? This is just returning searching results in a (arguably) prettier way.
- drhayes9 13y ago
  It's a big deal because this is a false equivalence. A corporation with a marketing budget and a brand is not the same as an historical figure. I think that explains a lot of the leeriness around this move. That said, I'm leaning towards your interpretation ("search results in a prettier way"). But the money involved makes me nervous.
  - chc 13y ago
    Lots of people have an irrational fear of money. But in reality, money itself is rarely a problem.
    - drhayes9 13y ago
      Sure. It's not money itself, per se, but the concurrent corruption it brings.
- snowwrestler 13y ago
  The difference is that Google does not charge MLK to have his info show up in knowledge graph results. As I understand it, they are charging Southwest Airlines for this big banner. If it was just a larger knowledge graph box I doubt anyone would care.
- socillion 13y ago
  You're saying that whether or not it's advertising depends on the context of where the paid ad appears, which is an arbitrary and baseless distinction. If a company rents a billboard that's right outside their office, isn't that advertising? Sure, you could have looked at the front of the building to see their logo, but that doesn't change the fact that the billboard is advertising.
gdilla 13y ago
How about just a banner. It reflects the content of the search. It would be an Ad if it was say, American Airlines pictured for a Southwest Airlines search. It's like seeing the official results being curated for the searcher.
- shortformblog 13y ago
  I think this is exactly point I was getting at. Google is giving companies the ability to curate their own results, which is something Facebook (through pages) and Twitter (through featured tweets on high-profile social accounts) already allow. Difference is that it's a search, not a dedicated page. I know there are a lot of cynics here, but that's not the same as a banner ad.

golergka 13y ago

It's not an ad because it's an organic search result, which is directly relevant to what I'm searching. It's essentially the same as Google Image search result, only better suited for this particular page and request.

tedunangst 13y ago
Today I learned you can pay Google to appear at the top of the organic search results.
- Dylan16807 13y ago
  1. Prove it. Don't make up examples. 2. Official pages already have the ability to skip the queue, for free.
  - tedunangst 13y ago
    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-breaks-promise-banner-ads-search-results http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-bre...
rmxt 13y ago
Care to elaborate on how its better suited? Why return what you are calling image results on a page that historically has been text only, especially when there exists a perfectly functional Image Search already? Plus, why insert an image at all if not to convert people that would otherwise miss (or not be looking for) the text result?
eCa 13y ago
> Google said that it won't be charging more for the banner ads - which take up large parts of the screen: "they are part of AdWords" [from the linked article] "they are part of AdWords" -> Google considers them to be an an ad. Ads doesn't, per definition, need to be irrelevant.

TheCraiggers 13y ago

If I search for MLK, I see his picture on the side. I don't see how getting a picture of Southwest Airlines when I search for "Southwest Airlines" is that big of a deal. Now, if I were to search for "airlines" and saw that huge banner up there, I'd call that an ad and I'd be right there, handing out pitchforks. This? This is just returning searching results in a (arguably) prettier way.

drhayes9 13y ago
It's a big deal because this is a false equivalence. A corporation with a marketing budget and a brand is not the same as an historical figure. I think that explains a lot of the leeriness around this move. That said, I'm leaning towards your interpretation ("search results in a prettier way"). But the money involved makes me nervous.
- chc 13y ago
  Lots of people have an irrational fear of money. But in reality, money itself is rarely a problem.
  - drhayes9 13y ago
    Sure. It's not money itself, per se, but the concurrent corruption it brings.
snowwrestler 13y ago
The difference is that Google does not charge MLK to have his info show up in knowledge graph results. As I understand it, they are charging Southwest Airlines for this big banner. If it was just a larger knowledge graph box I doubt anyone would care.
socillion 13y ago
You're saying that whether or not it's advertising depends on the context of where the paid ad appears, which is an arbitrary and baseless distinction. If a company rents a billboard that's right outside their office, isn't that advertising? Sure, you could have looked at the front of the building to see their logo, but that doesn't change the fact that the billboard is advertising.

gdilla 13y ago

How about just a banner. It reflects the content of the search. It would be an Ad if it was say, American Airlines pictured for a Southwest Airlines search. It's like seeing the official results being curated for the searcher.

shortformblog 13y ago
I think this is exactly point I was getting at. Google is giving companies the ability to curate their own results, which is something Facebook (through pages) and Twitter (through featured tweets on high-profile social accounts) already allow. Difference is that it's a search, not a dedicated page. I know there are a lot of cynics here, but that's not the same as a banner ad.