Spot Check By AP Reveals Most Engines Slow to Respond To FTC Requests

[rubble88]

A spot check by the Associated Press is just out as to how the engines are dealing, if at all, to the requests made by the FTC re: Commerical Watch.

From the article,
"To gauge the search engines' response, The Associated Press submitted a series of random queries this week."

"The spot checks found few changes had been made, even though it appears all but one of the surveyed search engines will have to make revisions to meet the FTC's guidelines."

"The AP reviewed search engines at a dozen sites: Alltheweb, AOL, AltaVista, AskJeeves, Google, Hotbot, Looksmart, Lycos, MSN, Overture, Netscape and Yahoo."

"Google was the only search engine that appeared to meet all the criteria laid out by regulators."

Full-Text at:
[siliconvalley.com...]

[Zoron]

And further, "advert" is clearly understood globally...over "sponsor?" I'd wager to say not 2% of Americans would respond to 'advert' (It's a British aberration). In America it's 'advertisement' AND 'sponsor.'

[Napoleon]

I come from the UK... the north of the UK.

The norm for 'sponsor' where I come from (and lots of other places), has a different emphasis on the word. Sponsor does NOT mean advert at all. It has benefactor type connotations... someone who is paying for a greater good, rather than just personal financial profit.

This is well known by the SEs. Many people have told them. They are well aware of it, yet they persist with the word. Why? Well you tell me if it isn't to deceive.

And yes LW, the analogy does fit. They are returning results on a totally different basis to which searchers understand. They are tricking them into believing they are returned on the basis of relevancy.

Here's a good idea: why not call the adverts 'adverts' and the search returns 'search returns'? Now... what IS the problem with that type of clarity? Answer: no problem, except that they will get fewer clicks on the ads because fewer people are being deceived!

>>In America it's 'advertisement' AND 'sponsor.'<<

Fine... I'll live with advertisement.. bet the SE's won't!!!

[lgn]

Move offshore. That may be a viable option for the PPC hosting search engines to avoid the FTC.

[mundonet]

Tough luck Zoron, I just received a letter from Overture about "benefits" of Auto Bidding and it starts with these words: "Dear Overture™ Advertiser".

Guess that's because it's advertising...

[Zoron]

Hi Mundonet,

Don't mean to burst your bubble but this is not a new leaf OV's turning over...I've received correspondence for as far back as I remember addressing me as an 'advertiser.' Here's one I received in early April, way before the FTC's pronouncement, for instance:

"Dear Advertiser,

Congratulations! You've earned Gold Service on Overture. As an Overture Gold Service advertiser, you'll receive priority treatment on Overture, which means faster editorial review of your search listing requests and quicker response to account inquiries. Providing Gold Service is our way of recognizing and rewarding you for spending over $6,000 per year* on Overture."

I've never denied that I'm 'advertising' with Overture just that my "paid listing" like a Yellow Pages or Business Directory "listing" doesn't need to be labeled "advertisement" when it's labeled exactly what it is: "sponsored listing," "sponsored matches","sponsor sites," et. al.

Hope you're not expecting the SEs carrying these labels to change. They won't because they don't need to. A 'sponsored' anything [in the U.S.- the site of the FTC's jurisdiction] is clearly understood to be paid advertising. And besides that, Overture itself shows the prices paid. Couldn't be any clearer if it were also in Braille. :)

Anyway...this is certainly no crusade for me like it appears to be with a number of those objecting so vehemently over the omission of the term 'advertisement' or God forbid 'advert.' Yeah, that's the ticket, let's label it 'advert,' then no one in America will understand it at all. :) Or how about?: "Warning: Reading this could cause you to be deceived and may be hazardous to your mental health."

[mundonet]

"doesn't need to be labeled.." just like you don't need to call a cat a cat, surely there is a PPC-speak formula that could "clearly" define the animal. SE are in the business of analyzing words and their relative position, no choice of words is innocent.

So any opposite opinion to yours is a "crusade"? That's a convenient label.

[Zoron]

C'mon Muldonet...I didn't say "doesn't need to be labeled." I said "doesn't need to be labeled advertisement'"...when it's already labeled "sponsored listing" or the like.

And speaking of PPC-speak... is this any different from the label PPC itself and the label PFI ('paid for inclusion') which Danny Sullivan and group call it? Or 'cat' and 'pussy.'

I guess I interpret 'crusade' to be 'strong action TOWARDS' (literally "a reforming enterprise undertaken with zeal") reforming something...rather than a defensive stance of maintaining 'status quo'..."If it ain't broke, don't fix it." :)

No offense intended, just accurate labeling. :)

[Zoron]

Ooops. Sorry I misspelled your name, Mundonet.