Scroogled, new campaign by Microsoft | Hacker News Reader

Scroogled, new campaign by Microsoft

scroogled.com

51 pointsBootvis47 comments

This comes off as disingenuous to me, but is unsurprising coming from Microsoft, which seems to have always taken a stance of condescension to its competitors that waffles between apparent apathy and mouth-foaming rage.

At no point is MS seemingly capable of perceiving their competitors as legitimate, and their successes as being due to shipping superior product.

Sounds a bit like Steve Ballmer. Maybe.

Let's try this one on for size: how's about MS start shipping products that don't suck, instead of relying on smear campaigns?

Let's try this one for size: how about we look at the merit of what Microsoft is discussing here, instead of making what is essentially an ad hominem attack.

I had no idea that Google shopping results were more or less ads. I thought it was an aggregator of shopping results. This is news to me.

I agree here. I was un aware that google started doing this. Thank you microsoft for informing me.

Maybe because you don't use it? There's a notice at the bottom of every page and a link that says "Why these products" with the same discloser.

It's part of the reason I find this annoying, people keep parroting it and then talking about generic search results which are not involved in anyway. Whether it's intentional or a byproduct of "Google" being so widely used for different things, I don't know.

I don't think anybody is saying that Google isn't being shady because Microsoft is being tacky as hell. That would be an ad hominem.

Discussing both aspects of the story seems perfectly reasonable to me.

This deserves merit? This is discussion? For me, this page is just childish kinderganden-level "name-calling". Yes, there is 1 bit of information that is useful, but why not write an article and put it on the Bing frontpage. Did they really need to come up with "Scroogled"?

I don't think this deserves merit.

It might be only one bit, but it's the most significant bit in the bunch. It's not just childish name calling.

I think the bad part here is that the google shopping page looks just like a regular search page except with a notice at the top right (that you have to hover over to read). I actually would have no problem with this if it were clearer from the page that all the results on that page were paid for, just like I don't have a problem with adwords ads at the top of search results because google really does seem to do a good job of making sure they are relatively relevant (though usually the only time I click on those is when I'm going to be shopping anyways).

Microsoft calling Google out on this is ridiculous, however, because the only way to get on Bing shopping right now is to pay for the privilege, which makes the situation essentially the same (note that the bing disclaimer says that they don't use payment for ranking, which doesn't disclaim the fact that you have to pay to show up at all).

http://searchengineland.com/microsoft-attacks-google-with-sc...

In any case, this feels super shady, exactly like a political attack ad, as others have said. It would be interesting to see numbers on how effective this is. The Bing it on thing did seem to have some reach into popular consciousness, but didn't seem very effective at getting people to actually switch (only anecdotal evidence, of course). I imagine awareness went up, but the key there was that Bing it on was a relatively positive ad: "we're just as good now" vs "look how bad those other guys are".

I think I've lost track of how many times Microsoft has accused Google of something, only to find out a few days later that they were doing the exact same thing. At least make sure you aren't doing that, too, if you're going to accuse someone of something. Seems like attack ads 101 to me.

And yes, all these negative FUD spreading ads remind me of the old Microsoft, which is the same as the new Microsoft it seems.

I was particularly surprised to see how aggressive the TV campaign was. I've seen these all over. They're really running with this thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WIluNt0mvA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_6bSCW_UI0

Not surprisingly, they've apparently hired a former political hack to help run this campaign. It's interesting, because these ads definitely have a dirty politics feel to them:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2012/07/23/can-mark-p...

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/07/19/mark-penn-microsoft%E...

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-03/did-mark-pen...

Holy cow: I knew about the Penn hire and the Scroogled campaign, but the connection didn't "click" until I read your comment. I should have realized that there was a connection. The dirtiness I feel when loading the Scroogled site now makes a ton of sense.

>Higher visibility: Paid offers will be highlighted throughout Bing Shopping, including search result and product pages

from http://advertise.bingads.microsoft.com/en-us/search-advertis...

well, okay then.

Google very publicly announced the changes and Microsoft is attempting to conflate product search with general web search. It isn't shady to create a paid listing catalog (which is essentially what Google has done with its product search) if people are aware of that fact. While Microsoft isn't lying in this campaign, they are attempting to paint Google as being dishonest with their general search results, something that isn't true.

The quotes on the top banner are all Larry and Sergey talking about search, not product search...a feature which is no where near as popular or used. Putting these quotes on the same page with attack language could easily confuse anyone to think Google was now accepting paid search results a la Overture back in the day.

How do you know that Google search is pure? I for one can barely see what are ads vs regular search and am deeply suspicious of Google's humongous increase in profits and Adwords revenue this past year after Panda and other updates. Occam's razor and all. Google has changed

Both Google and Bing have ads that are clearly marked as ads on their web search results? How does one know Google search is pure? Start a company, get some press, build pages in an SEO friendly format and start seeing traffic trickle in from organic search without paying a dime to Google.

Google has a lot more incentive (as they've proven over the years) to maintain really high quality organic search and paid ads separate. That is what set them apart in early 2000's. When they integrated g+ results, they had an orthogonal incentive (take down Facebook, spar with Bing) but if the incentive is just to make money in the business of search it is extremely unlikely they would pollute their web results with ads.

I click on "Try Bing" and it brings me to their landing page.. fine. So I click on "Shopping", thinking it will give me an "honest search result" but where does that take me?

It takes me to "www.ciao.se", a price comparison site that I stopped using years ago (pricerunner, pricespy or even amazon will all give better results in terms of prices and the information presented). As far as I know, the retailers that want to be listed on ciao.se need to pay for that privilege.

