Google

You are currently browsing articles tagged Google.

Salami and salad are an aggregate of different ingredients. Both salami and salad are diverse, mixing a range of different yet similar stuff into the one package, a lot like Twitter and Facebook. Combining so much into one easily consumed package is almost revolutionary in a world where meat offcuts and lettuce had until that time stood alone, solitary and distinct – somewhat similar to what was seen with Web 2.0, where user generated content was spread across sites like Geocities and other free hosts to be replaced with Myspace and Blogger, sites and tools that connected and generated content like never before.

Social Media Sandwich

Social Media Sandwich

Why not go further? Why not move from a boring world of plates, knives and forks, to a place where salami and salad can be enjoyed at the same time between two pieces of bread? The sandwich is a truly revolutionary construct. Taking the best of both foods and making them available in the one easy to consume package through the medium of baked goods.

How do you eat it? Must you use a plate, can you carry it with you, maybe it is only available in a specific restaurant and you can’t take it away? Or is it the übermensch of sandwiches and able to be eaten in whatever way you see fit, and if so, is this the revolutionary development? There are a lot of content aggregation tools available now, from Friendfeed through to Google Buzz, Windows Live Messenger Beta and device specifc tools like MOTOBLUR, Flipboard and Google’s Social Search. They vary greatly in capabilities, sources of media they can access and curation tools, but they perform the same task for the user.

A lot of these services and tools take a few social media activity streams and create a single feed, but a few index or include the content linked to and present it to the user directly. Flipboard delivers this content in the app, and Google Social Search presents the links in a results page of a relevant search query.

Questions of fair use and legality aside, providing socially sourced content from multiple sources in the one place with tools to make this information manageable is a significant development in how the Internet is used. From Google’s personalisation of search to the increasing importance of social networks for filtering content and the shift away from static portals, each user’s experience of the Internet is becoming more unique.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

App Inventor promises to do to the application ecosystem what Blogger, YouTube, and other Web 2.0 sites did to the Internet. Soon the Android ecosystem will be flooded with the application equivalent of videos of cats falling off things, highly specific tools with a target market of one, and people who see this as a bad thing.

Like the Internet, Google’s App Inventor will follow Sturgeon’s Revelation. Just like Blogger, the Little Big Planet level editor and the Spore creature creation tools, there will be some awesome stuff built with totally original ideas and a huge volume of dross to shovel through to find them.

Tools that simplify creation and distribution of content lower or eradicate barriers of entry. The ability to create at a level equal to that of the new tools is commoditised. The real value at this level of content becomes the idea, its execution, and being able to find what you want. After all, there is a lot of content and some is good enough for most of the market and free. It is only the remarkable that people will pay for.

If the ability to find the relevant stuff had no value, search engines wouldn’t exist. All media distribution channels or nodes have used this editorial power to create value, online and offline.

The ability to find the relevant stuff is valuable, and Google has built their business on this idea. The Android App Marketplace has been criticised for its high number of poor and legally dodgy applications, from potentially malicious apps to those using unlicensed intellectual property. The Android Killswitch was announced, but there is bound to be more to come from Google on providing a better way to sort, classify and deliver relevant apps, because if they don’t, someone else will.

Tags: , , , ,

Google is incorporating more information into their Search Engine Result Pages (SERP) all the time. Video, product information, image previews, maps, reviews and social media content are a few of the things that Google has brought to their search engine over the years. Adwords has not been too far behind, with the inclusion of ads on their maps, and the introduction of Ad Sitelinks for certain campaigns. Ad Sitelinks was first introduced in November 2009 and was only available for qualified campaigns. Their appearance in the organic SERP looked more disruptive than a normal Adwords Ad, and promised to improve on Click Through Rate (CTR).

Google has just announced that Ad Sitelinks are now available for any campaign and the introduction of seller rating extensions. Getting Ad Sitelinks to display is still dependent on the ad meeting certain criteria, most probably relating to the spot on the page the ad displays in as determined by bid, competition and click through.

