walkman - 5:57 pm on Sep 22, 2011 (gmt 0)
I'm just curious, folks. What do you wise professionals say (or how do you suggest I respond) to the argument on the order of "Google is a business *not operating pro bono* and thus they 'have a right' to promote their own products, cook the search, and do as they please with the search 'product'."?
Fine, on every non-IE browser that operates on Windows, MS displays an annoying ad. What say you? Or if MS Pandalizes Google Chrome or gives them a Low landing Quality Score? MS is not pro-bono, is it?
They are most certainly fixing bid prices on Adwords at the very least. The 'Quality Score' algorithm allowed them to go away from an auction based system to one where they can simply increase bid prices on a whim and claim it's quality score related. You as an advertiser have no way to know what's going on.
I'm no fan of government but someone needs to take Google down a peg or two. The arrogance they display is quite infuriating.
If they did this (let's take a wild guess), you can pretty much see Google a few dozen pegs down, not a peg or two. Imagine the fines, and lawsuits from people demanding their money back.
And if they chose the algorithm based on Adwords income (so-so, but not too bad Serps = more clicks,) frankly they all should be hung from lampposts. It's not funny to ruin people's livelihoods.
neither being "fair" in the selection of search listings
Bad press and lost trust aside, FTC might disagree if Google places sites based on financial incentives and does not disclose it. Those links cost consumers money, money that Google got. Who pays for Google's advertising? We do, prices are passed to the consumers.