Hacker News Reader

Comment by spindritf | Hacker News Reader

Someone searching for Southwest Airlines is probably looking for... Southwest Airlines. So the very first result is a useful one. With sections of the official website conveniently linked and a pretty picture on top.

This sounds to me like a complete non-issue. If you don't like ads, install AdBlock. Of course if you need clicks for your website, carry on.

View on HN

Precisely. If Southwest's banner hit for "cheap airfare" or something similar, this would indeed be outrageous. But this just seems like useful (and sponsored) info being offered without needing to click-through.

Somewhat sensationalist.

Consider an alternate universe where Southwest Airlines has a worse reputation due to a variety of bad practices they've engaged in. These banner ads have the potential for pushing many hits describing these practices further down the page, stifling the ability for organic results to properly reflect public opinion on a company.

As pointed out below, these images aren't "pushing" anything down anything. They are about the same height as the stuff they replaced.

http://searchengineland.com/figz/wp-content/seloads/2013/10/...

> As pointed out below, these images aren't "pushing" anything down anything. They are about the same height as the stuff they replaced.

Doesn't matter. Users are going to see this, and their mind is going to register "huge fucking banner ad". They aren't going to go find old screenshots, break out a ruler and do pixel by pixel comparisons.

If the "pushing" issue is that negative results can be put below the fold, or further down the screen, size is totally relevant. As somebody pointed out, this folds in the top organic search result. It's more like a natural evolution of the author pictures Google indexes.

Yes it's eye catching, but you could just as easily end up with the juxtaposition of a big AA ad, followed immediately by an article about a hijacking. Plus there's the argument that people have been trained to ignore banner ads. This could bite advertisers depending on the other organic results and their demographic.

If the "pushing" issue is that negative results can be put below the fold, or further down the screen, size is totally relevant. As somebody pointed out, this folds in the top organic search result.

If the issue about following content being above or below "the fold" were the only issue at stake, I'd agree. But from the pics in the article, I feel like people are going to see this and have an immediate, visceral, negative reaction, because it looks and feels like a huge banner ad.

But, if, as some people are saying, this is ONLY going to be for very specific brands and situations where the linked "ad" really would have been the top organic anyway, then maybe it won't be so bad. I had originally thought that this kind of ad was going to be allowed broadly and that they would be popping up all over.

Uhm, in that image there is another search result pushed off the bottom of the page.

I don't know.

Look during normal days, having big "southwest airlines" banner ad is ok. But if there is a current event involving "southwest airlines" which might not be beneficial to them (some review, revelation about safety, etc.) this ad will be basically make this event on the second page of the search...

Look, Southwest AirLines are not stupid. Nor Google.

It is just that we are annoyed because there is less and less of "free internet".

It becomes problematic when these companies get control over the content of a brand search. There are ramifications for consumer advocacy. What happens when I start searching for "apple sec ruling" and I am given a full page sponsored ad courtesy of apple? I see that as giving companies a chance to bury insightful or informative content that may not be positive.

"Apple SEC ruling" is a fairly specific keyword search whereas searching, blanketly, for a company name is not.

But maybe I'm thirsting to learn more about the juicy fruit. Do I get a page courtesy of Apple Inc too?

Then you should search for 'Apple fruit'. I'm sure it's orders of magnitude more likely that someone searching 'Apple' is looking for information related to the company than the fruit

Most people would actually search "apples".

really? how do you know?

This would not qualify as a branded search term, so this extension would not be available.

Should Banana Republic be able to buy an enhanced search experience for people searching for "banana republic"?

Stuff like this was my concern, as well. What if my 3 year old and I are Googling "Apple" while we go through the alphabet? Or what if I'm looking for airlines that service the southwest? If I'm a teenager searching for Tesla as part of a school project, should a car brand get to own the majority of that initial experience? (Answer, yes, if the price is right for Google.)

This is Google selling out their initial vision (the little that's left of it) just a little bit more. Which is disappointing to me personally, but they certainly don't owe anyone anything. They can do with their SERPs as they please, just as I can do with my search queries what I please. They were so good for so long, but ask any SEO worth their salt what they think of Google. They'll tell you those days have been over for some years now.

