homegirl - 9:27 pm on Feb 18, 2003 (gmt 0)

Thanks for that clarification (Jeremy)!

I didn't realize the NYTimes was taking the position that the search engines *should* do something about this. Only cautioning people.

My point is simply that what a lot of people take as "basic" here in WebmasterWorld- isn't either known or well-understood by the vast public.

Hence, when CommercialAlert went after search engines for a blending of paid results with search-engine-derived results, I don't think any of the WebmasterWorld crowd was surprised by this news. But the actual news hasn't disseminated all that well into public consciousness.

Similarly, when Danny Sullivan talks about how more scrutiny might be applied to paid listings (particularly the looser standards applied to paid content) in his recent "Ending the Debate on Cloaking" article, this runs along the same lines- except that he expects the FTC to step in. It's all about appearances. Ads in the NYTimes appear to be ads. It's the ads-masquerading-as-editorial-pieces that are more difficult. Just kidding!

It's FAR from an end to PPC. However, for those of you who take ads on your sites, wouldn't it dismay you personally to hear of repeated negative or borderline-fraudulent experiences with your particular client?