Google Print Has Advertsing

19 comments

I think the arrogance at Google has hit a new high point, they are now showing advertising in Google Print. I noticed they are putting links to to Google print on the bottom of all the SERPS today

Which brings you to a list of books they have scanned I clicked the second link and went to view the page inside the book if you look at the bottom you'll see an advertisement.

I can't imagine anyone except Google being happy with this arangement.

Comments

Started seeing it a couple

Started seeing it a couple of days ago on all searches as well. Seems to be a move to get the public hooked. So when G is forced to pull the plug, the mob will be on their side.

It used to be (and I think

It used to be (and I think it probably still is) that the ads shown are credited, Adsense style, to the publishers' account.

Personally if that is still the case then I think it is a great move by Google, as it is a huge monetisation reason for the publishers to add books to the programme

If so does it go to the

If so does it go to the author or publisher? If it's a split who decides the percentage? For publishers with hundreds of books is this set up to give breakdowns? Seems to be on all the books on that SERP hard to believe all of them agreed to be scanned.

hard to believe

I'm finding it hard to believe that all those Google employees are happy now that it is so obvious Google is all about plastering the world with advertising.

I recall when Apple recruited top talent by saying things like working on Apple's projects was "better than pushing sugar water" (working for Coca-Cola)... how about Google putting up billboards that say "Put your genius to work where it's appreciated. Help Google put advertising on everything in sight".

I find it hard to believe the quality people are not itching to move on to something a wee bit more meaningful. Maybe that explains the selling out.

holy shit, relax guys. just

holy shit, relax guys. just think about how much money this project has cost google. as a publicly traded company, it's google's LEGAL obligation to do all it can to maximise dividends on its shares, i.e. to make money, otherwise it could be liable to all kinds of lawsuits (a la Dodge vs. Ford)

even if it gives publishers ALL the money from the ads, remember it still takes a cut on all ads anyway

I love the example search :)

I love the example search :) very TW heh...

wtf?

it's irrelevant

how much money this project has cost google

the project should not exist

the most relevant link on the page:

See a problem with this page? Please tell us

More 'Relax Guys' stuff...

Isn't that screenshot a little misleading? I mean, you cut out the area that allows you to sign in to your Google Account in order to see full pages from the book. That, of course, means that the book was submitted by the publisher to Google and gave permission for the ads etc (and undoubtedly has a share in them). You also removed the part where there are links to places where one could buy the book. Personally, I don't see anything wrong here.

Personally, I don't see

Personally, I don't see anything wrong here

Yes I did edit out the links to where the book can be purchased, but only to capture the screen shot and keep it readable. For the book I selected (and most of the others on the page) you don't have to log into a google account to view the scanned pages. I have to imagine there are a great many authors who really don't want anyone, including Google, putting advertising around their work, especially without their permission.

Satire!

So, let's say I go to the book store. After looking around for something that interests me, I pick up a book. I then leaf through it and scan a few pages. Maybe I like what I see. So I take a seat and read half of the first chapter. It's good. But as I get up I notice, since I'm in the bookstore, that there are a few other books like this one. So I scan through a couple of those as well. Eventually I decide that yours is the best and I buy it. What is wrong with this picture?

Nothing you say, that's normal. But, clearly there are horrible flaws in this system. First, the consumer is allowed to read the books right there in the store without paying a cent. That's robbery. The books should be plastic wrapped like CDs (and while we're at it, we should probably get rid of those listening stations, those things are just like Napster). Second, the book store is advertising competitors' works right next to each other. In fact, it seems that they've worked out some kind of contextual system that groups similar works onto the same shelves. That means that when someone comes in looking for Book A they might see Book B right next to it and buy that instead. Stop this madness!

What we really need are book shrines. One shrine per book per major city. That way, if folks somehow became interested in a book they could go to it's shrine and bow down before its copyrighted majesty. They could not touch the book, or even view the cover because that's intellectual property, but they could buy it from the Book Monk if they felt so moved (the Book Monk might also be allowed to give a brief plot summary).

If someone said to me, "I'm going to sell your book to the whole world," I would not complain. Instead, I would say, "How can I help you?"

What we really need are

What we really need are book shrines. One shrine per book per major city. That way, if folks somehow became interested in a book they could go to it's shrine and bow down before its copyrighted majesty. They could not touch the book, or even view the cover because that's intellectual property, but they could buy it from the Book Monk if they felt so moved (the Book Monk might also be allowed to give a brief plot summary).

hahahahaha.....beautiful. your point is exactly correct. i still dont see how the whole book project is different than regular google search, and i still dont see how a business applying an advertising-based business model (google is not the first to do this) is wrong, or, to use a more meaningless word, evil.

in the end, this still facilitates distribution of useful information, so i have a tough time seeing how this has a net negative effect for the world instead of a net positive effect.

lastly, intellectual property obsessives need to realize their "property" is probably just an idea based off someone else's idea. once they shut up and get off their delusional and narcissistic pedestal, the world as a whole can go on to more easily and happily enjoying the fruits of humanity's collective creativity.

when did this become about Google print vs. publishers?

I know G wants to distribute books without any middlemen... it's been in the news for weeks.

What I learned from this post is that G is putting ads on scanned books already.

Let's tell the world "we want to make the world's information available" but really mean "we want to put ads onto everything". That's the only interesting thing for me in this thread.

New York city started "selling" the space on the sides of garbage cans for ads. That's 4 sides per square can (and it's cost-effective to replace those old round cans with square ones now, I bet). How about ads on parking meters, right next to the instructions? Or better, how about making those instructions smaller, so there's even more ad space? And when they need separate larger street signs to explain the parking rules (because no one can read the small print on the meters), they can sell the backs of those as well. And maybe even part of the front?(may have to make the sign's print a bit smaller, that's all). Times Square used to be amazing because of all the signs. Now it's amazing because it's brighter than the Las Vegas strip...24 hours a day.

This is Google's website we

This is Google's website we are talking about right? Since when was a publisher not allowed to place ads on his own site?

Bookstore = Bad Example

Although they are similar is some areas, there is one big flaw about the bookstore analogy. Google didn't pay for the books like Barnes and Nobles does. Google didn't order 100,000 copies of the book to stock their shelves. Lets not forget that typically if you are in a bookstore, you are looking to buy books.

Whatever the case is, copyrighted materials is copyrighted materials. You can't spit in the face of years of copyright law because you are the "in" company right now.

????

Quote:
This is Google's website we are talking about right? Since when was a publisher not allowed to place ads on his own site?

Google published all those books?

..

from a different direction; how did that book and that search result in an ad for liquid soap and moisturiser?

Or have Google suddenly developed a very English sense of humour?

That ad seems to be the

That ad seems to be the default ad, either that or it's a subliminal message that all of spammers need to clean up our act...

If we're talking Google

If we're talking Google Print, where the publishers opt-in, then it'll be interesting to see how the publishers react this. It would be interesting to know what sort of terms and conditions they've actually agreed to.

OK, I was bored :)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.