But if you're searching for Southwest Airlines then why do you want to get an ad for Southwest Airlines instead of just a neutral link to their homepage?

I understand ads for terms like "cheap tickets", but why would I want an ad for the term "Southwest Airlines"?

"why do you want to get an ad for Southwest Airlines"

From what the example shows it's not so much an ad as a really quick way to visually see that when you click you will be going to the right place.[1]

I mean visually it's probably quicker to see the big honking ad and airplane and focus and click than it is to read type. I'm guessing. User testing would prove or disprove this. (After all why do people use icons for that matter?)

[1] If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

> From what the example shows it's not so much an ad as a really quick way to visually see that when you click you will be going to the right place.[

The banner at the top of the box is a traditional (and somewhat large) banner ad.

The rest of the content of the box is exactly what you get as the top result of the same search on Google when you aren't getting the experimental ad.

Yes, for the user it's probably easier this way. However, I find it a bit weird that Southwest is paying Google to display this banner. If it's just an enhancement for the user shouldn't that be offered by Google itself?

I'm just a bit concerned that we're moving more and more to the point where your business can only be successful if you're paying Google. I'm not sure if it's fair to say that and I understand that Google is a business that has to earn money, but there are some red flags showing up for me.

Look at southwest's front page and then look at Google presentation of their site map. Their own site is such a train wreck that I wouldn't be surprised to find out that conversion is superior if the user starts at Google instead of their own site.

why would I want an ad for the term "Southwest Airlines"?

If it pushes southwestsucks.com or something similar off the first page of google results it has some value.

Here is another reason: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6608049

Because to check-in for a flight or lookup my reservation I have to 1) search Google for the airline and pick the official site out of the list of all similarly styled links and 2) navigate the airline's site for the exact page I need.

This makes it much, much easier now that all I have to do is search for the airline and click the section I want from the box at the top that signifies that what I'm about to click is the exact official site I'm looking for.

That is incorrect. Currently for "southwest airlines" in the US, sub links for their organic listing include:

-Check in Online -Book Travel Award -Check Flight Status -Special Offers -Flight Schedules -Customer Service

This may be different in other countries. I am inclined to believe this is showing for nearly all US users as I have seen these direct links for airlines for quite some time.

What Southwest is doing is trading their free clicks for paid ones.

Exactly my thoughts. As long as these don't start showing up on a more general search and only for what's obviously a search for only that specific company, I'd consider it an enhancement.

This worries me though. I use AdBlock and get really annoyed when using friends' machines without it. But the system won't work if too many people use AdBlock. So if more ads -> more adblock -> then what?

My nightmare scenario is the spread of what already goes on on alot of less scrupulous sites: "we have detected that you are using AdBlock. Turn it off to view our content".

It reminds me of the excellent dystopia-satire "Black Mirror" where citizens are forced to view ads and if they look away or shut their eyes, an increasingly loud tone is played along with a "warning"...

I hate the fact that, after a while, AdBlock automatically checks "Allow some non-intrusive advertising" checkbox.

And "some" means several hundred supporters.

Switch to Adblock Edge, it is a fork with no such black "feature".

And so it should, the content can only be provided for free because people are being exposed to the ads.

this was my initial though... any big brand who owns a trademark is probably going to find this useful, and I can't imagine someone searching "dell" or "southwest airlines" who isn't simply looking for their main site.

If these ads show up when you search "cheep airline tickets" or "personal computers" i could see there being a problem.

Does anyone know what you need to do to qualify for that type of banner ad? My guess is trade mark and major brand recognition

Does it need to be 1/4 of the page, though?

I think at this rate Google will only show one result on the page in the future, with a 90 percent chance that result being a big brand, and with a "See more results" link at the bottom. I'm not sure I'd like that future, even if it wasn't compromised by Google's push towards showing big brands at the top, and if it were in fact showing the "best of the best" result.

I thought Adblock did a deal with Google so Adwords etc were whitelisted?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com