Ad Sitelinks provide alternative points of entry to the site aside from the main landing page, allowing the advertiser to offer alternative offers. Links to areas such as “Store Location”, “Quote Calculator” or “Product Reviews” can appeal to viewers who might not have responded to the main offer.

Search can be a powerful indication of intent, but with more generic terms, the action or information sought by the market can vary between individuals. With branded or descriptive terms the visitor might be seeking further information beyond the noun and a price point. Ad Sitelinks makes it possible to provide this at first glance, and generate traffic where the user may otherwise have continued on to the organic listings.

Using the same visual language of the organic results also makes the ad appear more authoritative and trustworthy. The addition of seller ratings can create the same effect. Creating richer content in a format closer to what the user is trained to look for on a SERP gives the advertiser the opportunity to disrupt their normal search and engage with the ad.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Search as a Portal

Bing has announced some new features in search this week. Explained in the Bing Gets a Fresh Look post, content themed on Auto, Finance and Entertainment information was used to demonstrate “great new decision-making tools in [these] areas”. Similar to the enhanced Search Engine Result Pages (SERPs) served by Google and Bing, these new tools take search closer to portals in their content consumption model.

In many ways SERPs are becoming more like portal content pages. Search goes beyond an ordered directory of URLs and descriptions. Content including maps, scanned books, images, video, news, blogs, product listings, and social media material is indexed and increasingly being presented in the main SERP as a part of an enhanced search result.

Indexing Entertainment Media

The Internet is an important source of entertainment, either supporting content available through other channels or material native to the web. As said by Bing’s Yusuf Mehdi in his “A New Entertainment Experience For Bing” post:

“In the field of entertainment, 76 percent of people use search to help find and navigate their entertainment options online, but only 10 percent say they have a trusted place to go.”

Entertainment information, from song lyrics to game trailers to film reviews, matters to the user, and can take many different forms. The challenge is in organising it in a human friendly way, similar to what has already started to happen with geographic information and maps. The search engine can programmatically add more content in locations under their control in a theoretically infinitely scalable fashion.

Search in the Music Business

Google is also in the entertainment business. Beyond their search properties and YouTube, Google’s acquisition of Simplifymedia during May hints strongly at Google directly entering the music business. It is likely that Google would add their product to the search experience in the same way as Google Commerce feeds (formerly Google Base) are added to the index or through applications in Chrome or Android.

Lady Gaga on Bing

Lady Gaga on Bing

Lady Gaga on Yahoo! Music

Lady Gaga on Yahoo! Music

Search is starting to provide a portal-like experience. As the search experience becomes richer, more personalised and more aware of the location of the user, it gets closer to providing the experience sites like Yahoo! do, but with finer levels of customisation through queries. Pages like Yahoo! Music may soon be eclipsed by pages like Bing Entertainment or the current Bing Lady Gaga SERP. In the end it will be how the consumer prefers to consume and seek out content that will determine this. It is passive consumption versus searching with intent.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

People have always connected over common experiences; it creates communities. Sporting events, product launches and TV shows are all important Social Artefacts, and are a part of many communities’ shared experience. State of Origin, Lost, the iPad launch are all examples of public events that form a focus for interaction for many different groups. A lot of this activity is now happening online, through fan pages, hashtags, forums and general conversation.

A lot of people watch TV and discuss it with others watching the same things. Online Back channel conversations around TV shows, live events, launches and sport are more visible than before, thanks to platforms like Twitter and Facebook, adding an interactive social dimension to an otherwise passive experience. This behaviour is not new, but it used to be confined to narrow interest groups in their own online communities, with little visibility to those who are not already directly engaged.

TV’s place as a standalone source of entertainment and information has diminished over the last decade. The proliferation of mobile Internet-capable devices such as laptops, netbooks and smartphones have made it easy to consume content and interact with others while watching TV. This behaviour will probably become even more prominent in future, especially with products like Google TV.

There is a very interesting section in the Google TV Developers area:

  • Remember that TV is social.
    • Consider how groups might use your website or application.
    • Offer ways for individuals to use your site or apps in social settings.

