 |
Internet Marketing · eMarketing · Internet Advertising · Online Branding |
|
Internet Marketing · eMarketing · Internet Advertising · Online Branding |
|
|
|
||
| ADVERTISING BY ICONOCAST |
||
STILL IN SEARCH OF DISCLOSURE
Re-evaluating How Search Engines Explain the Presence of Advertising in Search Results
STILL IN SEARCH OF DISCLOSURE
Re-evaluating How Search Engines Explain the Presence of Advertising in Search Results
By Jørgen J. Wouters
June 9, 2005
Consumer Reports WebWatch
101 Truman Avenue
Yonkers, NY 10703-1057
Tel: 914.378.2600
www.ConsumerWebWatch.org
Executive Summary .................................................................... 3
About Consumer Reports WebWatch .......................................... 8
Major Findings .......................................................................... 9
Results by by Search Engine...................................................... 14
1st Blaze ............................................................................ 14
AltaVista ............................................................................ 15
AOL Search ........................................................................ 16
Ask Jeeves .......................................................................... 18
CNET’s Search.com ............................................................ 19
Google .............................................................................. 20
InfoSpace .......................................................................... 21
Lycos .................................................................................. 22
MSN Search ...................................................................... 23
My Search .......................................................................... 24
My Way Search ..................................................................26
Netscape ............................................................................ 27
Overture ..............................................................................28
Web Search........................................................................ 29
Yahoo Search...................................................................... 30
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 3
One year after Consumer Reports WebWatch research
demonstrated many of the Web’s most popular search
engines fail to provide clear disclosures about how their
results are influenced by advertisers, follow-up research
by WebWatch confirms the industry’s continuing inability
to adequately inform consumers about the financial
forces at work in online search.
WebWatch began reporting on the relationship between
advertising and search engine results in 2002, when it
released the results of a comprehensive national poll of
1,500 U.S. adult Internet users. The survey, "A Matter of
Trust: What Users Want From Web Sites," showed more
than 60 percent of respondents were unaware search
engines accept payment to list certain sites more prominently
than others in search results, a practice commonly
known as "paid placement."1
Among those to take note of these findings was the U.S.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which cited the report
in a warning letter to the search engine industry later that
year.2 In that letter, the FTC issued recommendations for
"clear and conspicuous disclosure" of paid placement
and paid inclusion, the two main methods of inserting
advertising into search results. (Paid placement programs
charge advertisers a fee in exchange for higher rankings
within search results. Paid inclusion programs also
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
KEY FINDINGS
1Princeton Survey Research Associates (2002). "A Matter of Trust: What Users Want From Web Sites. Results of a National Survey of Internet Users."
Consumer Reports WebWatch. Available online at http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/dynamic/web-credibility-reports-a-matter-of-trust-abstract.cfm
2"Complaint Requesting Investigation of Various Internet Search Engine Companies Paid Placement and Paid Inclusion Programs." Federal Trade Commission
(2002). Available online at http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/staff/commercialalertattatch.htm
Consumer Reports WebWatch examined how the
top 15 most-trafficked search engines explain their
business relationships with advertisers and discovered:
■ Disclosure headings are even more difficult to
find in many cases.
■ Two of three meta-search engines tested have
greatly improved their disclosure practices.
■ Paid inclusion still was not satisfactorily
disclosed by any search engine tested.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 4
charge a fee, but only to assure a site’s listing within a
search engine’s full index of possible results — without a
guarantee of ranking.)
The FTC’s recommendations came after Commercial
Alert, a Portland, Oregon-based consumer watchdog
group, filed a complaint with the commission accusing
several major search engines of deceptive advertising
practices.3
With the surprising results from the national poll established
as an empirical baseline, WebWatch followed
with the 2003 study "False Oracles: Consumer Reaction
to Learning the Truth About How Search Engines Work,"
which explored why paid search results remained
opaque to consumers. This ethnographic study underscored
study participants’ complete lack of awareness
about the integration of advertising into search pages —
as well as considerable dismay when informed how
advertising influences search results.4
As a next step in WebWatch’s analysis of search engine
disclosure practices, WebWatch created an evaluation
tool based on FTC guidelines to examine the methods
major search engines used to explain to consumers the
role of advertising in the online search process.
WebWatch employed an expert panel of librarians, professionals
trained in information search, to perform the
analysis. This 2004 study, "Searching for Disclosure:
How Search Engines Alert Consumers to the Presence of
Advertising in Search Results," found most of the 15
search engines tested made some effort to satisfy the
FTC’s recommendations. But compliance varied widely,
as some sites diligently disclosed and explained their
business practices, while others appeared to obscure the
presence of advertising within search results.5
Now, this report builds on "Searching For Disclosure" by
re-examining the same 15 search engines almost one
year after they were reviewed for the 2004 report.
Although the initial study was based on analysis by 4
librarians and the report’s author, the author alone conducted
follow-up reviews for this study by querying the
term "digital cameras" for all 15 sites. The sites re-evaluated
in this study were: 1st Blaze, AltaVista, AOL Search,
Ask Jeeves, CNET’s Search.com, Google, InfoSpace,
DEFINITION OF TERMS
PAID PLACEMENT
When Web sites pay a fee to be ranked
prominently in search results.
PAID INCLUSION
When Web sites pay a fee to increase the
likelihood they will appear somewhere within
search results, without a guarantee of a high
ranking.
FIGURE 1
THE 2004 STUDY FOUND
MOST OF THE 15 SEARCH
ENGINES TESTED MADE
SOME EFFORT TO SATISFY
THE FTC'S RECOMMENDATIONS,
BUT COMPLIANCE
VARIED WIDELY.
3"Commercial Alert Files Complaint Against Search Engines for Deceptive Ads." Commercial Alert (2001) Available online at
http://www.commercialalert.org/index.php/article_id/index.php/category_id/1/subcategory_id/24/article_id/33
4 Marable, L. (2003) "False Oracles: Consumer Reaction to Learning the Truth About How Search Engines Work. Results of an Ethnographic Study."
Consumer Reports WebWatch. Available online at http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/dynamic/search-report-false-oracles-abstract.cfm
5 Wouters, J. (2004) "Searching for Disclosure: How Search Engines Alert Consumers to the Presence of Advertising in Search Results." Consumer Reports
WebWatch. Available online at http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/dynamic/search-report-disclosure-abstract.cfm
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 5
Lycos, MSN Search, My Search, My Way, Netscape,
Overture, Web Search and Yahoo! Search.
