Tag Archives: searches with sponsored placements

red bar

Smart Searching

In online searches we should be looking for dependable sources selected for their relevance, expertise, and fairness.

It is now part of the natural cycle of searching for a product or service to use Google to see what is available. It has become second nature, and that has become a bit of a problem. The recent moves by the federal government to investigate Google to determine if it is become a search monopoly is a good time to remember that it is by far the dominant search engine, getting 90 percent of the traffic.

Google is an American Goliath in part because it is able to sell placement of its search listings, giving a client priority to be near the top of whatever search list a person wants to see.  Most of us are aware of this. But I’m amazed at how often I bite for the first listing, forgetting that some are in the “sponsored” category. Font color and text remain consistent across all search listings, making it easy to miss a paid entry. It’s not that anything is concealed. It’s whether a reader picks up on the implicit advertising in the listing order. It is one reason the company makes something like 237 billion a year in advertising. I can’t even picture that number, but I know it’s more than a professor makes in even a good year.

The fee to the organization that wants a top spot comes with a lot of variables. But it can range from $100 to 10,000 a month. The number of clicks a site gets also affects what Google charges. Google is not the only search engine in this game, but it is by far the biggest. A few browsers such as DuckDuckGo do not take search ads, promoting searches as more useful.

A Google search result below is for the product of “armchairs.”  The first screen on my computer includes two sites and even a nearby store.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It takes a little bit of extra work to figure out where the listing of sponsored products ends and other relevant entries start. But that is something you may want to do to find better bargains. Most of us think that listings should appear high on a list based on relevance and merit. What we are usually looking for in these searches are quality sources based on an unknowable set of algorithms that will screen for merit. But we need to remember that “pay to play” placement of a listing can take merit and quality out of the equation.  A drug company with deep pockets may pay for prominent placement of a product of dubious value.  As with movies, the extent of a marketing campaign says little about the worth of what is being sold.

If you are searching for information about an idea, like “existentialism” you might think sponsored listings are no longer a factor.  Even the first listings should be good. But it does not always work that way.  On my computer there was a promoted first entry run by a pastor who apparently wants to bounce his Christian fundamentalism off of the idea of existentialism. His site is a hook for various jeremiads that somehow manage to exclude Judaism and Christian Science. Only after this listing do we get the paydirt of a modest Wikipedia entry, and a detailed entry from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

The folks who paid for a high placement spot may have legitimate rights to pay to be first. But smarter searching usually means also looking at listings that are not sponsored.  It is slightly more likely an algorithm might serve you better.