Integrating the Back channel conversations around the content, and making it more visible than even Twitter’s hashtags will enhance the experience for the average user. With most social networks supporting cross-posting, posting out to the user’s Twitter and Facebook feeds from the TV based app, even a message as simple as “/me is watching Show” would be an effective form of social proof for the show exposed to the user’s friends. Similar tools are already being used by games.

Once a best practice has been established for TV as a platform, in terms of interface and hardware useability, this may be the killer app that keeps TV in the living room, and not just for consoles, media boxes, or Blu-Ray players.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

A new version of Android, new APIs and “Google TV” were some of the things announced at this year’s Google I/O conference. The Chrome App Store and Google’s acquisition of SimplifyMedia were also announced at this event. They are all interesting developments with the potential to have a huge impact on how we consume content online.

Google TV

The idea of viewing the Internet on a TV is not new, but Google’s implementation based on Google Chrome will be a long way ahead of those old thin clients. There is only a small niche market for media boxes and computers connecting TVs to their home networks, and Google TV promises to drive this trend into the mainstream.

In the blog post announcing Google TV, the line “With Google Chrome built in, you can access all of your favorite websites and easily move between television and the web” really stood out. Combining Internet and TV in one device will create a far richer experience by simplifying access to a wider variety of content. Simplifying access and integrating streams of social media content around existing audio/visual content could be very interesting.

There is already a highly active Backchannel about certain TV shows, reality TV, interviews and news. Twitter, with its transparency, effective search tools and the use of hashtags is a great example of this. Currently this turns watching TV into a far more social experience and offers social proof to others watching the feed that supports program promotional activity.

Chrome’s Browser Application Shop

The Chrome Web Store is a browser based application marketplace. The applications are “…regular web applications that are built with standard web tools and technologies” that will run in any current or future generation browser. As discussed in Mozilla Ponders an “Open” Web App Store on ReadWriteWeb.com, developers can make their applications ‘installable’ for Chrome through building the applications into a .crx file.

Aside from the open source discussion, the Chrome Web Store will simplify making money from applications for developers. With the credibility of the Google brand and a centralised store with billing support for an otherwise niche product, the application market for browsers will improve. Creating a software market not tied to a device or operating system, but rather to a browser, will also help to create a device-agnostic computing environment.

Google’s approach is different to the operating system based route that Microsoft is taking. Google Chrome OS, Chrome Web Store and Google’s current range of services and tools available online are all a part of a trend towards cloud computing aimed at the average user. The application store for Chrome might also increase the number of users for the browser, similar to the way that applications have shaped the Smartphone market.

Tags: , , , ,

Shop and Share with Bing was announced earlier this week. Integrating sharing links within product searches is not exactly groundbreaking. The idea that social proof works to drive purchasing behaviour online is not new. A number of different sites such as mypicklist.com (now gone), ThisNext.com and Amazon through their ratings and owned product lists support this. What is interesting is that this is another way in which Search Engines are beginning to act like portals.

The team behind Bing has shown a willingness to be as creative as Google in their approach to search. From launch, Bing has been referred to as a decision engine, and they seem focused on this goal. The Microsoft Fuse Labs Spindex project using Bing certainly matches this aim. It is an inclusive integration of the user’s social network into their search experience. The Search Engine Result Page (SERP) is influenced by the behaviour of members of the user’s social networks. This looks like an extension of what Google is doing with Social Search and in a way is a good demonstration of just how pervasive a social Internet can be.

The Preview of the new Windows Live Messenger also shows real intent to move into this area. Bringing social content together through a stand alone application, one which millions of people will certainly already have installed on their computers at some point, will be interesting.

Between a fragmenting web and social content being used across multiple platforms and tools including search and general content discovery, the online experience of any two people attempting to complete the same task will very rarely match. There are a number of ways to move around this, such as building a branded query space, becoming the portal or controlling the platform or device they use. Of course not adapting is always an option as well.

