15 May 2009
Of Keywords and Competitors
I’ve been thinking a bunch about Google’s policy of allowing people/companies to buy their competitors’ keywords — and trademarks — as triggers for ads, and I don’t really have a problem with it.
I keep returning to a real world example: if I walk into a store knowing that I want a Coke and only a Coke, I’m still likely going to see Pepsi and a few other drinks along the way. But if I really want a Coke seeing the other drinks won’t bother me. If I see an A&W Cream Soda and decide I want that instead, fine. Either way I’m satisfied and my thirst is quenched, and Coke has no right (or any reasonable way to require) that all other products be out of sight — in most cases.
Of course this isn’t quite apples to apples, since the Internet allows you to drill down and find very specific things. That said, isn’t a major part of the promise of contextual advertising that, based on the input I give a system, it can kick back other things I might be interested in?
Moreover, if I search for Coke on Google and Pepsi comes up in the sponsored section, I can distinguish that Pepsi’s link is in a different category from Coke’s, which is still going to be the first “neutral” link featured in the results. It gives me options. And I like that.
Finally, if I’m Coke and a searcher looking specifically for my brand can’t distinguish it from Pepsi — well, I’ve got bigger problems than search results.
Companies Object to Google Policy on Trademarks - NYTimes.com