A year is a long time in cyberspace, and many search
engines reviewed here have undergone a number of
changes. Unfortunately for consumers, many of these
changes have not been for the better. Comparing current
levels of disclosure among search engines with those a
year ago, we found that some of the best have gotten
worse, a few of the worst have gotten better, and roughly
half have remained more or less the same.
Most search engines also appear more interested in following
the letter — rather than the spirit — of the FTC’s
guidelines. This reinforces a troubling trend WebWatch
noted a year ago, i.e., many search engines seem to be
doing as little as possible to comply with FTC recommendations
and as much as possible to camouflage the
presence of advertising within their search results.
WebWatch’s body of research demonstrates both consumers’
strong desire in knowing whether search engines
sell rankings to advertisers, as well as their considerable
SEARCH ENGINE DISCLOSURE COMPLIANCE COMPARISON, 2004-2005
SITE CHANGE COMMENTS
1ST BLAZE -- • No disclosures
• Poor transparency
ALTA VISTA ▼ • Once visible headings now muted
• Disclosure hyperlinks removed
AOL SEARCH -- • Changed disclosure headings from red to green
• Disclosure links slightly paler but still noticeable
ASK JEEVES ▼ • Disclosure headings more faint
• Removed disclosure hyperlinks
• Disclosures harder to find
CNET’S SEARCH.COM ▲ • Added disclosure pages for paid placement and
paid inclusion
GOOGLE -- • Good disclosure, although difficult to find disclosure statements
INFOSPACE ▼ • Reduced paid placement disclosure to one sentence
• Still no disclosure of paid inclusion
LYCOS -- • Streamlined disclosure pages
MSN SEARCH ▲ • Some paid placement listings easier to spot
• Ended content promotion and paid inclusion programs
• Removed paid placement disclosure page
MY SEARCH -- • Disclosure headings only slightly larger
MY WAY SEARCH -- • Disclosure headings only slightly larger
NETSCAPE ▼ • Once vivid headings now light gray
OVERTURE -- • Good disclosure
WEB SEARCH ▲ • Paid placement listings now identified
• Much improved paid placement and paid
inclusion disclosures
YAHOO! SEARCH ▼ • Once bright red headings now light gray
• Paid placement and paid inclusion hyperlinks removed
• Single disclosure hyperlink easy to miss
FIGURE 2
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 6
frustration in trying to locate and understand these disclosures.
Because of the demonstrable importance consumers
place on the integrity and transparency of search
results, the industry must enhance the effectiveness of disclosures
to ensure they are noticed and understood. If
not, the search engine industry risks losing credibility
with the audience it is competing so vigorously to capture:
Consumers.
KEY FINDINGS
■ Disclosure headings — the first and often only indication
consumers are given to alert them of advertising
within search results — are getting even harder to spot.
Almost every search engine that used large and/or colorful
headings last year has either muted their colors,
reduced their size, or both. As a result, the majority of all
headings are now small, usually gray — and tend to
blend in with the page.
■ Disclosure pages — which provide helpful information
about paid placement programs, as well as required
explanations of paid inclusion programs — are getting
even harder to find. Four major search engines reduced
access to these disclosure pages by removing separate
hyperlinks, leaving it up to consumers to figure out how
to find disclosure information.
■ Meta-search engines, criticized a year ago for their
collective lack of disclosure, have largely improved. Two
engines have substantially enhanced their disclosure of
both paid placement and paid inclusion, although one
site has become worse.
■ Again in this year’s evaluation, no search engine disclosed
paid inclusion satisfactorily, increasing chances
consumers will think they are viewing advertising-free
"Web results." Despite the loss of two high-profile players
last year, paid inclusion remains prevalent, and is still
practiced by at least nine of the 15 search engines tested.
■ Disclosure statements, which in theory are written for
consumers, should be simple and straightforward. But
some — for both paid placement and paid inclusion –
seem written to discourage reading. More than half the
disclosures remained virtually unchanged from a year
ago, and some are still unsatisfactory.
SEARCH ENGINES SELECTED
FOR THIS STUDY
1ST BLAZE
http://www.1stblaze.com
ALTA VISTA
http://www.altavista.com
AOL SEARCH
http://search.aol.com/aolcom/webhome
ASK JEEVES
http://www.ask.com
CNET’S SEARCH.COM
http://www.search.com
GOOGLE
http://www.google.com
INFOSPACE WEB SEARCH
http://www.infospace.com/home/search
LYCOS
http://www.lycos.com
MSN SEARCH
http://search.msn.com
MY SEARCH
http://www.mysearch.com/jsp/home.jsp
MY WAY SEARCH
http://www.myway.com/
NETSCAPE
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/def
ault.jsp
OVERTURE
http://www.content.overture.com
WEB SEARCH
http://www.websearch.com
YAHOO! SEARCH
http://search.yahoo.com
FIGURE 3
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 7
CREDITS
This project was written and directed by Jørgen J.
Wouters, a consultant to Consumer Reports WebWatch
and author of WebWatch’s 2004 report, "Searching for
Disclosure: How Search Engines Alert Consumers to the
Presence of Advertising in Search Results." He has been
writing about the Internet since 1993, for the
Washington Post Company’s Washington Technology
magazine and other publications. He also edited the
Information & Interactive Services Report, a weekly
newsletter for information industry executives. Wouters
also has written for the international consulting firm
McKinsey & Company.
This project was funded by Consumer Reports
WebWatch. The research report was edited by Tracy
Ziemer, WebWatch’s researcher and site producer.
Neither ConsumerWebWatch.org nor ConsumersUnion
.org participate in paid placement or paid inclusion programs
with any search engine. ConsumerReports.org
does participate in both paid placement and paid inclusion
programs.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 8
Consumer Reports WebWatch is a project of Consumers
Union, the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports magazine
and ConsumerReports.org. The project is supported
by The Pew Charitable Trusts, which invests in ideas
that fuel timely action and results; the John S. and James
L. Knight Foundation, which promotes excellence in journalism
worldwide and invests in the vitality of 26 U.S.
communities; and the Open Society Institute, which
encourages debate in areas in which one view of an
issue dominates all others.
Consumer Reports WebWatch’s mission is to improve the
credibility of Web sites, through research, news investigations,
and articulation of best practices guidelines in
specific sectors of Web publishing. WebWatch’s
research, investigations, guidelines, conference transcripts,
a list of sites that comply with WebWatch’s best
practices guidelines, and other materials are available
for free at http://www.consumerwebwatch.org.
ABOUT CONSUMER REPORTS
WEBWATCH
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 9
A year ago, WebWatch testers determined all search
engines reviewed could improve the visibility of their
headings and hyperlinks and/or the clarity of their disclosures.
