Team Lead Local SEO & GMB at OCAnalytica with expertise in Local SEO and GMB Optimization.
Why advertisers can no longer trust Google The Department of Justice’s laid out a damning case against Google in the antitrust lawsuit closing argument. Search Engine Land Managing Editor Danny Goodwin highlighted some of the damaging evidence – including how Google has been increasing costs for advertisers – in How Google harms search advertisers in 20 slides In light of the revelations, I contacted search marketers to get their thoughts on Google Ads to evaluate the current confidence level. Spoiler alert: it’s not good. Clearly, trust is a major issue – and in the court of public opinion among advertisers, Google has already been found guilty. Here’s what advertisers told Search Engine Land: Manipulation and deceptive practices Sarah Stemen (Paid Search Specialist and Founder): “Their willingness to rewrite help desk documents, frankly, feels shocking after such revelations.” “It seems like Google is trying to hide the mechanics of a potential first-price auction rather than ensuring a truly fair second-price system.” Boris Beceric (Google Ads consultant and coach): “The only one ‘benefitting’ from randomization is Google.” “Google is a monopoly that’s raising prizes without telling advertisers about it.” Dids Reeve (Freelance Paid Media Specialist): “The document reads like randomization is code for ‘we can deviate from the usual auction algorithm to make ourselves some more money’. And that if advertisers perceive Google to be ‘randomizing’, then it would be bad enough that they want to cover up the fact.” Chris Ridley (Paid Media Manager, Evoluted): “The latest news of Google randomizing the top two ad positions in the hope advertisers will raise their bids, is a sign that Google is willing to rewrite the rulebook for advertising on their platform.” Robert Brady (Founder and PPC Expert): “Exact match bears the name ‘exact,’ but the behavior of the match type is far from exact. They keep the name because it gives advertisers a false sense of precision.” “Randomization in this context is used the same way. The layperson would infer that it meant the behavior was truly random (not influenced by predictable factors), so Google deflects scrutiny when a full analysis shows that their ‘randomization’ showed a clear preference in Google’s favor.” Amy Hebdon (Google Ads Conversion expert): “With RGSP, Google has gaslit advertisers with disingenuous explanations of the changes, trying to convince us that this lack of transparency is for our benefit.” Google’s prioritization of profit over fairness Jyll Saskin Gales (Google Ads Coach): “However, reading the internal Google commentary on the practice, it’s clear that the motivations for randomization were not noble.” Charley Brennand (PPC Consultant & Founder): “Google will never put advertisers’ needs before their need to grow profit.” Hebdon added: “Using ad rank and a second-price auction, Google already had a system prioritizing quality and user e...
