New Microsoft ads blast Google shopping search

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Microsoft is trying to skewer Google as a lousy holiday shopping guide in its latest attempt to divert more traffic to its Bing search engine.
The attack starts Wednesday with a marketing campaign focused on a recent change in how Google runs the part of its search engine devoted to shopping results. The revisions require merchants to pay Google to have their products listed in the shopping section.
In its new ads, Microsoft Corp. contends the new approach betrays Google Inc.'s longstanding commitment to provide the most trustworthy results on the Web, even if it means foregoing revenue. To punctuate its point, Microsoft is warning consumers that they risk getting "scroogled" if they rely on Google's shopping search service.
The message will be highlighted in TV commercials scheduled to run on NBC and CNN and newspaper ads in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. The blitz also will appear on billboards and online, anchored by a new website, Scroogled.com.
Watch the ad:
The barbs are likely to inject more antagonism into an already bitter rivalry between two of the world's best-known and most powerful technology companies.
Google's search engine is dominant on the Internet, with Bing running a distant second. Microsoft's Office and Windows software remains an integral part of personal computers, but Google has been reducing the importance of those programs and PCs with the success of Web-based services and its Android operating system for smartphones and tablet computers.
Google still doesn't require websites to pay to be listed in in its main database. That's the index providing the results for requests entered into Google's all-purpose search box. A query made there for a particular product, such as computers, will still include results from merchants who haven't paid for the privilege of being included.
But anyone who clicks on a tab at the top for shopping-specific results will see only listings for paying merchants. That means results from sites, including Web retailing giant Amazon.com Inc., aren't displayed unless they pay. Amazon so far has only occasionally paid to have some of its wares listed in Google's shopping section. Zappos, a site owned by Amazon, has been more willing to pay the price to be listed in Google's shopping results.
Google defends the fee-based approach as a way to encourage merchants to provide more comprehensive and accurate information about what they're selling.
"I think you just get a well-organized set of product information, ways to buy it, and really have a great experience there," CEO Larry Page said during a conference call with analysts last month.
In a statement late Tuesday, Google said it's pleased with the response to the new shopping system, which offers listings from some 100,000 sellers.
Google, like Microsoft, also accepts payments for ads that are triggered by specific search terms and appear to the right or on top of regular search results. Those are labeled in gray letters as ads.
Since its inception in 1998, Google has tried to cast itself as a force for good while depicting Microsoft as a ruthless empire.
But Google has become less cuddly as it has established itself as the Internet's main gateway - and through that, as a well-oiled moneymaking machine. The company's search engine is so influential that government regulators in the U.S. and Europe have been investigating whether Google has been stifling competition by giving special preference to its own services in search results.
Microsoft, which faced its own antitrust inquiries more than a decade ago, is among the companies that had prodded the investigation of Google. This time, it's pouncing on Google for straying for from its own principles.
Since mid-October, Google's shopping section has included only listings from merchants who paid to be included in the results. In some cases, the order of the shopping results has been dictated by how much money Google received for the listing. The change coincides with what is expected to be the most lucrative holiday shopping season on the Web yet.
Google discloses that it receives payments in small print at the bottom of the shopping results page. The notice is also visible if a user clicks on a link at the top of the shopping results page, under the heading: "Why these products?"
What's left unsaid is the omission of sites such as Amazon, which often offers some of the best deals on the Web.
The financially driven system for determining the results in a major part of Google's search engine breaks new ground for a company whose idealistic founders, Page and Sergey Brin, once railed against the perils of allowing money to influence which Web links to show.
Brin and Page preached about the issue in academic papers that they wrote about search while conceiving Google as Stanford University graduate students. They more famously delved into the topic when discussing Google's "don't be evil" creed in a letter written when the company went public in 2004.
"Our search results are the best we know how to produce," Brin and Page wrote in the letter. "They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them."
Microsoft contends that Google is doing a disservice to its users with the new approach, as many users may not even realize that the results in shopping search are being swayed by money.
"We want consumers to know in contrast to route that Google has pursued, we are staying true to the DNA of what a good search engine is really about," said Mike Nichols, Bing's chief marketing officer. "We will rank results on what's relevant to you and not based on how much someone might pay us."
Microsoft once accepted payments that can affect the order of results. But the company says it hasn't accepted payments since it re-branded its search engine as Bing in 2009.
Bing's shopping section includes merchant listings for Shopping.com, a service that gets referral fees. Microsoft says the payments don't influence how Bing ranks its shopping results.
