Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google's Stomach Pangs - Adjusting to DoubleClick

Posted by Zonk on from the hard-to-digest dept.

An anonymous reader writes "C|Net is reporting on some trouble Google is having integrating DoubleClick into their family of products. External problems, like antitrust allegations and privacy concerns, are bad enough. The worst problems might come from within, though, as a division within DoubleClick was essentially created to game the very systems the Google search engine is founded on. '"Google is treading in dangerous waters right now," writes Ross Dunn of WebProNews.com. Google's search results "are supposed to be unbiased and highly relevant," but with Performics, "Google is put into the conflicted position of trying to generate profits by providing result-oriented organic ranking services for its own unbiased organic search results." The worry, in other words, is that Google's search results could be compromised by operating a division with an interest in skewing those results in favor of clients.' The article goes on to say how this Performics division is likely to be sold off to make sure everything stays above board."

7 of 98 comments (clear)

  1. Sold off. Brilliant! by Ai+Olor-Wile · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Something says it would be more polite if Google were to close the Performics division outright and then reverse-engineer its tactics to stomp out SEO-spam companies.

    At first glance of the summary, I'd hoped that was their secret do-good motive for buying DoubleClick in the first place. Alas.

    1. Re:Sold off. Brilliant! by Holmwood · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree, though, even better yet, keep them as a "red team" continuing to work on ways to subvert google's results, and keep on shifting tactics to stop them.

    2. Re:Sold off. Brilliant! by zrobotics · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well yes, there still is a conflict of interest, but only if they sell the services of the Performics team. They can still keep this team, using them in much the same way companies use white hat hackers-to purposely game the system, then hand the results over to Google. It's a conflict of interest if they continue to offer Doubleclick's Performics services, but it's an invaluable tool if they use it properly.

    3. Re:Sold off. Brilliant! by 644bd346996 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wouldn't it make sense for Google to run an 'Optimised for Google(tm)' optimisation service? The more sites that Google can spider properly, the more useful it is. No. If anything, Google could publish a set of guidelines for web designers. They could then use their clout to declare flash-based websites profane, standards compliance a necessity, and in general promote common sense design principles. It would work, too. No company would want to know that their google ranking was hurt by the fact that they weren't w3c compliant. Google wouldn't even have to tweak the algorithms in order to make it work.

      Google just can't afford to give anybody a privileged place in the rankings. Doing so would make them no better than AOL and Yahoo. If a company wants more exposure through Google, their only option should be advertising.
  2. Google is all about your data by Simon+(S2) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google is all about tracking you. Your mails, your locations, your searches, all sites you visit, the books you read, the videos you like, the things you buy, just everything. I think google bought DoubleClick only because they have 1x1 gifs and banners on a very lot of sites. Google can tracks the pages we vist with urchin (yes, google knows you are on slashot right now), but can now track our web behaviour with all doubleclick backlinks as well. I think all google wants is know *everything* about us (or at least as much as possible), and that is why they have free mail, free maps, free everything. The data google has about us is a lot more valuable than 20$ a month for maps or a mail service, and that is the only reason they bought doubleclick. At least IMHO.

    --
    I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
    1. Re:Google is all about your data by zrobotics · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait juuuust a second: did you say that "people who search"="a small demographic"??? It took me 2 years to convince my mom that she could type www.weather.com into the bar at the top. For 2 years her homepage was set to Google and she would navigate via Google searches. Once she was done checking the weather, she would close the browser, start another session, and do another Google search. So no, it's not a small demographic. It is, almost literally, everyone who uses the web. At some point or another, nearly everyone who uses the web will use one search engine or another. Since Google is the most popular search engine, it follows that Google has reams upon reams of data that advertisers find highly desirable.

  3. Google is already too "SEO-friendly" by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Some time in the last two years, Google started becoming much more "SEO friendly". There are meetings at Google for SEO types. Google sponsors "Search Engine Marketing" conferences. It's getting a bit embarassing.

    Google has to keep growing to justify their P/E ratio of 47 and keep their stockholders happy. That's hard to do when they already have most of their primary market. It's common to see dumb merger and acquisition activity in that situation. Search with occasional ads was a terrific business - doesn't take many employees, moderate operating costs, almost no cost of goods, good margins. The things Google has gone into since search (mail, video, office apps, etc.) don't have those properties, and are less profitable than search, if not outright money drains.