The latest review of these 15 sites only reinforces
this finding. While fewer than half the sites tested
remained essentially unchanged from a year ago in
terms of disclosure practices, many sites have changed
for the worse, with a few notable exceptions.
In 2004, many sites used small, gray, indistinct disclosure
headings to highlight advertising on their results
pages, although a handful of the most-trafficked search
engines made a point of using vibrant, hard-to-miss fonts.
But now, many of the best and brightest headings tested
a year ago have gotten smaller, duller, and easier to
miss. Several engines that once exceeded FTC guidelines
by providing hyperlinks to paid-placement disclosures
have since removed them, and most other hyperlinks
remain difficult to find.
However, on a more positive note, two of the three metasearch
engines tested last year have greatly improved
their disclosure of both plaid placement and paid inclusion
— and, in some respects, now surpass some of the
very engines they fared so poorly against last year. Also,
two of the three most-trafficked search engines, despite
some other shortcomings, now feature some paid placement
results in helpful, easy-to-spot colored boxes.
AMONG THE MAJOR FINDINGS:
■ Disclosure Headings are Fading
A year ago, eight of the 15 search engines were criticized
by WebWatch for labeling their paid placement
and inclusion listings with small, dull-colored headings.
Since then, five additional major players have either
MAJOR FINDINGS
SEVERAL ENGINES THAT
ONCE EXCEEDED FTC
GUIDELINES BY PROVIDING
HYPERLINKS TO PAIDPLACEMENT
DISCLOSURES
HAVE SINCE REMOVED
THEM.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 10
muted the color of their headings, reduced their size or
both. AltaVista, Netscape and Yahoo once used highly
visible, bright red headings but now use gray, the industry’s
apparent color of choice. Two engines, however –
Yahoo and MSN – offset their indistinct paid search
headings by placing some paid search listings in colored
boxes.
Only two search engines – My Search and My Way –
actually increased the visibility of their headings,
although these once-minuscule headings are still small
and gray. The use of inconspicuous headings greatly
increases the likelihood consumers will not discern the
nature of paid results.
■ Paid Placement Hyperlinks Are Vanishing
Although the FTC requires only a heading to indicate
paid placement, most search engines tested last year
went beyond these recommendations by offering hyperlinks
to disclosure pages, a practice lauded by
WebWatch. Since then, four major search engines –
AltaVista, Ask Jeeves, MSN and Yahoo – deleted these
hyperlinks from their results pages, and MSN removed its
disclosure page entirely. (See Figure 5.)
Although AltaVista’s and Yahoo’s headings are hyperlinked
to disclosures explaining the sites’ use of advertising,
neither is obvious unless one rolls over the headings
with a mouse. Ask Jeeves users must now dig through its
help pages for a disclosure. While some of these engines
may still exceed FTC guidelines by offering a separate
paid search disclosure, the sites aren’t doing consumers
any favors by making this information so hard to find.
■ Some Paid Inclusion Hyperlinks Have Been Removed
Although the FTC requires search engines to link to disclosures
explaining the site’s use of paid inclusion, some
engines have deleted them from their pages. Two of these
SITES THAT HAVE REMOVED
PAID PLACEMENT HYPERLINKS
SITE 2004 2005
ALTAVISTA "About" None
ASK JEEVES "About" None
MSN SEARCH "About" None*
YAHOO! SEARCH "What’s this" None**
*=Disclosure page removed as well.
**=Site now offers "About these results" hyperlink set apart from the
heading
FIGURE 5
COLOR CHANGES TO
DISCLOSURE HEADINGS
SLIGHT IMPROVEMENTS
SITE 2004 2005
MY SEARCH Faint gray Darker gray
MY WAY Faint gray Darker gray
WEB SEARCH None Gray
GETTING WORSE
SITE 2004 2005
ALTAVISTA Red Gray
ASK JEEVES Big, bold red Small, thin red
MSN SEARCH Gray Faint Gray
NETSCAPE Red Gray
YAHOO! Red Gray
PRIMARILY UNCHANGED
SITE 2004 2005
1ST BLAZE Black Black
AOL SEARCH Red Green
CNET’S Black Black
SEARCH.COM (red when (red when
moused over) moused over)
GOOGLE Gray Gray
INFOSPACE Pale blue Pale blue
LYCOS Red Red
OVERTURE Pale blue Pale blue
FIGURE 4
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 11
engines – Ask Jeeves and MSN – no longer have anything
to disclose since they dropped their paid inclusion
programs after WebWatch’s testing in 2004. However,
AltaVista still features paid inclusion listings, and last
year the site highlighted this disclosure information with
a separate "About" hyperlink placed next to the heading.
Now, however, AltaVista has eliminated the separate link
and hyperlinked the paid inclusion heading instead —
something not apparent unless a user happens to mouseover
the heading.
Yahoo, the largest engine using paid inclusion, also
removed its once prominent "What’s this?" hyperlink, as
well as its paid inclusion heading. The site now uses an
"About this page" hyperlink in the upper right corner of
the page above a set of paid placement – not paid inclusion
– listings, which only adds to confusion.
Although these modifications by AltaVista and Yahoo
may still technically meet FTC guidelines, they’re a far cry
from the levels of disclosure praised by WebWatch
testers a year ago.
■ Most Disclosure Hyperlinks Remain Small, Gray and
Out of the Way
Last year, only three search engines tested – Yahoo, AOL
and Lycos – used colorful and noticeable disclosure
hyperlinks, while all other search engines earned low
marks from testers for their reliance on small, faint gray
links. AOL and Lycos are the only sites of all 15 tested
this year to still use relatively visible hyperlinks placed
next to headings, as the FTC recommends.
Although disclosure links are meant to be noticed, most
either blend in with the page and/or are located so far
from the headings that they are easily missed — as they
were by several testers last year. The continued use of
eye-straining, and often buried, hyperlinks makes it likely
most consumers will never see the disclosures the links
are meant to highlight.
■ Meta-Search Engines are Much Improved
Every tester last year criticized the lack of disclosure
offered by the three meta-search engines tested, but two
have considerably improved their disclosure practices.
CNET’s Search.com, which used to disclose paid placement
listings with just a heading and failed to disclose
paid inclusion at all, now offers a well-worded disclosure
page for both. Web Search used to mix paid placement
and paid inclusion listings on the results page without
any labeling and provided only a vague and confusing
disclosure page; the site now discloses paid placement
on a listing-by-listing business and has completely overhauled
and clarified its disclosure page for the better.
InfoSpace, however, continues to disclose paid placement
on a listing-by-listing basis, but has also truncated
its paid placement disclosure to a single, unsatisfactory
sentence. More troubling, its use of paid inclusion
remains undisclosed.