Tags: , , , , , ,

You have just built a great Google Adwords, Yahoo! Search marketing or Microsoft adCenter campaign. Viewed from the web or local interface, the data is skewed towards analysis by keywords entered into the campaign. Assuming they are not set to exact match, this will not show the whole picture. It is important to dig a little bit deeper, and examine the phrases that trigger your ads.

When you look at the phrases that actually trigger your ads, such as in an Adwords Search Query Performance report, you will start to see patterns emerge, the most interesting being terms that are common across phrases that triggered conversions. Taking a closer look at Clusters of Queries like these can reveal a lot. Most SEM campaigns will have a subset of keywords that might not even be set up in the account itself that correlate strongly with sales. There will also be phrases or words that obviously do not fit or inflate the campaign’s CPC by crossing over into another industry with an aggressive SEM space.

Keyword performance will always be influenced by a number of factors. The effect will vary depending on other descriptive and qualifying terms. Some queries will naturally return more on investment, yield more traffic or be genuinely cheaper. Not all of this will be the product of consumer behaviour. Competition within the query space is incredibly important, especially once you start to examine the performance of specific clusters of search terms.

For example, suppose a pet shop called ‘I Like Turtles’ has set up a campaign to sell turtles. The landing page, with a strong call to action and a robust cart has been built, and a campaign built around phrase match on species terms like ‘Box Turtles’ has been launched. The traffic is not performing as well as expected. The CPC is unsustainable and the traffic is not engaging on the landing page at all. A quick look at the searches triggering the ads suggest a long list of additional negatives and reveals that some descriptive terms are performing better than others, while some are not even appearing at all. The same is true for locations. Reported first page bid levels can provide a guide to what is happening in the market, but it won’t reveal the reason.

What ads are triggered

What ads are triggered for a long search phrase?

There are a number of different ways one campaign can compete with others in the same query space by either bidding directly on the same keywords or bidding on other keywords that appear in ad triggering search phrases. There are a few that can create a skewed impression of the query space for any single account. Campaigns targeting specific areas within a larger query space for another coupled with specific geographical regions, devices and time periods can aggressively reduce the larger campaign’s visibility in otherwise profitable spaces.

Either through less wasted coverage leading to a better return or a more aggressive bidding strategy one can lock a more general campaign out of lucrative query groups. These competitors do not even have to be selling the same product to the same people; there can be a lot of overlap in terms used for the SEM campaigns of different businesses.

For ‘I Like Turtles’, their targeted query space may also have a toy store using “Buy Turtles”, travel and accomodation companies targeting the name of their city, a conservation organisation raising awareness on river conservation and a DVD store selling Ninja Turtles movies. These companies do not need to be selling the same product to have an impact on the ‘I Like Turtles’ SEM campaign. Travel companies may bid higher than the pet shop and be less precise with their negatives, and increase the CPC. The DVD store might time their ads to run for the weekend, and periodically bury the pet shop’s ads, and the conservation company and toy store may increase competition on terms that often form a part of a search that would trigger an ad for ‘I Like Turtles’. Each of these actions can increase the effective cost of bidding for the campaign and make it harder to appear for one of the higher converting search strings.

Increasing bids around peak buying times can place ads in front of people more likely to buy for certain products. Any increase in return on traffic can increase the amount spent per click. The same applies for more efficient landing pages and sites, and effective targeting geographically and by device. The more likely a sale, the more that can be spent per click.

This activity within a more general campaign can have an effect on how effective certain query clusters may seem. It can also reduce a campaign’s visibility for certain terms. A Search Query Performance report does not tell the full story of what is happening with your campaign and the targeted terms, but it can hint at competitive activity.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Adwords has just added a new tool for brand advertisers. Advertising inventory on the Content Network is now divided into above the fold and the whole site. Advertisers can now exclude below the fold inventory on sites in the Content Network in Adwords. Google has turned their Content Network into two different products, with different levels of value.

By default, Content Network bids will be on all advertising space on the site, both above and below the fold. To display above the fold, below the fold placements need to be excluded and bids made for placement on the whole site need to be beaten.

