Google Cleans Up Search Results By Ditching Sidebar Ads (theverge.com) 105
Mark Wilson writes: Google generates a huge amount of revenue through advertising but it's not afraid to try mixing things up a little. Ads in search results have long-been controversial, but the latest change is likely to go down well with many people -- the ads that currently appear in the right-hand sidebar of search results are to be dropped.
The change means that ads will only be displayed above and below search results. There will be seven Google AdWords ads in total -- four above the search results and three below. The right-hand side of the page will be left free for Google's own Product Listing Ads. Google also confirmed that the change is global and affects all languages.
The change means that ads will only be displayed above and below search results. There will be seven Google AdWords ads in total -- four above the search results and three below. The right-hand side of the page will be left free for Google's own Product Listing Ads. Google also confirmed that the change is global and affects all languages.
Re: (Score:1)
Hint: they only love your money. Dole it out slower so it lasts longer.
Confused (Score:5, Insightful)
From a user's perspective, isn't the sidebar an ideal place for ads so they don't mix in with search results?
Re:Confused (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, that's the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
> There will be seven Google AdWords ads in total -- four above the search results and three below.
so now there will be 17 search results shown, ten of which are organic and seven of which are keyword-targeted ads. 59% signal to noise ratio, go google! keep up the stellar work! meanwhile i'll be at duckduckgo.com along with everybody else.
Re: (Score:2)
I think adblock doesn't box the search add inserts? It's just text and hyperlinks, so I don't see how adblock could identify it or cut it out.
Re: (Score:2)
While I do have duckduckgo setup as my default search engine, I find myself frequenting Google a lot. The quality of that 59% matters quite a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
While I do have duckduckgo setup as my default search engine, I find myself frequenting Google a lot. The quality of that 59% matters quite a bit.
I love using DDG...until I need to sort my search results by date posted.
*sigh*, okay Google, let's dance again...just this once, though, then I'm heading to the showers...
Re:Confused (Score:4, Informative)
I think the trick to use ddg as the default, and when you need to jump the google, use the bang. So when I find I'm not getting the results I'm looking for, I add a "!g" to the search box and jump directly to google.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Or just use startpage.com [startpage.com].
Very interesting...will check it out! Thanks for the tip!
Re: (Score:2)
This is a good thing, it makes it very easy to write a greasemonkey script to STRIP all the fucking "sponsored" search results.
Re:Confused (Score:5, Insightful)
so they don't mix in with search results?
Exactly, they want to confuse you. Why would they do anything that would decrease ad revenue? It's probably easier to trick folks into clicking when they aren't aware of the ads.
Re: (Score:3)
That's like the yahoo! homepage that randomly mixes article headlines and ads. The ads have a light blue background color, but unless you correctly angle your screen, the background color looks white, like the article headline's background. Both headlines and ads have the same look and format.
How the heck can companies get away with such blatant deception?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There are ads on Google? Since when?
Oh, you mean I have to disable ublock/noscript to see them?
Sorry, Google, no can do.
Re: (Score:1)
If you are opposed to online ads why are you commenting on a website that finances itself through ads? Oh, wait, I thought you people had principles... oops. My bad.
False equivalence and you may even know it.
Being opposed to ads and having principles would mean "this site refuses to serve me unless I turn off my ad blocker, and I will respect this instead of circumventing it." It also means "the site owner has chosen to allow adblocking users to access the site, that is the choice they made".
It does not mean "I am opposed to ads but use sites that try to push them anyway". That's your poor attempt to misrepresent the position without ever actually arguing against it.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I clicked on a news link today and saw some words covering the page that said, "the thing about ad blockers is..." and after closing the tab I finished the sentence for them: "... that users who use them, use them!" LOL And then I just clicked a different link.
I don't give a squat what some company's financial plan is. That isn't the basis for what content I consume. Did they ask my permission as a future potential reader to put ads on it? No? Well, it explains why I didn't worry about their opinio
Re: (Score:2)
I love those adblocker whine images. I left click on them and "make new rule" then block them. They go away and I am happily blocking even more.
Re: (Score:1)
For reasons,* I adhere to their wishes. If they specifically request that I not view their content without allowing their ads, I close the tab. I even open most links in new tabs just to be able to close it.
* I figure it is their property and I am their guest. I am there by their graces. They set the rules. They do not want me to view the content unless I disable my ad blocking application. It is up to them to decide to place whatever controls they want on their property. If I want the content bad enough, I
Re: (Score:2)
If you are opposed to online ads why are you commenting on a website that finances itself through ads? Oh, wait, I thought you people had principles... oops. My bad.