■ Paid Inclusion Headings Still Misleading
A year ago, virtually every search engine labeled its
paid placement listings with headings most testers
SEARCH ENGINES THAT USE
PAID INCLUSION
SITE 2004 2005
1ST BLAZE N/A N/A
ALTA VISTA ✓ ✓
AOL SEARCH
ASK JEEVES ✓
CNET’S SEARCH.COM ✓ ✓
GOOGLE
INFOSPACE ✓ ✓
LYCOS ✓ ✓
MSN SEARCH ✓
MY SEARCH ✓ ✓
MY WAY ✓ ✓
NETSCAPE
OVERTURE ✓ ✓
WEB SEARCH ✓ ✓
YAHOO! ✓ ✓
FIGURE 6
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 12
believed clearly indicated advertiser-driven results
("Sponsored Links," "Sponsored Results," etc.), and these
headings remain essentially unchanged. But no single
engine tested last year used a heading testers said clearly
conveyed paid inclusion, and none do now ("Web
Results," "Web Pages," etc.).
Until the FTC or the search engine industry figures out a
way to properly disclose these listings, the majority of
consumers will probably believe they are viewing advertising-
free "Web results or "Web pages," when in reality
Web sites have paid the search engine to improve their
chances of being listed among possible search results.
■ Paid Inclusion is Less Popular, But Still Prevalent
Last year, only three search engines – Google, AOL and
Netscape – offered search results free of paid inclusion.
Since then, Ask Jeeves and MSN (both ranked among
the top 5 most-trafficked search engines) have abandoned
this controversial form of advertising.
But Yahoo, along with its AltaVista and Overture engines,
continues to display and provide these listings to many
other sites, and smaller players still supply paid inclusion
listings as well.
Yahoo also employs a pay-per-click model that some
industry watchers say lacks credibility, because it is clearly
in Yahoo’s interest to boost the rankings of these listings.
6 Overall, at least nine (not including 1st Blaze, in
which it is impossible to tell) of the 15 search engines
tested still use paid inclusion, down from 11 sites during
last year’s testing period. (See Figure 6)
■ Paid Inclusion-Free Search Engines Remain Difficult to
Identify
Although the number of major search engines offering
paid inclusion-free listings has grown, it’s doubtful many
consumers could tell. A year ago, some testers mistakenly
assumed Google, AOL and Netscape used paid inclusion,
largely because most other sites did, and these
three sites didn’t offer any prominent online statements to
the contrary. Although MSN and Ask Jeeves are now free
of paid inclusion, it’s not easy to discern this fact from the
sites themselves.
Given the controversy over paid inclusion – there is no
clear way to confirm paid inclusion programs have no
impact on search rankings – it seems odd these sites tend
to only point out the advertising-free nature of their editorial
listings on pages aimed at advertisers, rather than
announcing this fact to consumers.
■ Many Disclosures Remain Incomprehensible
In theory, disclosure statements are written for consumers,
and should be simple and straightforward. But many —
for both paid placement and paid inclusion — remain
anything but, and seem written to discourage reading.
Some disclosures also seem aimed more at advertisers
than consumers and are still peppered with jargon and
trademarked program names (especially for paid inclusion)
that left some testers baffled a year ago, and
remain confusing today. More than half the disclosures
remain virtually unchanged, and warrant improvement.
■ Content Promotion Still a Potential Cause of Confusion
A year ago, some search engines tested (AOL, MSN,
OVERALL, AT LEAST NINE
OF THE 15 SEARCH
ENGINES TESTED STILL USE
PAID INCLUSION, DOWN
FROM 11 SITES DURING
LAST YEAR'S TESTING
PERIOD.
6 Kerner, S. (2003) "Outlook: Paid Inclusion Needs to Change its Ways." Internetnews.com (December 26, 2003). Available online at http://www.internetnews.
com/ec-news/article.php/3293111
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 14
1ST BLAZE
http://www.1stblaze.com
Date tested: March 21
See Figure 7
1st Blaze is, at least, consistent. In the original report, 1st
Blaze was alone among the 15 search engines to completely
ignore the FTC guidelines — without so much as
an attempt at any kind of disclosure. Nearly one year
later, 1st Blaze remains the same and continues to earn
very low marks for transparency.
Paid Placement
1st Blaze continues to use paid placement for at least
some results but still does not explain how search results
are generated, either on the results page or anywhere
else on the site. Visually, 1st Blaze continues to return
results in three batches: the first group appears after the
statement, "Your search for ‘digital cameras’ returned the
following results"; the second appears after the heading
"Featured Sites"; while the third appears under the statement,
"Results from around the world related to digital
cameras."
RESULTS BY SEARCH ENGINE
FIGURE 7: 1ST BLAZE
Despite the query
term "digital cameras,"
1st Blaze
returned offers for a
contest, easy credit, a
dating service, and a
college degree
beneath the heading
"Featured Sites" --
just as it did for
every query last
year.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 15
As before, none of the headings offer hyperlinks to disclosures,
nor are any disclosures available elsewhere on
the site. While the first and third result groupings feature
results related to the search term queried, the "Featured
Sites" group do not. These nonsensical results remain
exactly the same almost one year later, with identical language,
irrelevant links and order. Despite the query term
"digital cameras," 1st Blaze returned the following
"Featured Sites" results: Offers for a contest, easy credit,
a dating service, and a college degree – just as it did for
every query last year.
Paid Inclusion
Whether 1st Blaze displays paid inclusion listings continues
to remain a mystery. An attempt to reach 1st Blaze
on May 11, 2005 by e-mail – the only means of contact
available anywhere on the site – bounced back, returning
the message: "I'm sorry to have to inform you that the
message returned below could not be delivered to one or
more destinations."
ALTAVISTA
http://www.altavista.com
Date tested: March 21
See Figure 8
AltaVista earned generally high marks from testers in the
2004 report but has since instituted some unhelpful
changes to the very items previously singled out for
praise. The once-visible headings now blend in with the
page, and the stand-alone disclosure hyperlinks have
been removed.
Paid Placement
AltaVista’s paid placement listings continue to appear at
the top and bottom of the results page and are still disclosed
with a "Sponsored Matches" heading, but no
longer with the easy-to-spot red font. Now, this heading
sports a far less eye-catching shade of light gray.
Although the heading is hyperlinked to a disclosure, this
fact isn’t apparent unless you mouse-over the heading,
which then turns blue. Previously, the heading was followed
by a small, gray "About" hyperlink to a disclosure
page. Testers liked the wording and positioning of this
link — which AltaVista has since stripped from the results
page.
