“Buying Your Way In…”
By Danny Sullivan
I found it interesting to see the page cluttered with a mish-mash of clickable ads, mostly promoting search-engines: It makes sense, as the prime topic of the piece was how advertisers infest their banners, links, and blurbs into the various results of search-engines (an online utility that allows open-ended input into a text field, and outputs, from throughout the web, content relatable to said textual input).
The article made it very clear from the start that when a search engine sells a listing, it is not a secret to be kept, and therefore nothing to be afraid of – there is no backhanded-ness going on here. The comparison was drawn to more primitive varieties of print: A newspaper sells ad space, but the ads are easily identified as such, even with adverts masquerading as editorial. The problem, Sullivan identified, is that this new form of advertising is somewhat undeveloped, and users sometimes misconstrue paid placement ads – ads guaranteed by payment to show up after a certain search term is entered – as part of the search results. Other types of paid-listing, including paid inclusion and paid submission, have various benefits (mainly for the proprietors of the included site).
Sullivan saw a narrow benefit in the generation of revenue for the various engines he examined, enabling said engines to return sites that don’t pay as well. I am truly neutral to this whole business: As an internet user since 3rd grade, I have come to easily distrust and disregard online advertisements. One thing that did come to mind, though, is this: Could someone with enough capital create a sort of search-engine monopoly, giving enough people enough money to make their site the number one hit at all times? And those of us who take Orwell’s 1984 as a bit prophetic might foresee a huge governmental influx of paid for web listings (considering the article also pointed out the legislative hand dipping into the public-policy pool of online ads) – an oppressive government may, in the future, provide some digital propaganda for the online proles.
Reading over that, it nearly sounds absurd. . . Nearly. :)
2 comments:
Your point that the article itself is surrounded by ads is very interesting. A google search of the phrase "search engine advertising" (admittedly, I had an edge since I knew the title of the article) results in this particular article at the top of the non-sponsored links. Ok, so the publication isn't paying the search engine people, but the publication itself generates revenue from advertising. Don't the advertising dollars shape the content of online media as it shapes the content of print media? Might it be useful to expand our ideas of "sponsored"?
Do you mean how certain advertisers only patronize media outlets that provide content agreeable to their goals and causes? Such as a sugary cereal commercial during Saturday morning cartoons?
Post a Comment