I do have principles and one of them is: no ads, thank you.
If a site doesn't let me accesss it without disabling adblocking and/or enabling scripts from a shitload of third party domains then I don't access it.
Re: (Score:2)
From a user's perspective, isn't the sidebar an ideal place for ads so they don't mix in with search results?
No, research shows that users would prefer to see ads mixed in with links (link - ad - link - ad). It is even better if links jump around under your mouse or at least regularly obscured with a surprise overlay banner "subscribe here!".
Users only liked unobtrusive ads in the 90s -- tastes have clearly changed.
Bring back alta Vista (Score:2)
and Overdrive ads.
Download Now (Score:2)
Will they also be using a large green arrow so I can immediately get the software or movie I googled. Those are really helpful when they are mixed in with search results.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to disagree. I shop online. I don't rely on the advertisements. Of course, with noscript, ublock, request policy, and more, I don't see the ads.
If I want a thingamabob, I search for thingamabob. If I know what brand I want, then I search for Bob's thingamabob. I don't get adverts, instead I get hits on stories, articles, and vendor's sites. Someone evaluated all of Bob's thingamabobs, and found that they aren't all the same quality - his cheapest item sucks, his most expensive item doesn't suck
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure. I've never noticed the ads.
Or am I not meant to tell the advertisers that?
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely. It took me a while to get used to there being ads above the search results... Very frustrating, so much harder to distinguish commercial from organic results. No problem with the commercial results, I'll even click on them occasionally, but I do like to know beforehand how that result came there.
Removes dupes (Score:1)
um... (Score:2)
So the ads in the sidebar
At least they are trying... kinda sorta. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Google page has become messy and much less useful. Recall that one of Google innovations was a clear, transparent, and clean results page. It is now necessary to analyze the page pretty completely before understanding what is relevant.
Also, less ads means that the advertisers have to bid higher amounts to get on the page.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Google allows you to opt out of there targeted advertizing, they also allow you to delete your search history from their servers. whether that history is actually deleted or not I have no idea.
Hello, new owners? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hello, new owners? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's the problem.
If Slashdot ownership decides to keep posting submitted stories as-is, some people are going to complain about perceived biases in the stories.
If Slashdot ownership chooses to have their editors rewrite the submissions before they're posted, some people will start complaining that Slashdot is controlling the news and attempting to put its own spin on everything. ... and I expect the Venn Diagram of the two groups would mostly overlap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As long as there's a link to the original submission, the editors can rewrite it as they please (and be called out on bias).
Best of both worlds.
Re: (Score:2)
Google has ads? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Call me crazy but Google is one of the few white-listed in ABP.
Their ads are often useful when I'm searching for commercial offerings - when I specifically want to buy something. The regular search results give the product info, the ads give great starting points to buy.
Also they're not intrusive and easy to filter out - though that's getting harder and harder with first the appearance of ads above and below the search results, and now the disappearance of the side bar altogether. Google is at risk here of
Re: (Score:2)
completely blank? that means your adblocker is broken and kills rhs_block altogether
google movie/car/game etc and rhs_block will fill up with most relevant info
Before vs after (Score:1)
In particular, I'm wondering if we're going from 1-2 in-line ads and 1-2 sidebar ads to 3-7 in-line ads. (In other words, is this "cleaning" just an excuse to put more ads in-line with the search results? Let's not forget this is Google, who won market-share in part by way of putting ads on a noticeable yellow background. Anybody noticed the background colour for ads these days?
Re:Before vs after (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Altavista tried this approach before Google ate their lunch.
When people are searching for something they want results, not ads. The ads drive revenue but the revenue comes from having users to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
Which also reminds me that the best ads are the ones where the website deals with the business direct instead of using some ad middleman. That's how Slashdot used to be able to pay for itself IIRC. We had ThinkGeek and even Microsoft and Oracle ads. Blech. But at least those ads were specific to this target audience.
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks for the link!
Since I have your attention now, this might be a good place to post this request. I'd love to have the option of opening links in discussions in a new tab.
I just wanted to see what the new lay-out was and continue with reading the rest of the thread. Now I accidentally forgot to "open in new tab", saw the picture and had to use the "Back" button in the browser. Losing the position in the discussion in the process.
Links in the comment part of an article are almost always something you wou
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, Google! (Score:1)
There's Ads? (Score:1)
it's an antitrust workaround (Score:2)
...to head off those court cases where various people and countries suspect that Google is giving its own products "undue prominence" in search results - by putting their own products in a separate column to the right (and perhaps then dialing down alleged prominence algorithm) they're now no longer in violation of anything
The top ads are the worst (Score:5, Interesting)
I run a website, it is called acls.net. Lots of people compete with us.