Clicking the "Sponsored Matches" heading takes users
directly to AltaVista’s paid inclusion, rather than paid
placement, disclosure (as it did a year ago), thereby forcing
users to scroll down the page. The disclosure wording
itself remains essentially unchanged from the one
testers generally found clear and straightforward. A year
ago, this page was incorrectly labeled "AltaVista – Types
of Audio Results" at the top of the browser window. It still
is.
FIGURE 8: ALTAVISTA
AltaVista's once
easy-to-spot red
"Sponsored
Matches" heading is
now a far less eyecatching
shade of
light gray.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 16
Paid Inclusion
AltaVista continues to display paid inclusion results supplied
by its corporate parent Yahoo, whose subsidiary
Overture supplies AltaVista’s paid placement results. The
site continues to flag these results with the same inadequate
"AltaVista found X results" heading. This heading
also has gone from bright red to a less visible light gray
and is still linked to the somewhat jargon-laden disclosure
criticized by testers in 2004. As with its paid placement
listings, AltaVista removed the "About" hyperlink to the
disclosure page, leaving it up to consumers to figure out
whether the heading is hyperlinked.
AltaVista now offers content promotion listings (in-house
and sponsored content) with a new feature called
"Shortcuts." These "shortcut" hyperlinks are typically
found just below the paid inclusion heading and flagged
with an icon of an arrow in a box. Clicking this icon
opens a pop-up window with an overview of the program
but not a disclosure. The fact some "shortcuts" are
paid for by advertisers is revealed on the main disclosure
page, which describes them as "relevant, high-quality
results…from the invisible Web - sources that are not normally
available to search engines."
Be that as it may, content promotion last year proved a
troublesome gray area for WebWatch testers who were
professionally trained in information search. If these
testers could easily confuse content promotion with paid
inclusion or paid placement, there is little reason to
believe these "shortcuts" wouldn’t cause similar confusion
among consumers.
AOL SEARCH
http://search.aol.com/aolcom/webhome
Date tested: March 22
See Figure 9
AOL Search made a few changes to its search result
pages, both in style and substance. Although the disclosure
language is fundamentally unchanged, AOL has
toned the vibrant colors once used in its headings and
FIGURE 9: AOL SEARCH
AOL Search changed the color of its "Sponsored Links" heading from red to green and added the content
promotion program "Snapshots."
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 17
hyperlinks, making them somewhat less eye-catching.
Paid Placement
AOL Search’s paid placement listings still appear near
the top and bottom of the results page and remain distinguished
from other results by a heading and hyperlink
to a disclosure page. Results, then as now, are provided
by Google.
Although the wording of the heading ("Sponsored Links")
remains unchanged, AOL has muted the color somewhat
from a bright red to forest green. The disclosure hyperlink
is now a paler blue and reads "Learn more about
Sponsored Links" instead of "What is a Sponsored Link?"
That said, AOL’s headings still remain far more noticeable
than those of most other sites, and AOL remains one
of the few engines offering a separate, easy-to-spot
hyperlink to a paid placement disclosure.
Previously, the hyperlink was followed by the disclaimer:
"Provided by a third party and not endorsed by AOL,"
an unusual admission unanimously applauded by testers.
This disclaimer has since been shortened to "Provided by
a third party," which still makes the intended point.
The actual disclosures – which explained paid placement
under two separate headings: "Sponsored Links –
Search" and "Sponsored Links – Content" – created confusion
a year ago. And although the disclosure language
is relatively straightforward, the rationale behind this
dual disclosure remains unclear and confusing. Also,
users are still forced to scroll down the page to read the
entire disclosure.
Previously, AOL sometimes displayed "content promotion"
results, which included both in-house and sponsored
content selected by editors. These results were disclosed
with a heading ("Recommended Sites") and a
"Learn more about Recommended Sites" hyperlink to the
main disclosure page. These listings have been supplemented
by an additional content promotion category
called "Snapshots," which are similarly disclosed.
The "Learn more about Snapshots" link takes users to an
"AOL Search Toolbox" page, which clearly states
"Snapshots" may contain "partner content" and even
(clearly labeled) paid placement listings. "Snapshots” are
also jointly disclosed with "Recommended Sites" on the
main disclosure page.
AOL has also added a new category called "Shopping
Results," which features photos and links to search-related
products. These results are disclosed with the same
headings and hyperlinks as the other search categories,
and are explained on the main disclosure page.
Paid Inclusion
Although AOL was one of the few paid inclusion-free
sites a year ago, it failed to communicate this fact clearly,
leaving more than one tester unsure about the nature
of its main results. The disclosure language remains
unchanged, as does the potential for consumer confusion.
ALTHOUGH AOL WAS ONE
OF THE FEW SITES THAT
DIDN'T USE PAID INCLUSION
A YEAR AGO, IT
FAILED TO COMMUNICATE
THIS FACT CLEARLY, LEAVING
MORE THAN ONE
TESTER UNSURE ABOUT
THE NATURE OF THE SITE’S
MAIN RESULTS. THIS IS
STILL THE CASE.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 18
ASK JEEVES
http://www.ask.com
Date tested: March 22
See Figure 10
A year ago, Ask Jeeves won high marks from testers, who
praised its eye-catching headings and refreshingly clear
and concise disclosures. Testers’ main complaint was the
site’s faint, gray disclosure hyperlinks. Ask Jeeves has
since even further reduced the visibility of its headings,
eliminated its disclosure hyperlinks and made the disclosures
harder to find.
Paid Placement
Ask Jeeves continues to rely on paid placement results
from Google (among others), although this is harder to
determine than before, since the site eliminated its
"About" disclosure hyperlinks. The site’s "Sponsored
Web Results" heading also is not hyperlinked to a disclosure,
and the heading itself has diminished from a
big, red font to a smaller size, making it far less obvious.
Although the FTC doesn’t require search engines to have
a separate paid placement disclosure (only a heading),
last year Ask Jeeves – like most sites – went above and
beyond FTC recommendations in offering one. It still
does, but now makes it much harder to locate. Users now
can find two separate disclosures, one on a "Glossary of
search results terminology" page, and another on an
"Editorial Guidelines" page. Neither is as clear and concise
as the old disclosure, and not nearly as easy to
locate.
Paid Inclusion
Ask Jeeves used paid inclusion during 2004 testing, but
subsequently announced the termination of this program
before the report was published. The site’s "About Ask
Jeeves" section contains a link to its paid inclusion program,
which notes that it stopped accepting paid URLs
into its index as of August 31, 2004.
