Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google

Google's Grip on Search Slips as TikTok and AI Startup Mount Challenge (yahoo.com) 36

Google's grip on the nearly $300 billion search advertising business is loosening. From a report: For years, the tech giant has seemed invincible in this corner of the ad market, which is the foundation of its business. Now, rivals are beginning to eat into its lead, and new offerings -- fueled by the rise of artificial intelligence and social video -- threaten to reshape the landscape. TikTok, the wildly popular short-form video platform, has recently started allowing brands to target ads based on users' search queries -- a direct challenge to Google's core business.

Perplexity, an AI search startup backed by Jeff Bezos, plans to introduce ads later this month under its AI-generated answers. Until now, it has made revenue mostly from a $20-a-month subscription offering that grants access to more-powerful AI technology. The new initiatives add to the pressure on Google from the rise of Amazon.com, which has taken a chunk of search ad spending. Many consumers begin product searches on the e-commerce platform.

Google's share of the U.S. search ad market is expected to drop below 50% next year for the first time in over a decade, according to the research firm eMarketer. Amazon is expected to have 22.3% of the market this year, with 17.6% growth, compared with Google's 50.5% share and its 7.6% growth.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's Grip on Search Slips as TikTok and AI Startup Mount Challenge

Comments Filter:
  • by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @09:14AM (#64845531) Journal
    If you use Bing with Cortana, it can often find things better than Google. Partially because Google sold out to the SEO crowd.
    • by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @10:13AM (#64845665)

      If you use Bing with Cortana, it can often find things better than Google. Partially because Google sold out to the SEO crowd.

      Google sold out to the SEO crowd? Google created the SEO crowd, promoted the SEO ideology every step of the way, and is now an SEO evangelist, ranking in tech territory about where Jimmy Swaggart ranked for TV evangelists at one time. Right around the time he got busted doing naked chinese firedrills with hookers.

      • I have no idea what you just said, but I like the energy.
        • I know exactly what he just said, and it was awesome.

          Depending on your age, you might not have been around when Jimmy Swaggart was a thing, doing his scandal-ridden pop media televangelism "religion", but you can imagine what it was like. Comparing it to Google SEO web-evangelism is a great analogy.

          Although, you can't blame a guy for "doing naked chinese firedrills with hookers". I wonder what they are doing now in the Google c-suite?

          • by GoTeam ( 5042081 )

            Depending on your age, you might not have been around when Jimmy Swaggart was a thing, doing his scandal-ridden pop media televangelism "religion", but you can imagine what it was like

            He survived Apollo 13. He's a national hero. Show some damn respect!

          • I don't understand the SEO part
            • I don't understand the SEO part

              SEO is far more religious fairy tale that reality. It sells the idea that if you bloat the shit out of your content, it will be more attractive to Google, thus making it more likely to top-rank on the listings, yet by the time you match SEO needs, you no longer have an informational and/or entertaining site, you simply have a meandering mess of requirements to meet before you can make your point. Much like religion as described by Televangelists. "If you just hop through every hoop and send enough money to

          • I know exactly what he just said, and it was awesome.

            Depending on your age, you might not have been around when Jimmy Swaggart was a thing, doing his scandal-ridden pop media televangelism "religion", but you can imagine what it was like. Comparing it to Google SEO web-evangelism is a great analogy.

            Although, you can't blame a guy for "doing naked chinese firedrills with hookers". I wonder what they are doing now in the Google c-suite?

            Google at this point has run out of imagination. No way they're going as far as naked chinese firedrills. Probably just the standard coke and sex in a closed room. No sense of adventure.

    • Partially because Google sold out to the SEO crowd.

      That's like saying Microsoft sold out to malware distributors. No Google and the SEO crowd have always been at odds with each other. They play an endless game of whack-a-mole with the SEO crowd gaming Google's algorithm with rubbish while Google tries in vain to block the tricks without actually breaking the search engine (which isn't as easy as it sounds).

      The only reason the SEO crowd doesn't do the same thing with Bing is because "With our services you can optimise your engagement with 3.9% of your potent

  • Back in the days, Google would just find relevant stuff crawling the web, in these days where SEO wasn't a thing. Now, if you have great info but no SEO skills, you'll be on the 16th page in the results and get no hit on your great info.

    AI is getting relevant, cause it gets (mostly) good answers to questions, compared to Google, where answers are getting more and more sponsored, and less relevant.