Sometimes we will get a customer on the phone that got our phone number from a friend and they want to login and buy our course. I tell them to type acls.net into the address bar. Just explaining where the address bar was hard enough. One older gentleman finally types it in and guess what... he lands on our competitor's website!
So then we go through this again. Type it in... hit enter... and then same result. So what happened is this guy is getting to the Google search results page and our competitor created an ad with the headline "acls.net". Luckily I figured this out, then just told him to click on acls.net that is green.
Turns out this guy is color blind. After 15-minutes of him patiently and whole-heartedly working with me, I could not get him to navigate to our 8-character URL website. I printed out the page and mailed it to him, and he mailed me a check for about $500 to sign up.
This is a real story, honest. Now think about how much money my competitors want to pay Google to make sure the customer that DIDN'T call me ends up on their site...
Re: (Score:1)
OK, so there's an issue about ads getting embedded in search results, but, I see what you did there - embedding an ad in your comment. Perhaps that kind of sneaky embedding is why a search for acls.net has a "Fraud Warning - American Heart Association" show up so prominently just below your website. http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/... [heart.org]
Re: (Score:1)
...and I clicked through on all the ads that show up, just to cost them a little money. You're welcome. Sometimes, when think about ambulance-chasing attorneys, I type mesothelioma into the search bar and click on the ads. [Full disclosure: I own some GOOG and GOOGL]
Re: (Score:3)
The product on our website is for doctors and I seriously doubt Slashdotters want to buy it. You can check my posting history, I rarely talk about work or promote anything other than my open source projects.
I am glad you're engaged to check that out. Yes, this industry (any competitive industry) has lots of scams. And I provided that link so you can see the kind of shady shit that's going on. Of course, Google encourages all this and they make lots of money from this exact situation. As to why my company is
Re: (Score:2)
Five people clicked the aforementioned, and forgot to install Privacy Badger beforehand.
WARNING, THE REMAINING PART OF THIS COMMENT IS SPAM
For comparison, another time I linked to my blog fulldecent.blogspot.com for something that was probably more relevant (I forget what link). There were seven clicks.
For more comparison, once I posted a link to privacylog.blogspot.com and it made the front page -- about 1,000 people accessed the story.
https://imgur.com/a/Ep6Sg [imgur.com]
Re: (Score:2)
If he was in fact typing in the URL bar and getting a search engine result, it sounds like he had some malware installed on his browser which redirected all URLs and searches to their own website.
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, ctrl-l is the shortcut to select the URL bar in all the major browsers.
Damn you, sans serif!
I was going to say that ctrl-i does nothing in my browser, and I was halfway through writing my reply before I twigged you might be talking about lowercase L instead.
Great start! (Score:2)
Now if they'll ditch that useless, waste-of-space left sidebar containing that "Anytime" crap, then allow us to disable suggestions, and auto complete and ... just about everything that doesn't work w/o Javascript then the various Google pages may be usable w/o me having to use NoScript, and HTTP (through Proxomitron) to make it simply palatable. Seriously, having it shuffle words with every character typed is so fucking annoying (and a waste of bandwidth) - their keystroke analysis be damned.
All I want
Re: (Score:1)
Go into your Google account > Personal Info > Search settings
they are already gone (Score:2)
#rhs_block, #tvcap, #taw, #tads, #bottomads, td.Bu.y3, div.nH.adC, div.nH.PS, .action-menu, .clickable-dropdown-arrow {display:none !important;}
Hmmm (Score:2)
The right-hand side of the page will be left free for Google's own Product Listing Ads.
So they are not ditching ads on the side of the page at all, like the summary claims. Plus, it's Google. They'll likely change their mind in about a week and ditch the search results in the middle, leaving the entire page for Google+, soon to be replaced by Google++.
2 Gripes about video advertising (Score:1)
And yet Google wrings it's hands over ad blockers (Score:2)
Google worries about ad blockers - then turns off all bar the most obtrusive positioning of their ads.
Google search ads were occasionally useful. Useful enough for me to want to keep them there. I actually clicked on them when looking for stuff to buy. But then they moved them to the top, then altered the colours so they were barely distinguishable from real search results. That was when I turned on ad blocking for their search page. I guess I could have just blocked the ads at the top and been happy,
People still use Google? (Score:2)
When there's StartPage DuckDuckGo? Why though?
There are ads on Google? (Score:2)
Never saw them???
In fact I can't see any ads anywhere. Is my internet broken?