Then, as now, Ask Jeeves main search results were provided
by Teoma (which it owns), and found under a red
"Web Results," header that – like the paid placement
header – has gone from a big, thick font to a less noticeable
small, thin one. Ask Jeeves is now technically free of
paid inclusion – although some of these listings will continue
to appear until contracts expire – but this fact is not
readily apparent without some digging through the help
pages.
FIGURE 10: ASK JEEVES
The "Sponsored
Web Results" heading
is smaller than it
was last year, and
it is not hyperlinked
to a disclosure
statement.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 19
CNET’S SEARCH.COM
http://www.search.com
Date tested: March 28
See Figure 11
CNET’s Search.com, like other meta-search engines tested
last year, was among the worst in terms of disclosing
its search results. Since then, however, CNET has considerably
improved its disclosure practices — especially
regarding paid inclusion.
Paid Placement
Visually, Search.com looks much as it did a year ago.
Paid placement results are still found at the top and highlighted
with a prominent, black, hyperlinked "Sponsored
Links" heading that turns an underscored red when
moused-over. A year ago, clicking on this heading yielded
an expanded list of "Sponsored Links," rather than an
expected explanation about advertisers paying to be listed.
A section in the help pages entitled "Understanding
Search Results" offered no further explanation, which all
testers criticized.
Now, however, clicking the heading takes one to a disclosure
page titled "Help Using Search.com." Of the
page’s concise three sections, the second section,
"Sponsored Links," offers a clear and simple disclosure
of the meta-search engine’s paid placement program.
This disclosure is easy to understand and accessible via
another addition to the top of Search.com’s search results
page: A narrow yellow banner that features a blue
"About this page" hyperlink.
Paid Inclusion
Last year, Search.com failed to disclose the existence of
paid inclusion anywhere on its site. However, its reliance
on results from search engines known to use paid inclusion
left little doubt among testers about Search.com’s
use of this type of programming — leading some to criticize
the search engine for not being more transparent.
Search.com has since altered the wording of its disclosure
heading from "Web Results" to "Metasearch
Results." Although this wording still doesn’t clearly indicate
paid inclusion, it is at least a more accurate description
of these results. More important, this heading leads
links to a disclosure page, which offers a clear and succinct
explanation of the potential presence of paid inclusion
results.
FIGURE 11: CNET’S SEARCH.COM
CNET's Search.com
provides a clear and
concise disclosure
page that is easy to
access. The site's
explanation of its
paid placement
program within
the section called
"Sponsored Links" is
easy to understand.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 20
GOOGLE
http://www.google.com
Date tested: March 29
See Figure 12
In the 2004 report, Google was generally praised for a
clean design that clearly separated editorial results from
the ads. But it also was chided for failing to offer a paid
placement disclosure page and not making clear its main
results are paid inclusion-free. A year later, Google
remains unchanged.
Paid Placement
Google continues to use paid placement, relies exclusively
on its own results, and displays them exactly as it
did a year ago. Paid links are separated from main
results, either in the right column separated by a vertical
blue line, or across the top of the results page in blueshaded
boxes.
Both sets of paid results are flagged with a "Sponsored
Links" heading in the same thin, gray font some testers
criticized as being too faint. The headings in the blue
boxes are still hyperlinked to the advertisers, rather than
to a disclosure — a practice condemned last year and
now.
Although the FTC doesn’t require a paid placement disclosure
beyond the results page, many of the search
engines tested last year — including those using Google
results — linked to separate disclosure pages. Google’s
reluctance to do so was criticized by testers, who noted
the difficulty in finding an explanation of these results
anywhere on the site.
FIGURE 12: GOOGLE
Google clearly separates paid links from main results with its "Sponsored Links" heading and vertical
blue line on the right side of the page.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 21
Paid Inclusion
A year ago, Google was one of only three major search
engines that avoided paid inclusion and wasn’t shy
about boasting about the purity of its results in the press.7
But Google’s lack of any disclosure page got it into trouble
with testers, only two of whom could say authoritatively
that Google did not use paid inclusion. Although
Google remains paid inclusion-free, determining this fact
remains difficult.
INFOSPACE
http://www.infospace.com/home/search
Date tested: March 30
See Figure 13
This meta-search engine received mixed reviews a year
ago. Although InfoSpace did a better job than other
meta-search engines at disclosing paid placement, it
made no effort to disclose paid inclusion. In a trade press
interview following the release of WebWatch’s 2004
report, an InfoSpace manager said the site was changing
the layout and design of its results pages, as well as
its disclosure language.8 The results page, however,
remains virtually identical to the one tested, and the disclosure
page has changed for the worse.
Paid Placement
InfoSpace’s results page looks much as it did a year ago,
and it continues to rely on listings from Google, Yahoo,
Ask Jeeves, AltaVista and others. Now, as then, paid
placement listings are interspersed throughout the results
page and identified with an un-hyperlinked "Sponsored
by" heading on a listing-by-listing basis. Most testers last
year praised the somewhat novel practice of link-by-link
disclosure, although some complained the headings tended
to blend in with urls due to their identical size and
color. This remains the case, with both sharing the same
pale blue font.
FIGURE 13: INFOSPACE
8 Sherman, C. (2004) "Rating Search Engine Disclosure Practices." Search Engine Watch.com (November, 24 2004. Available online at
http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3439401
InfoSpace's very brief explanation of Pay-for-Placement lacks details to help consumers fully understand
the nature of the site's search results.
7 Morrissey, B. (2004) "Ask Jeeves Ends Paid Inclusion." DM News (March 04, 2004). Available online at http://www.dmnews.com/cgibin/
artprevbot.cgi?article_id=26718
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 22
InfoSpace still offers a single "Learn More" disclosure
hyperlink at the top of the page after a list of participating
search engines — which several testers found hard to
locate. The disclosure itself, once found, earned high
marks for being written in plain English.
InfoSpace has since added introductory language to the
top of its disclosure page that notes "the results returned
from these search engines include commercial (sponsored)
and non-commercial results." But more significantly,
the specific paid placement disclosure was reduced to
a single, unforthcoming sentence: "Pay-for-Placement:
Engines that return relevant sponsored listings."
Paid Inclusion
InfoSpace still displays paid inclusion results — a fact
borne out by its reliance on paid-inclusion engines like
AltaVista, Overture and Yahoo — and still fails to disclose
this fact – as it did in 2004.
The disclosure page contains only a passing mention of
paid inclusion, which would undoubtedly be lost on the
average consumer – and was almost lost on this reviewer
– since it occurs in a category of search partners labeled
"Other." This is defined as follows: "Other: Engines or
databases that are metasearch specifically for images,
products, audio/MP3 and multimedia files, news, as well
as Guaranteed Search Inclusion submissions."