The attack starts Wednesday with a marketing campaign focused on a recent change in how Google runs the part of its search engine devoted to shopping results. The revisions require merchants to pay Google to have their products listed in the shopping section.
In its new ads, Microsoft Corp. contends the new approach betrays Google Inc.'s longstanding commitment to provide the most trustworthy results on the Web, even if it means foregoing revenue. To punctuate its point, Microsoft is warning consumers that they risk getting "scroogled" if they rely on Google's shopping search service.
The message will be highlighted in TV commercials scheduled to run on NBC and CNN and newspaper ads in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. The blitz also will appear on billboards and online, anchored by a new website, Scroogled.com.
Watch the ad:
The barbs are likely to inject more antagonism into an already bitter rivalry between two of the world's best-known and most powerful technology companies.
Google's search engine is dominant on the Internet, with Bing running a distant second. Microsoft's Office and Windows software remains an integral part of personal computers, but Google has been reducing the importance of those programs and PCs with the success of Web-based services and its Android operating system for smartphones and tablet computers.
Google still doesn't require websites to pay to be listed in in its main database. That's the index providing the results for requests entered into Google's all-purpose search box. A query made there for a particular product, such as computers, will still include results from merchants who haven't paid for the privilege of being included.
But anyone who clicks on a tab at the top for shopping-specific results will see only listings for paying merchants. That means results from sites, including Web retailing giant Amazon.com Inc., aren't displayed unless they pay. Amazon so far has only occasionally paid to have some of its wares listed in Google's shopping section. Zappos, a site owned by Amazon, has been more willing to pay the price to be listed in Google's shopping results.
Google defends the fee-based approach as a way to encourage merchants to provide more comprehensive and accurate information about what they're selling.
"I think you just get a well-organized set of product information, ways to buy it, and really have a great experience there," CEO Larry Page said during a conference call with analysts last month.
In a statement late Tuesday, Google said it's pleased with the response to the new shopping system, which offers listings from some 100,000 sellers.
Google, like Microsoft, also accepts payments for ads that are triggered by specific search terms and appear to the right or on top of regular search results. Those are labeled in gray letters as ads.
Since its inception in 1998, Google has tried to cast itself as a force for good while depicting Microsoft as a ruthless empire.
But Google has become less cuddly as it has established itself as the Internet's main gateway - and through that, as a well-oiled moneymaking machine. The company's search engine is so influential that government regulators in the U.S. and Europe have been investigating whether Google has been stifling competition by giving special preference to its own services in search results.
Microsoft, which faced its own antitrust inquiries more than a decade ago, is among the companies that had prodded the investigation of Google. This time, it's pouncing on Google for straying for from its own principles.
Since mid-October, Google's shopping section has included only listings from merchants who paid to be included in the results. In some cases, the order of the shopping results has been dictated by how much money Google received for the listing. The change coincides with what is expected to be the most lucrative holiday shopping season on the Web yet.
Google discloses that it receives payments in small print at the bottom of the shopping results page. The notice is also visible if a user clicks on a link at the top of the shopping results page, under the heading: "Why these products?"
What's left unsaid is the omission of sites such as Amazon, which often offers some of the best deals on the Web.
The financially driven system for determining the results in a major part of Google's search engine breaks new ground for a company whose idealistic founders, Page and Sergey Brin, once railed against the perils of allowing money to influence which Web links to show.
Brin and Page preached about the issue in academic papers that they wrote about search while conceiving Google as Stanford University graduate students. They more famously delved into the topic when discussing Google's "don't be evil" creed in a letter written when the company went public in 2004.
"Our search results are the best we know how to produce," Brin and Page wrote in the letter. "They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them."
Microsoft contends that Google is doing a disservice to its users with the new approach, as many users may not even realize that the results in shopping search are being swayed by money.
"We want consumers to know in contrast to route that Google has pursued, we are staying true to the DNA of what a good search engine is really about," said Mike Nichols, Bing's chief marketing officer. "We will rank results on what's relevant to you and not based on how much someone might pay us."
Microsoft once accepted payments that can affect the order of results. But the company says it hasn't accepted payments since it re-branded its search engine as Bing in 2009.
Bing's shopping section includes merchant listings for Shopping.com, a service that gets referral fees. Microsoft says the payments don't influence how Bing ranks its shopping results.
So thats why I couldnt find my result on Google Shopping! I found something I thought was a good price on a website, and searched Google Shopping to see what the competitors were charging and couldnt find the initial price in the results. Well, I dont use Bing, but I wont use Google Shopping anymore either since its not going to give me all the results, only paid ones.
