Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Is it just me or do you think this is somewhat unethical? There's got to be a conflict of interest - I mean, what incentive does Google have in charging ITSELF the highest possible price for clicks on this ad? Or for that matter, what incentive do they have to charge themselves ANYTHING? Since we get no breakdown by advertiser, it will be impossible to determine which advertiser is pulling down the average.
I wouldn't say a word if they wanted to place their own ads in search results - that's their choice. But do you guys think it's ok for Google to advertise via AdSense?
I don't see any reason why they shouldn't run their own recruitment ads. It shows they have faith in their system.
The rule is the big guys get a better deal, including G themselves.
They say it has to compete in the auction but I don't totally buy it.
Just had to block Bill G & Co. Nice to have them on my site but the earnings were cut in half of my normal take on the two pages they were on today. See ya big M!
Then everyone will complain that Google doesn't even trust their own advertising if they feel they have to advertise on other networks.
Imagine you have your own, original business niche and one day Google decides to directly compete with you on Adwords or Adsense. You wouldn't think you have fair chances to compete with them. Not only because they have unlimited budget, but mostly because of the knowledge about the Adwords/Adsense system. The knowledge you will NEVER have a chance to gain. It is a concern to more and more businesses.
Newspapers advertise in their own classifieds sections. Magazines run ads on their own pages. TV stations run ads for their own shows. As do radio stations. Are they all unethical?
Come on. It takes a 7 yo to figure out which place is best to put an ad in a newspaper or which show is going to bring most visitors. You cannot compare it to figuring out the ever-changing, sometimes illogical nuances of the Adwords/Adsense systems. Google has this knowledge, other advertisers don't and probably won't.
- Continue working with them, even though you apparently think they're cheating you.
Or...
- Terminate the relationship.
If I were in your situation, I'd choose the second option. It doesn't make sense to work with a company you don't trust.
Google can only behave like an elephant in a porcelain store; maybe it doesn't want to do harm, but no matter how hard it tries, it DOES and WILL DO harm.
Instead of mistrusting the payout, consider it a sign that we believe in the power of our own network. :)
-ASA
That's the reason for ethical concerns. You are the teacher, the public users are the students. What is sad - there's no way that the students have a chance to outsmart the teacher in this game.
[edited by: menial at 3:59 am (utc) on June 29, 2007]
Tell me that is not so.
[edited by: Khensu at 3:58 am (utc) on June 29, 2007]
What is sad - there's no way that the students have a chance to outsmart the teacher in this game.
An attitude of "don't do anythign because everything you do can't help but be unethical" is not going to fly with Google shareholders, employees, or anyone else who uses Google. Basically, you're telling Google that they are so big that they should just shut down.
If anyone should be complaining, it should be those in the AdWords forum, but they probably won't. It would be like those over here complaining that Google competes unfairly because they run google ads on their properties, and they know how things work better than we do.
Not all advantages are "unfair" advantages. In sports there are "home field" advantages because the players know the conditions. Some people take time to study advertising, and they will have advantages over those who do not. Big advertisers get concessions that smaller advertisers do not.
Google has an advantage, but as long as they are playing within the rules, competing for ad space on the same grounds as everyone else, paying the publishers what is due, then it is a fair advantage.
Since when is it a "game" between teachers and students?
Do you think it's fair that the teacher (Google) creates math exercises and then tells the students (Adsense/Adwords publishers) they have exactly the same chances to solve them correctly and get the optimal results?
Do you think it's fair that the teacher (Google) creates math exercises and then tells the students (Adsense/Adwords publishers) they have exactly the same chances to solve them correctly and get the optimal results?
What I would be interested to know is:
- Does the Google staff report conversions?
- What works best for them, CPC or CPM?
- Is the landing page quality rule applicable to them?
- Will they ever put adsense ads on their landing pages to shift the costs? ;-)
Google isn't in the business of actually "teaching" publishers anything. At its most basic level, the Adsense/Adwords system is an ad-serving network where multiple parties may profit. If publishers can learn anything, it should be to forget about "gaming" the Adsense system and simply write/create/develop quality content. When you do that, those wonderful, well-targeted ads will come.
If big companies (including Google) have ads to display and they're playing by the same rules as other advertisers in the same ad network -- they should display those ads.
It's up to publishers to figure out whether or not they wish to participate in the same ad network by allowing Google to serve those ads.
When Google HR places ads to try and recruit people to work in their new data center in the Dalles, or engineers off tech oriented sites, they probably get a little help with setting up the targeting. But there is no need for them to cheat the system, because they could effectively use the same tools that everyone else has access to.
They aren't competing with you on selling vacation packages to Switzerland, they are hiring engineers and pitching blogger. Given the markets, there is no competition at their scale that they would need to compete against. They have the money, they will just outbid you if they want. Though I bet you would consider that to be unfair too.
[edited by: BigDave at 5:54 pm (utc) on June 29, 2007]
The same should apply to Google and its empoyees. It probably will soon when the goverments have a better understanding of the whole issue.
A much more appropriate comparison would be to insider trading laws. You are allowed to trade in a stock when you are an insider. But you are not allowed to trade based on any "inside" information that you have been given that is not available to the public *IF* that information is going to lead to a major change in the stock price. But that doesn't affect things like scheduled purchases. Nor does it have any impact on whether you trade on personal knowledge of your own,such as knowing that when you resign, the stock price will drop so you sell all your stock.
So the government will not do a damnt thing about Google buying their own ads, unless you have some sort of proof that they are cheating. Taking advantage of their knowledge of their system will not count in this case.
We all get it. You hate Google and you think they are evil. I hope you are enjoying your crusade. Most of us just view them as a company that we trust enough to deal with. If we had your point of view we wouldn't deal with them, and we are confused about why you do.
You see, when Microsoft changed their EULA between windows 2000 and XP to something that I considered unacceptable, I stopped buying from them. I don't trust them so I don't deal with them anymore. I don't wast my time in MS forums ranting against them. You should try it, it's easier on your blood pressure.
Is it "unethical" for politicians with big families to run for office? It's not fair to other politicians, since the ones with big families have a bunch of guaranteed votes and can "cheat" the voting system.
Is it "unethical" for super bright people to go to college? It's not fair to the other students that they raise the grade curve so much and make everyone else look dumb.
Is it "unethical" for Bob, who has been with the company 5 years longer than me, to apply for the same position that I want to? It's not fair to me that he knows more about the company than I do. (Or for that matter, is it "unethical" for me to apply for the same position that hundreds of other people from outside of the company are applying for? OMG- that's even more unfair to all the outsiders who don't know about the inner workings of the company!)
Anywa, I don't hate Google; I use their services almost every day and I like most of them. But sometimes you need to take a bigger picture because some of the things they do today may be dangerous for the Internet population as a whole in the future. Always remember the elephant/porcelain analogy.
But that's another story and you're right, I'm not the one who should worry about it. Some people get it now, others will hopefully get it soon.
