John Battelle's Searchblog

Danny writes: "Google has launched Google Ad Planner as an invite-only beta. It's designed to allow advertisers to identify sites with demographics they're interested in

and

Google writes (in their "Ten Things" corporate philosophy): "Google firmly believes that ads can provide useful information if, and only if, they are relevant to what you wish to find."

I know I've brought this issue up a few times before. But now that Google has finally launched it, am I still the only person that sees a conflict here?

What I mean is that demographic targeting is the antithesis of relevance-based targeting. Demographic targeting means that you are the type of person that the advertiser would like to sell to. Relevance targeting means that you have the type of information need for which a particular product is a good match.

Demographic targeting favors, or puts at the conceptual center, the advertiser. Relevance targeting favors, or puts a the conceptual center, the user.

So I ask once again: Is Google now going against everything that they once ever stood for, by offering non-relevance-based advertisement targeting? In flat contradiction to their guiding principle?

I wonder how long will Google keep up the charade of "do no evil" when it is becoming an evil behemoth that is willing to sell the most intimate of its consumers secrets to make money...

How much is enough Larry? Are you turning into what you stood against?

(*YAWN*) ....

nmw, you may find this sort of discussion on advertising boring. But let me try and convince you for a moment that this sort of Google approach to advertising is directly related to their lack of innovation in search. If you care about the latter, you should care about the former.

I think Google lost interest in innovation related to search several years ago -- at least that's the way it appears....

The only thing Google is interested in is making money. As long as they can find suckers willing to click on their ads, and also suckers willing to pay to advertise, they will be able to turn a profit -- but neither of these activities has very much to do with innovation regarding information retrieval.

Here's one of the sites I'm currently working on: http://Browse.NAME -- if you'ld like to give feedback, please visit http://gaggle.info/post/73/re-launch-of-browsename

Thanks!

:) nmw