At least clean up your own house before you go acting all high and mighty, MS.

Also, I've never seen google present "Commerce" as anything but a commercial service, bought and paid for by the sellers on that service.

Maybe something is different if you're out of the US, but I didn't see a ciao.se website at all. From the Scroogled site, I clicked "Try Bing", searched for "toy trucks", and clicked "Shopping" at the top of the results page. (There was no shopping link that I spotted on the Bing homepage.) I was directed to the following page: http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=toy+trucks&qpvt=to...

Cheap, tacky. Makes me seriously concerned for Microsoft's health if they feel they need to resort to this kind of childishness.

I think that concern is valid even though I agree that Google's shopping results are deceptive to the average user; if Microsoft can't make a campaign out of it that is less about Google's failing and more about how Bing offers better value, it doesn't do them any good.

I think the point is more to tarnish Google's halo in general than to promote Bing. They want to level the playing field and have people to see Google the way they already see Microsoft, as a generic big evil corporation.

I don't care much for the ad, but it is a shady practice. I have long since used Google (or Bing for that matter) because they have become so complicit with advertisers and content farms that their results have been marred.

I have long since used Google

I don't think that means what you think it means.

In fact, I'm pretty sure it means exactly the opposite of what you think it means.

* Correction for your sake: I have not used Google in a long time...

Wow.

What is particularly interesting is what this says about advertising versus search. I'm sure lots of people are familiar with magazines which are "published" with a bunch of articles that are really just long form advertisements for the people who paid for that month's print run. These 'manufacturer supported' publications are more common in the trades than in general circulation but still, few people reading them thinks "Wow this is a really honest evaluation of which oscilloscope is best."

I find it interesting that it accuses Google of switching to a more extractive business model. If that is true then this change would mark the nadir of Google's ability to grow that market. The tying of Google's search capability to their advertising business seems analogous to the way Microsoft Office and DOS were tied together, the 'team' being much much harder to dislodge than either element.

This page looks terrible! There is a clutter of fonts, overlapping text elements, a scared girl and a scrolling banner. Its disorganized information overload! I would expect this from the Time Cube, but and not Microsoft.

It looks better through the Geocitiesizer

http://wonder-tonic.com/geocitiesizer/content.php?theme=2...

All this does is make Microsoft more evil.

Edit: People don't like my short reply I guess, let me elaborate.. All this site does is say, "Google is secretly being evil and shoving ads in your face," but all I see is Microsoft low-blow trolling its competitor, and if that's not evil, then 4chan may as well be wikipedia.

Regardless of the message the Microsoft is trying to deliver here they could at least make a website that does not make me close the tab in the first 10 seconds. What a mess.

FAIL. Shitty design, and none of the messages about Google posted by Microsoft inspires trust (infact, it arouses suspicion). It seems more like Microsoft is desperate to get more customers this festive season. It's a very very desperate attempt.

OK. So you're a wealthy business with a huge talent pool. You discover that your competitor is doing something that might annoy its market and create an opportunity for you.

Do you:

a. Improve your product in the space and make it so amazing that people flock to it and abandon your competitor, or

b. Run a marketing campaign with smear ads?

Hint: if you're a technology company, you choose the first.

I haven't been enthusiastic about Google Shopping in a long time. I'm not surprised they've decided to turn it into a bidding war. But, Microsoft still isn't offering something better.

...Huh. Why does this feel like politics all of a sudden?

What Google is doing is, indeed, shady - but then again if I imagine my mom (and Google's knowledge of her) she might be browsing best offers for her (And purchase what is really best for her), despite the fact that G makes money off it.

What is Google doing that is, in your opinion, shady?

The page is strangely put together. It feels very ... Geocities? ...

I had not thought MS played the attack ad game until recently. It denotes that there's some kind of strategy shift going on.

I'm quite surprised by the aggressiveness of this campaign, but maybe that's because I'm not from the US. Is this also over the top in the US or is this considered normal?

It's over the top.

What a terribly chosen name. I wonder what the Scroogle guy has to say about this.

It's also the name of a great short story by Cory Doctorow (link below). Bit of a ripoff by MS on the title. http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-09-17-n72.html

I'm trying to figure out whether it was intended as Scrooge-google for the holiday season or screw-google...

I'm guessing "screw-google", as I always assumed scroogle.org meant, though now that I think about it perhaps Scroogle is "scrape-google"?

It's only missing "I'm Steve Ballmer and I approve this message" in the end.

I feel like having a DejaVu. Wasn't this on HN a couple of days before?

It really was.

As if we've never been screwed over by microsoft, fuck off

"Scroogled"? Wasn't that an FSF campaign or Cory Doctorow story or something? Pretty sneaky of MS to co-opt it. Perhaps we've been Microscrewed?

What's particularly bad about Google is that they've clearly copied the look and feel of Bing, and I remember a story about how they even used shady opt-out in their browser to track user's searches and clicks in order to copy search results from Bing!

Oh wait, that was Microsoft who copied Google, stole search results from Google, and is now bashing Google.

Disclaimer: I have a soul.

This reminds me a lot of the anti-Microsoft stuff that Novell put out in the 90s.

Reminds me of Edison vs. Tesla. Too bad this time Tesla is worth $200 billion (Larry Page made sure of it) and Edison and Co. is run by a bald idiot named Ballmer.

If you have to litigate or advertise your way against the superiority of your competition via attack ads - you've already lost.

Desperate much?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com