Hacker News Reader

Comment by OGinparadise | Hacker News Reader

I have to move my laptop screen to see what is an ad and what is not. Forget about Google that tested this to death to confuse users, but not even FTC sees this as a problem. That should be illegal, ads should be clearly and unambiguously separated from content. Kudos to EU.

That makes me not trust a thing from Google, especially when they can make a buck. They even turned Shopping in 100% ads, without promptly disclosing it (you have to click on a tiny thing on the page to read that Google is listing results based on payment to Google)

Same with other Google content. Their claim to fame was impartiality but now the pages are 95%+ Google properties and ads. People, and I mean average Joe and Jane, should be updated on the change.

View on HN

Seems glaringly obvious to me, a yellowish background that is more contrasty than the HackerNews background color, that's on a Dell 30" monitor, a MacBook Retina, and a ChromeBook. Google can't auto-detect people's monitor calibrations or poor contrast. You continually claim on HN that Google ads are so subtle that people are fooled into thinking they are regular content, but I don't know anyone is who is regularly fooled by Web ads, even elderly inlaws are who total computer newbies.

Secondly, Google does disclose that Shopping is paid inclusion, it quite clearly says "Sponsored", without a click through.

The claim is 95% of the content is Google properties and ads seems ridiculously hyperbolic.

  > I have to move my laptop screen to see what is an ad
  > and what is not.

Do you have a screenshot? When I do a search, even for very ad-heavy queries such as [credit card], the ads are still clearly marked with colored backgrounds and notes like "Ads related to credit card".

  > They even turned Shopping in 100% ads, without promptly
  > disclosing it (you have to click on a tiny thing on the
  > page to read that Google is listing results based on
  > payment to Google)

In shopping, at the bottom of the page is a notice that "Google is compensated by these merchants. Payment is one of several factors used to rank these results." It appears to be about the same font size as the body text in ad blocks.

> Do you have a screenshot?

His screenshot on your screen will just show you what you always see. It's not going to show you what his screen displays.

EDIT: Here are some poor camera phone photos. The ads are clearly marked as ads, but at a normal viewing angle the background is almost invisible. This is on an uncalibrated old Lenovo thinkpad monitor.

(http://imgur.com/a/BKY4w#qcXWJdc)

Google should assume that people have shitty monitors and have no idea about calibration and make ads very clear. This is a complaint that was made when Google first started putting ads at the top of search.

Of course, they're free to not do that and carry on as they are, but they're likely to find regulatory interference increases in the EU.

  > His screenshot on your screen will just show you what
  > you always see. It's not going to show you what his
  > screen displays.

If he has an incorrectly-configured video driver or a program that modifies color temperature (such as f.lux), his screenshot would show it.

> I have to move my laptop screen to see what is an ad and what is not.

This is an indication you should look into calibrating your display. Right now, you're probably missing more than ad-outlines. It doesn't take very long.

But most people don't know their monitors can be calibrated, let alone how to do it.

So Google could chose colours that are less likely to be lost on poorly calibrated monitors.

What color do you suggest without making the text of the ad illegible? Perhaps a bright red border around the ads?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com