2 
At one point, Google was proud to offer up its search results and services without any sponsored content. That seems to be changing in a pretty aggressive way, though. Google is apparently compensated by the vendors that appear in its Flight Search and Hotel Finder vertical search engines.
So here’s what that means: Last year, Google launched Hotel Finder and Flight Search, seemingly to compete with Kayak orHotels.com. Both now appear prominently on Google’s main search results page. At the time, it seemed like Google was just running roughshod over every industry, gathering up precious information while it trampled over the once-profitable fields sown by competitors that couldn’t afford to operate on the slim margins Google does.
Now, though, there’s another layer: Google is collecting money from vendors its search engines point users toward. The results seem to be the same as pure “organic” results, just now companies are paying Google for the referral. So if you grab a Delta flight through Google Flights, Delta will kick back a percentage of your ticket price to Google. Totally fair! But it also goes against the Google’s fundamental principle that search results should always be organic and transparent. Here’s the disclaimer/explainer that Google shows users right now:
Which looks even worse when you line that up with Google’s statements in its IPO filing in 2004:
We do not accept money for search result ranking or inclusion. We do accept fees for advertising, but it does not influence how we generate our search results. The advertising is clearly marked and separated. This is similar to a newspaper, where the articles are independent of the advertising. …
We apply these principles to each of our products and services. We believe it is important for users to have access to the best available information and research, not just the information that someone pays for them to see.
Now that’s changed, and naturally, the EVIL flags are being run up the mast. Except that for a giant entity of Google’s scope, this is inevitable and obvious clearly something that had to happen, especially in the context of DUH. Yes, Google is going through some changes—and that means a real reevaluation of what and who it is as a company. And paid search placement is a precious thin line to tread—right now, there’s no discernible impetus for companies to continue paying, so this could quickly, conceivably turn into a pay-to-be-included scenario. But right now, right here, this is just good business. In fact, it would almost be weirder if they didn’t.
Here’s the thing: All of Google’s direct competitors—Facebook and Twitter especially—have full paid inclusion that’s at times far less transparent than Google’s. It’s just how business is done at this point. Google changing its mind doesn’t mean that it’s a harbinger of destruction on the world. Companies change their minds all the time. This is just Google acting like the corporate monolith that it has been for some time now. [Marketing Land]
Google's Search Results Page Is Changing
Google's Newest Search Result? An FTC Antitrust Investigation
Google Search Results Can Pull From Your Gmail Now
“The advertising is clearly marked and separated.”
Which is exactly the case here as well. These are ads, generated by the keywords in the search – exactly the same as every other ad on a Google search is formed.
How many other big companies would be upfront about the fact they’re getting money from such ‘helpful’ extras? Does Facebook tell you that the pages you’re ‘recommended’ to like are actually the pages that paid the most money for that position on the page?
I’ve been surprised quite a few times seeing people click the first link in Google searches (the sponsored ones in the yellow box.) I’ve actually pointed out to a couple of people they are clicking adverts not search results but they don’t seem to know or care about the difference.
I like to click the sponsored links just to keep the internet’s cogs turning – somebody’s gotta! I do, however, realise that they may not be the most relevant page and likely to read their description better than when I sometimes just click the top link and hope. But anyway, if these people are paying to have their link put up they probably have something relevant that you’re going want. Advertising can work out better for both sides after all.
Yeah I will click them if they are relevant, but usually they are trying to sell me something, and I’m rarely looking to buy anything on Google
Is it just me or is this article trying to have it both ways? The tone of the article at the start seems to be saying “Oh no, look at this evil thing Google has done” but by the end is saying “this is all pretty normal and Google does it fairer and more openly than others”. Maybe I just haven’t reached my caffeinated brain operational level yet.
No, I think it’s critical through-and-through, but the latter half provides some context. Good article, imo. :>
“But it also goes against the Google’s fundamental principle that search results should always be organic and transparent”
That is certainly not Google’s fundamental principle. At least not since 2000 when they started with the paid ads across the ad network. Paid vs Organic is a solid distinction in the search engine world and it has been that way for a very long time.
As they say in their 10 commandments: “Placement in search results is never sold to anyone, and advertising is not only clearly marked as such, it offers relevant content and is not distracting” – this is still the case.
These are the principles on which Google was founded: http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/
If I use google rather than typing in a whole URL manually, for the screwfix website or something like that, I’ll often click on the sponsored link because its obviously relevant to my search. If I am searching for something that I want to buy or use though, I rarely use the sponsored links, because I want my results to be based on popularity rather than how much they paid Google for ranking