Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.21.175.43

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google’s Jaw-Dropping Sponsored Post Campaign For Chrome

     

alvin123

4:38 am on Jan 3, 2012 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



"Google’s paying to produce a lot of garbage, the same type of garbage that its Panda Update was designed to penalize."

[searchengineland.com ]

madmatt69

7:15 pm on Jan 4, 2012 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



As if the penalty will stick for very long. Just like with the google japan fiasco and any number of companies they've purchased then had to punish. If google's rules are too confusing for themselves to follow it's absurd for them to think the rest of the web will too. I'm sure Chrome won't be having to lay anybody off or close their doors when they get 'slapped' by google, in the same way that many other small web operations have had to close their doors in particular over the last year.

tangor

8:02 pm on Jan 4, 2012 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



<tinfoilon>Let's see if anyone notices, and if they do nuke it for publicity.</tinfoiloff>

Actually, that's tongue in cheek. Meant only to show that even the brainiacs can make stoopid missteaks like the rest of us. Only when we do it, it hurts worse. When G does it, it's front page news and keeps the "brand" in the public eye and ear. WIN WIN for "brand".

Whitey

8:51 pm on Jan 4, 2012 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member whitey is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Sometimes they had a history of pushing the boundaries, but other times it just seemed impossible to understand.

Maybe this incident raises the awareness of treating penalties in an even handed way. WMT would be a good way to upgrade the communication and penalty handling process'as well by being more specific and timely.

Arguments against this are that it teaches spammers the boundary limits and what Google hasn't managed to pick up, but issuing "warnings" would be enough to deter practices outside guidelines.

The other argument is that Google's algorithmn doesn't necessarily pick up all offences, and as in this case, relies on manual inputs.

Should Google improve it's handling of penalties through WMT?

tangor

8:57 pm on Jan 4, 2012 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Should Google improve it's handling of penalties through WMT?


This would be the commonsense way, but would require real humans to be involved, not an utter reliance on an algo. This would require the same type of management as utilized here at Webmasterworld: human beings operating under established (published) rules. Unfortunately, there's that issue of SCALE... and the salaries attached. So, even though that would be the best of worlds, it is not likely to happen from a profit point of view.

Whitey

10:01 pm on Jan 4, 2012 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member whitey is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Unfortunately, there's that issue of SCALE...

Perhaps there are some interim improvements, like better consistancy on occassional communications already produced in the WMT panel.

c41lum

11:35 pm on Jan 4, 2012 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



Its a conspiracy theory I know, but I wouldnt be surprised if this is a tactical move to prove to the EU and US antitrust cases that they treat there own companies the same as competitors.

Doing this would give themselves the perfect defense. Shame they don't downgrade there price comparison service (froogle/product search) like they have done to all of their competitors.

rlange

2:41 pm on Jan 5, 2012 (gmt 0)



c41lum wrote:
Its a conspiracy theory I know, but I wouldnt be surprised if this is a tactical move to prove to the EU and US antitrust cases that they treat there own companies the same as competitors.

Doing this would give themselves the perfect defense.

Too many players directly involved; too many weak links.

Assuming Google to be the originator in this hypothetical conspiracy, there are three options: 1) Google let Essence Digital in on the conspiracy, 2) Google told Essence Digital to do what was done, 3) Google told Essence Digital to do something innocent hoping that they'd instead do something "bad".

Option 1: There are three more options: 1a) Essence Digital let Unruly Media in on the conspiracy, 1b) Essence Digital told Unruly Media to do what was done, and 1c) Essence Digital told Unruly Media to do something innocent hoping that they'd instead do something "bad".

Option 1a: You now have three independent organizations with no doubt multiple individuals within each organization aware of the conspiracy. That's a horrible conspiracy. Someone is bound to talk.

Option 1b: I believe Essence Digital denied that what Unruly Media did is what Essence Digital requested. Unruly Media could easily expose the lie by pointing to the contract they signed with Essence Digital. At this point Essence Digital either takes the fall or exposes the conspiracy.

Option 2: This is similar to Option 1b, except between Google and Essence Digital.

Option 3 and Option 1c: Too much chance involved. That's a horrible conspiracy.

--
Ryan

Sgt_Kickaxe

11:47 am on Jan 6, 2012 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member sgt_kickaxe is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member



off topic a little but this reafirms the strength a small blog has on the internet, Google wouldn't have wasted their time otherwise.
This 38 message thread spans 2 pages: 38
 

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month