I hate Bing I wont use it
Why hate on Microsoft? Microsoft has given more to the computing industry than any other company, by far. Bing isn't great (and their commercials are god-awful) but if Google's transitioning to this commercial format, likely tricking thousands of unsuspecting shoppers, I'll be making the switch. Look at it this way, if they thought paid for search results were benefiting their users, we would have heard about it before now.Â
Although Bing does suck - Â Since Google product search went to a paid model rather than organic a few months ago, I would yield to MS in this case.
From scroogled.com: "For an honest search result, try Bing."
...or you could just do an ordinary Google search instead of using Google Shopping.
Google stock $683.87
Microsoft stock $27.36
Â
enough said.
 @Vince You know nothing about the stock market. Vince, you fail.
 @Vince Google: 328.59 million shares. Microsoft: 8.42 billion shares.Â
@Vince
Market cap is more telling...
Â
Google:Â 224.65B
MS:Â 230.27B
Â
Google stock price could be $224B if they only offered 1 share.
Â
 @VinceÂ
Not quite enough said. Â Back in 2003, after a 2-for-1 stock split, Microsoft had 10 billion shares. Â Don't know how many shares of Google there are, but price per share is affected by the number of shares. Â
my two cents......Bing sucks.....it finds more B.S. than what i am actually looking for ....google is faster , less crap to deal with......( with the exception of G. chrome).....( which really screws with the older computers).....i would rather use yahoo if i couldnt use Google..... "All Hail The King" ........GOOGLE !!!!
 @fourwallesÂ
I believe you deserve 1 cent in change. Â
 @fourwalles my two cents .... your messages are .... easier to take .... seriously .... when you .... don't write them ... like this ... .... ....
Â
Also, nice Google plant.
@KieferSkunk .......gets attention though dont it!...........
Poor Microsoft. Lashing out because its the only thing they know how to do. Dump Ballmer and perhaps you can move a little faster with your software development.
 @Chico I remember sitting in a company meeting where Ballmer and Co made fun of competitors advertising, and within the next year they ran a load of really bad advertisements. They looked like complete idiots at the next meeting.Â
For this issue I'm sure anyone out there can put together some group of queries to make Bing look stupid too. This type of attack is lame. But to the defense of MS, Google selectively chooses what it will show in search results based on its politics. For instance if you are shopping for firearms they won't show results in their promo area or whatever. Restricting porn and whatnot makes sense but picking what people get to see for shopping is another. Either way both companies are idiotic.Â
One huge amoral corporation accusing another of having flimsy values. What a hoot!
If you go to google.com and type in your search you do not automatically go to the 'shopping' system... I use the web a lot to search for purchases, but I've not once felt that I needed anything more than just the regular search results. Its not as if Google is filtering their regular search based on payment...
Still to each their own, MS is stating the facts here and educating consumers is good. It seems overly sensationalistic, though, to me.
Google should be dismantled
Microsoft, instead of trashing Google, make Bing so great that everyone wants to use it.Â
@makeadifference - Bing search is actually no better or worse than Google' search.Â
I didn't know about the latest change in Google's shopping site. I use Google, I have for years and can't stand Bing - reminds me of visiting a hoarder's house. However, I will be the first to admit that Google's shopping site is one of the worst I've ever tried to use. I've tried Google shopping and it feels like I'm only getting a bit of the picture (and not a very good one at that), I get better results from searching on Amazon for any product (and I know they are limited). Personally, I think MickeySoft is right, it goes against the image that Google has tried to create of an open and free environment so I'll just continue to go elsewhere to shop yet still use their (non-hoarder) search service. :)
Actually a very clever campaign...Until Bing comes up with a way for me to earn the same income I do from Adsense, my loyalty will remain with Google.Â
Until you become competition like Amazon, which then they'll remove you from their results. Shady  move for Google, and is a step away from their "do no evil" mantra.
Didn't Google show that Bing was copying their search results when they put some deliberately bogus hits in the Google database and then waited for them to also show up in Bing search results?
 @Travis Hartnett Google fed those specific results to Bing intentionally.
I noticed google switched up it's shopping search a few months ago. It use to be a free to all sites, now it says you have to pay them to be included in the search results. There are definitely not as many sites showing up anymore and I stopped using it.
 @SkaBob Mid October was when Google started to charge merchants! That is hardly "a few months ago"