About Me

My Photo
Peter Yared is the CTO/CIO of CBS Interactive, a top ten Internet destination, and was previously the founder and CEO of four enterprise infrastructure companies that were acquired by Sun, VMware, Webtrends and TigerLogic. Peter's software has powered brands from Fidelity to Home Depot to Lady Gaga. At Sun, Peter was the CTO of the Application Server Division and the CTO of the Liberty federated identity consortium. Peter is the inventor of several patents on core Internet infrastructure including federated single sign on and dynamic data requests. Peter began programming games and utilities at age 10, and started his career developing systems for government agencies. Peter regularly writes about technology trends and has written for CNET, the Wall Street Journal, BusinessWeek, AdWeek, VentureBeat and TechCrunch.

Many thanks to Bob Pulgino, Dave Prue, Steve Zocchi and Jean-Louis Gassée for mentoring me over the years.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Google: +1 on Search Links, -1 on Ad Clicks


This post was also published in VentureBeat.


Google has finally unveiled its +1 social initiative, largely aimed at stemming Facebook’s ability to learn what links are relevant to others in a social graph. The Google +1 implementation, where people can recommend individual items within search results, is definitely a step in the right direction. However, it could also hurt Google’s revenue stream — I predict that adding a +1 option to keyword ads will have a negative effect on clickthrough rates.

Google has been gradually embedding interactivity in search results, lately even asking directly in search results if a particular Twitter handle is yours. The new +1 feature harkens back to a 2008 Google experiment that mimicked Digg’s interface and let users move search results up and down, and even comment on them.



This new feature where users can directly like particular search result links definitely will help Google better rank search results by involving crowdsourced humans instead of algorithmic computing, which have been increasingly gamed by search marketers.

However, Google +1 seriously begs the question as to why Google isn’t simply ranking results based on what people are clicking on. If a user clicks on one link and doesn’t come back to click on other results, that indicates they have found what they are looking for. A future Google +1 will likely let you rank any page on the Web using the Chrome browser whether or not it has a “Google +1” button on it, and therefore present a serious threat to the newly emergent StumpleUpon.

What Google doesn’t appear to have thought through seriously is the +1 integration with Google AdWords. It is a cardinal rule of advertising that you present the user with one call to action. Clicking on a +1 next to an AdWords ad makes no sense at all – it is already hard enough to get people to click on an ad without adding confusing paraphernalia around the unit.

A store selling futons in San Francisco that pays for a targeted ad to people in the bay area searching for futons wants people to click on the ad, not + 1 next to the ad. The Google + 1 AdWords implementation is an obstacle to conversions with very little upside. Google Instant is already impacting click through rates by automatically populating search results as users type, and Google + 1 is going to make the problem worse.

Google is clearly attempting to mimic the popular Facebook ad feature where people “Like” a Facebook page. However, in Facebook, Liking a page is essentially opting in for newsfeed updates — the Facebook equivalent of a mailing list opt-in — which is why marketers are willing to pay for ads that incent users to Like their Facebook page. Google +1 offers no such benefit. In addition, while users are happy to “Like” Disneyworld, chances are they are not going to like “25 percent on futons today only!”

Google +1 is a great step forward for Google as it is finally admitting that perhaps humans can be smarter than machines when it comes to detecting relevant content. But Google has already nailed how people like ads: By clicking on them.

7 comments:

Andrew said...

From what I believe Matt Cutts has said, or maybe it was another employee, if someone has "+1'd" Nike.com for example, then their +1 will also show up on Nike ads. So if 20,000 people have +1'd Nike's main website, then all of their ads will show 20,000 +1's. It's actually pretty smart imo.

Peter Yared said...

Hi Adnrew, thanks for your comment. Google gave me a call after this post and shared this as well. I agree that indicating how many people like the ad landing page is a good thing. I still maintain that putting other things to click on next to adwords is likely reduce clickthrus.

Andrew said...

True, but the data gleaned from +1's probably offsets the decrease in clickthroughs in Google's eyes; the +1 data is going to be more valuable going forward. Besides that, if people didn't click the ad because of the +1 button, it's highly suspect they were going to do anything after clicking the ad at all.

And as demonstrated by Instant, Google sometimes hurts their bottom line a little in order to increase user satisfaction. +1 will lead to more targeted and better ads.

Peter Yared said...

Yes, I am agreeing with you 100%. My only point is that it would be better optimized for clickthrus if it showed "1000 people like this" and then offer the +1 button _after_ the clickthru.

Andrew said...

Ah that's definitely a good point, but Google can't count on there always being a +1 button right after clickthrough.

Alice said...

Where can I put this +1 button in my facebook account? Is it possible? Will it help optimized my page?


Alice of Laser Lipo

Karen said...

Not all cares about this what we call "Privacy"... I even have my friends on my own who posts and disclose everything on their online accounts specially in Facebook...Yep it's true there are some also who firmly respect to have thier privacy...but not as many as those who delibarately don't care.....better in my case with my bachelor of applied fitness friends...we create group exclusive for us...so whatever we discuss and whatever we disclose we know we still have privacy.