    As for TikTok, AKA the PRC, I can't say, I will never let that shit in my home on smartphone. Just as Temu.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Back in the days, Google would just find relevant stuff crawling the web, in these days where SEO wasn't a thing

      SEO has been around longer than Google. SEO has been around almost as long as there have been search engines to manipulate, and there were plenty of search engines before Google. The first recorded use of the term "Search Engine Optimisation" was in 1997, although it was likely in use well before that, and the techniques were in use before they had a name. Google wasn't founded until 1998.

      • Wow, I remember when "web indexes" were a thing. I even had a book that contained a printed web index. But this was in the very early days of the web.
        • To be more clear, there were just pages with a large list of URLs for the various websites that were available at the time.
  • by in10se ( 472253 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @09:53AM (#64845619) Homepage

    If you need a question answered, Google is pretty good at that.

    If you need to search the web, unfortunately Google hasn't done a good job at that in over a decade.

    • I asked yesterday, for no reason, "why do my clothes smell like a wet dog?"
      It gave good, accurate answers with suggestions - use less detergent; clean the washing machine; wash dogs manually, not in washing machine.
      Etc, ymmv.
      Since this just works now, why do we need to pour billions of dollars into it? I'm good with it being able to answer questions like these.

    • I haven't experienced this decline in Google search results. As far as I can see, they've gotten better, not worse. It used to be that the answer I wanted was on the first page. Now it's usually the #1 result, or at worst, #2.

  • AI that can search, cite, and link while integrating information by relevance to the query is obviously vastly superior to Google search.

    Similarly, however, AI that gets to know the user and his/her needs/interests and projects could be a bastion for business IF the AI company charges to list their products. The key to win would be to offer more information about the products thereby enabling the AI to determine what products meet the user's actual needs.

    When I say products here, it also applies to service

    • Around the early 2000's or so my buddy has a similar idea. I was coding professionally at the time, but I only knew about NLP, not a whole lot about it.
      The idea of a virtual librarian/atlas/digital butler? wasn't entirely new, as it existed aplenty in fiction.
      At the time, chatbots were no better than "let me google that for you". Siri, Alexa, etc were released not too long after, and they were more novelty than anything. The NLP on the front end was good enough, but the actions were never all that impressiv

  • Ages ago, IBM was in the cash register market, and had to find new markets to keep going, thus being one of the first companies into the computer ecosystem. Maybe Google needs to start moving into other markets? The ad market isn't going to keep expanding, and it is only a matter of time, either due to nationalism, worry about intel gathering, increased concern about privacy, and people just sick and tired of ad companies, that the market is going to shrink, especially because the ad market likely will im

  • Google's grip on the nearly $300 billion search advertising business..

    A search advertising business that was reduced to half a dozen results on the first page only, because society embraced ADHD as some kind of personal mantra.

    Ask any company with second-page search results if they think that’s worth $300 billion.

  • Anyway

  • Regular searching has become such garbage these days. Ten years ago, I could look up a fact and be sure to find it in the first few results. Now, there are 1000 spam sites for every real site, and the number of spam sites keeps growing thanks to better and better (or worse and worse) AI tools.

    Now we need AI to sort through the AI spam. The overall result is worse than what we used to get, thanks to hallucinations and the AI slurping up the good with the bad. Eventually, we're going to all buy copies of

  • by BishopBerkeley ( 734647 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @12:11PM (#64846041) Journal
    Under pressure to meet its quarterly profits, Google has elected to flood search results with ads and "custom" results that keep the user engaged, instead of results that are relevant, the criterion that made them so huge. Now that search is a commodity, any number of other companies who do not need to generate ungodly profits every quarter can make good money by providing relevant results. Ecosia, DuckDuckGo, Bing, and any other number of search engines provide the traditional experience that makes them useful.

    When Dell made the PC a commodity, it destroyed its own profits. Google is trying to avoid the same fate now that search is a commodity business, but it's doing all wrong. So wrong!
    • ""custom" results that keep the user engaged," Basically code for "fuck you, user. We will waste your valuable time because we need to keep making tons of money". And this "keep the user engaged" is really rubbing me the wrong way.
  • Before they started to fuck around and more or less gimped their own search engine.
  • Google's grip on search slipped as their search results became nearly fucking useless.

    Literally just last night I had to Google "2010 audi a4 fuse box" because I was working on a car. I got FOUR FUCKING PAGES of YouTube links... as a test I hit IMAGES and still got four fucking pages of YouTube links. I don't want to watch a fucking 20 minute video about some douchebag's cat and some TV dinner by mail bullshit ad just to find out what fuses are where and even then have to pause the video at just the right m

Force needed to accelerate 2.2lbs of cookies = 1 Fig-newton to 1 meter per second

Working...