No further explanation is provided as to what exactly
constitutes a "Guaranteed Search Inclusion submission."
Digging through other pages on the site only leads to an
offer to sign up for this paid inclusion program.
LYCOS
http://www.lycos.com
Date tested: March 31
See Figure 14
Overall, testers gave Lycos good reviews a year ago.
Most commended its easy-to-spot headings and disclosure
hyperlinks, although testers were somewhat less
enthusiastic about the disclosures themselves, which
some found either confusing or incomplete. A year later,
Lycos looks much the same but has taken steps to streamline
its disclosures.
Paid Placement
Visually, the Lycos results page has changed little. Paid
placement results are still found above and below the
main listings. Lycos has, however, ceased displaying
additional paid listings in the right column.
Lycos continues to highlight its paid placement listings
FIGURE 14: LYCOS
Lycos' disclosure page
clearly explains its paid
placement program and
invites users to contact
the site if they have
questions.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 23
with a "Sponsored Links" heading in a large, vivid,
uppercase red font. It also retains the blue "info" hyperlink
within red parentheses, one of the very few eyecatching
hyperlinks in last year’s – and this year’s – tests.
Clicking this hyperlink opens a pop-up window with virtually
the same overly brief yet easy-to-understand disclosure.
Then, as now, users are asked to answer "yes" or
"no" when asked: "Did this answer your question?"
Previously, clicking "no" took users to another pop-up
with seven links for more information, a practice testers
found tedious and unnecessarily convoluted. Lycos has
since eliminated this feature. Clicking "no" now opens an
e-mail form that invites users to submit a question.
Although just how many users bother to submit a question
to Lycos about paid placement (let alone ever visit the disclosure
page) is an open question, this solution is certainly
more user-friendly. And any consumer who visits
this page should find the answer satisfactory.
Paid Inclusion
Lycos continues to disclose paid inclusion results as it did
a year ago, with the same easy-to-spot red "Web Results"
heading.
The blue "info" hyperlink is identical to the paid placement
link, but is separated from the heading by a sentence
such as "Showing Results 1 thru 11 of 4,658,499."
Last year, one tester failed to notice the hyperlink because
of this separation, which seemed to validate FTC recommendations
about keeping hyperlinks next to headings.
Given the importance of a clear disclosure, placing the
"info" link between the heading and the number of results
found might prove more useful for consumers.
The "info" link opens a pop-up window containing the
paid inclusion disclosure, which is followed by the same
"yes" or "no" options as with the current paid placement
disclosure. The disclosure itself is essentially identical to
the one used a year ago, and is less than candid.
Although Lycos explains participants in the "InSite" paid
inclusion program do not receive favorable placement, it
still fails to give similar assurances for results provided by
its LookSmart program, and instead invites users to visit
that site to find out for themselves.
MSN SEARCH
http://search.msn.com
Date tested: March 31
See Figure 15
FIGURE 15: MSN SEARCH
MSN Search's paid
placement listings
appear in a shaded box
at the top and in a column
on the right bearing
a pale gray
"Sponsored Sites" heading.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 24
MSN looks nothing like it did a year ago. Once the second
largest search engine to offer paid inclusion, MSN
dropped these listings before the 2004 WebWatch
report was published and later terminated its content promotion
program as well. Gone is any kind of paid placement
disclosure beyond the heading, as MSN follows
Google’s lead in terms of displaying and disclosing paid
search results.
Paid Placement
MSN still relies on paid placement results from Yahooowned
Overture, although it plans to launch its own "paid
search solution" in 2006, according to the site’s advertising
page. Paid placement listings are still displayed in the
right column, separated by a faint border. These listings
also are found across the top of the results page in a new,
eye-catching, pale green box, a la Google.
MSN still discloses its paid placement listings with a
"Sponsored Sites" heading, both above the right column
and in the shaded box. Although these headings are
larger than in the past, they’re an even lighter shade of
gray than the one testers criticized last year for being too
faint.
A year ago, testers criticized MSN’s unwieldy disclosure
process, which required lots of clicking and scrolling to
arrive at what some still regarded as an incomplete disclosure.
That’s no longer an issue, since MSN has dispensed
with any further paid placement disclosure
beyond the headings, like Google. And, like Google,
uncovering information about MSN’s paid placement
program requires digging into parts of the site aimed at
advertisers, rather than consumers.
Paid Inclusion
During testing last year, MSN displayed paid inclusion
results without any disclosure whatsoever. Although
testers sharply criticized MSN for its non-existent disclosure
last year, it now has nothing to disclose. As with
Google and others, determining that MSN’s results are
paid inclusion-free also takes more than a few clicks into
parts of the site aimed at advertisers, rather than consumers.
MY SEARCH
http://www.mysearch.com/jsp/home.jsp
Date tested: April 4
See Figure 16
My Search, owned by Ask Jeeves, is a search engine
portal that allows users to choose from one of several
search engines. Last year, testers criticized inconspicuous
headings and all-but-hidden hyperlinks but were somewhat
more approving of the wording of disclosures themselves.
Almost a year later, My Search remains virtually
identical in terms of appearance and disclosure,
although the headings are slightly more visible due to a
small increase in font size.
Note: Testing last year was done using "AlltheWeb,"
which "My Search" no longer offers. Revised testing was
done using "LookSmart" instead, since the other three
options (Ask Jeeves, Google and Yahoo) are covered
elsewhere in this report.
MSN HAS DISPENSED WITH
ANY FURTHER PAID PLACEMENT
DISCLOSURE
BEYOND THE HEADINGS,
LIKE GOOGLE. AND, LIKE
GOOGLE, UNCOVERING
INFORMATION ABOUT
MSN’S PAID PLACEMENT
PROGRAM REQUIRES DIGGING
INTO PARTS OF THE
SITE AIMED AT ADVERTISERS,
NOT CONSUMERS.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 25
Paid Placement
My Search continues to rely on paid placement results
from Google and others, which are grouped at the top of
the page. The wording of the heading has changed from
"sponsored listings" to "Sponsored Links."
Last year, My Search (along with MyWay) enjoyed the
dubious distinction of the most minuscule disclosure headings
of all engines tested. The fonts were excessively tiny,
thin and faint gray — and all in lowercase. The headings
are now slightly larger, slightly darker, and use capital letters
for the first letter of each word. Although the new headings
are hardly eye-catching, they are an improvement,
and actually a darker shade of gray than AltaVista—
whose headings went from bright red to light gray.
As before, the small, blue "About Search Results" hyperlink
remains buried in the bottom right corner of the page
among a handful of other links. Clicking the hyperlink
opens a large pop-up window that still takes users to the
bottom of a large disclosure page, requiring some scrolling
to find the paid placement disclosure at the top. The
disclosure remains identical to the one most testers
praised last year — too identical, since it still refers to
"sponsored listings" instead of the reworded "sponsored
links" heading.