On the Adwords blog post explaining this change it was stated that:

Our goal with this release is to give brand advertisers greater control over where their ads appear, and make the Google Content Network an even more powerful, controlled environment for running high performing brand campaigns.

In practice this will increase the perceived value of one form of placement over the other. A direct result of this will be a concentration of market participants, and allocated budget competing for one of the two kinds of placements. The above the fold placements will be seen as the more valuable of the two, and as a result, the average cost per click will rise. Many advertisers will diversify their campaigns and bid at different levels on both above the fold only placements and whole site placements for as long as they see value in doing so.

Content Network Above and Below the Fold

Content Network Above and Below the Fold

There is also a shift towards using online advertising in branding campaigns. With a greater perceived value in search and display advertising for promoting brand building content, the value of certain traffic sources has been inflated. Google Adwords has talked about branding and search marketing a few times already. By selling advertising on branding value and separating the value of an ad from an incremental per sale return increases the amount of money that most organisations can justify internally on paying more for impressions and clicks.

By leveraging different perceptions of value created by these changes to the Content Network, Google Adwords is increasing competition and consequently their margin per click. Separating cost per click from the profit margin on conversion for some markets in the minds of advertisers will also raise the perceived value of impressions and clicks on both search and websites.This trend will increase the actual value of traffic in a market where there is very little competition among suppliers.

Ironically it was Google with their entry into the market that created that first shift towards linking cost of traffic to profit from sale. The introduction of Analytics and Adwords along with using Adsense to grow their inventory were the main drivers in this shift for most marketers new to advertising online.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The big news of the week was that Yahoo! and Microsoft’s search agreement was approved by both the U.S. Department of Justice and the European Commission. Yahoo! is now closer to replacing their search, and search advertising product with Bing’s.

From what has been said, up to Yahoo!’s latest post on the matter, Yahoo! is going to stop being a search engine and simply focus on providing enriched data. In their words:

1) Providing you with rich results that display the most relevant information from Yahoo!’s rich content properties, as well as other great product, local, entertainment, reference, social and tech sites.

2) Showing specific results from vertical search products, like Yahoo! News.

3) Providing handy tools on the left-side of the page, such as our Search Pad and Search Scan apps, site filters that help you refine and explore the search results more easily, and related search term suggestions to help you refine your search further if the results aren’t quite what you were looking for.

Yahoo! seems to see itself as a portal, and is operating as if a portal can be distinct from a search engine. However, Google and Bing have taken a different approach, and have demonstrated that a search engine can become a portal. The inclusion of many Google properties, such as Maps, Base and so on, onto their Search Engine Results Pages (SERPs) has been discussed at length for years now. Bing has also chosen to follow a similar path, and have developed a suite of additional products of their own. Both Google and Microsoft also have email products that include social functionality in Google Buzz and Windows Live. It is interesting that while a portal site is moving away from search, search is moving towards becoming portals.

Yahoo! SERP for Vancouver

Yahoo! SERP for Vancouver

Google  SERP for Vancouver

Google SERP for Vancouver

Bing SERP for Vancouver

Bing SERP for Vancouver


A lot of what Yahoo! has discussed that they can bring to the Internet as a part of their portal business is already provided as a part of the Google and Bing search experience, or as a part of their additional properties. Where we are with search in terms of the richness of data that can be sorted and surfaced in search, each SERP is essentially a portal site. Depending on the term, photos, news, blogs, social commentary and maps can all be presented on the SERP as an algorithmically generated themed portal page. In getting out of search Yahoo! is limiting itself to competing with Bing and Google purely on content that they have the rights to, their existing user-base and presentation of information.

Is this enough? Both Google and Bing are creating more and more properties. Both Google and Bing have been developing more inventory requiring very little ongoing maintenance and have been rolling them into their main SERPs. With the inclusion of more user generated content such as social media updates and personalised search from Google, and Flickr content in Bing Maps and an apparent focus on travel indicated in their PR, how much value can Yahoo! provide as just a portal?

Tags: , , , , , ,

« Older entries