Google's thing is not advertising because it's not a romanticizing operation. It doesn't involve expression. It's a link. What they're doing is selling access.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
People used to say that advertising wasn't in Google's DNA, and that's obviously not true anymore. They used to say that display advertising isn't in Google's DNA, and that's not true any more.
Online advertising is display plus search.
It is very similar to companies like Google and other internet companies. When you go and search on Google you don't pay for that. But sometimes you click on an advert and Google makes money on that.
We get better search results and we see more appropriate advertising when we let Google know who we are.
We are a consumer company and our success is directly linked to our users trusting us. Therefore we have the same incentive as the user: they want to see relevant advertising so their experience of Google is positive and we want to deliver it.
Advertising is - quite often - alive to our real needs. It's just the products on offer might not be the things that will help us satisfy them.
Google is a consumer brand and people need to be comfortable. If we were just an advertising brand we wouldn't have the same concerns. We've always tried to promote transparency and choice among our users.
Google actually relies on our users to help with our marketing. We have a very high percentage of our users who often tell others about our search engine.
I credit Google for having the foresight to identify threats to its main business of selling advertising against search results. The potential loss of market share in the mobile space led them to the Android acquisition.
All media owners want to attract advertising revenue. Google is no different.