Paid Inclusion
When searching with the "LookSmart" engine, My Search
returns paid inclusion results. The heading, "LookSmart's
Directory," doesn’t exactly suggest paid inclusion, and the
"About Search Results" hyperlink buried in the bottom of
the page remains all too easy to miss.
Clicking the hyperlink opens the same pop-up window
that takes users directly to the "About LookSmart
Reviewed Web Results" disclosure at the bottom of the
page. The disclosure — unlike the one for "AlltheWeb"
reviewers encountered last year — clearly discloses and
explains LookSmart’s paid inclusion program.
FIGURE 16: MY SEARCH
My Search's disclosure information is somewhat
hard to find, as it is accessible from the "About
Search Results" hyperlink on the bottom right of
the page.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 26
MY WAY
http://www.myway.com/
Date tested: April 4
See Figure 17
My Way, like its sister site My Search, is owned by Ask
Jeeves and also allows users to choose from one of several
search engines. Although the search results pages of
the twin sites are almost identical, that’s where the
resemblance ends. My Way still does an even poorer job
of disclosing paid placement and paid inclusion than
"My Search," although it now features slightly more conspicuous
headings.
Note: Testing was conducted using "LookSmart," as it
was last year.
Paid Placement
Like My Search, My Way uses paid placement and displays
results from Google, Yahoo and others. As with My
Search, My Way’s heading also has been reworded
from "sponsored listings" to "Sponsored Links."
Last year, My Way used minuscule disclosure headings.
The fonts were tiny, thin and faint gray — and all in lowercase.
The headings are now slightly larger, slightly darker,
and use some capitalization. Although the new headings
are hardly eye-catching, they are an improvement.
My Way still doesn’t provide users with a separate paid
placement disclosure page. Although information about
the various search engines can be found by clicking on
the "help center" link at the bottom of the page and digging
down several pages, there is no mention of
"Sponsored Links."
Paid Inclusion
When searching with "LookSmart," My Way displays
paid inclusion results, which were found under the same
"LookSmart’s Directory" heading as "My Search." Like
last year, finding a disclosure requires some searching
for the small, blue "help center" hyperlink buried in the
bottom right corner of the page. After much clicking and
scrolling, one arrives at the same inadequate disclosure
used a year earlier.
Although one might expect My Way’s paid inclusion disclosure
of "Look Smart" results to duplicate the one used
by "My Search," this is not the case. My Way uses only
the first paragraph of the disclosure used by My Search,
which acknowledges the presence of paid listings without
explaining how they are ranked.
FIGURE 17: MY WAY
My Way's paid listings
appear beneath a
"Sponsored Links"
heading that is a more
noticeable darker gray
color than last year,
although the site still
doesn't link to a separate
paid placement
disclosure page.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 27
NETSCAPE
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/default.jsp
Date tested: April 5
See Figure 18
Like its parent AOL, Netscape regrettably has toned
down its once-vivid headings. Otherwise, little has
changed with Netscape, which testers generally praised
in 2004 for its disclosure of paid placement but criticized
for its use of content promotion.
Paid Placement
Netscape still features paid placement listings supplied
by Google, which are found above and below main
results and disclosed with a heading and hyperlink to a
disclosure page.
Although the wording of the "Sponsored Links" heading
remains unchanged, the once-bright red font is now light
gray. Similarly, the small, gray "About This" hyperlink is
even lighter than it was during testing last year. The
"About This" hyperlink still opens a pop-up window featuring
the same simple and straightforward "Sponsored
Links" disclosure praised by testers last year.
Paid Inclusion
A year ago, Netscape was one of only three sites that
didn’t offer paid inclusion search results and it still doesn’t.
Now, as then, its main results are grouped under a
"Matching Sites" heading and disclosed with an "About
This" hyperlink. The formerly vivid red heading is now
light gray, as is the hyperlink — which used to be a bit
darker, and thus more noticeable.
The "Matching Sites" disclosure is identical to the one
used last year that caused some confusion among testers.
Although Netscape relies on Google for the bulk of its
main results, its disclosure still notes that results may
include both Netscape and sponsored content chosen by
editors — which created confusion last year and now.
FIGURE 18: NETSCAPE
Although Netscape's once vivid, red
"Sponsored Links" heading is now a more
muted gray, the site's simple and straightforward
disclosure information earns high
marks.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 28
OVERTURE
http://www.content.overture.com
Date tested: April 5
See Figure 19
Overture, a commercial search engine that pioneered
paid placement back in 1998, remains virtually
unchanged from the search engine that won mostly positive
reviews a year ago. Visually, the only discernible difference
is a positive one: The inclusion of the tag line "a
Yahoo company" under the "Overture" logo, which
clearly alerts consumers to the relationship. There’s also
a banner across the middle of the engine’s homepage
that reads: "Overture products are now Yahoo! Search
Marketing products."
Paid Placement
Overture continues to display self-supplied paid placement
results and identifies them on a result-by-result basis,
with headings that are hyperlinked to a well-worded disclosure
pop-up.
The "Sponsored Listing" headings appear after the url in
a small, pale blue font within parentheses. Although the
headings don’t exactly jump out at the user, they at least
are differentiated from the black urls by color.
Conversely, the only other two search engines that identify
paid placement on a listing-by-listing basis (InfoSpace
and Web Search), use the same color for headings and
urls, making them easier to overlook.
Overture also is the only one of these three engines to
hyperlink the heading to a disclosure – although this link
isn’t immediately obvious unless moused-over. The hyperlinked
heading opens a pop-up window containing the
same paid placement disclosure deemed clear and concise
a year ago and today.
Paid Inclusion
Overture still uses paid inclusion (with results supplied by
FIGURE 19: OVERTURE
Overture indicates which results are paid listings
with a "Sponsored Listing" heading hyperlinked
to a simple, well-worded disclosure
pop-up window.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 29
Yahoo), although these results tend to appear only during
the most non-commercial of searches. These "Additional
Listing" results also are identified on a result-by-result
basis with headings hyperlinked to a disclosure page.
Clicking the link still opens a pop-up window containing
the paid inclusion disclosure, but the wording is new
since Overture used to receive these results from Inktomi.
The brief disclosure is jargon-filled at times but does an
adequate job of explaining some sites pay to be included
and that payment has no impact on rankings. This
explanation continues to earn Overture high marks for its
transparency — as well as distinguishes Overture as the
only search engine to highlight the potential for paid
inclusion on a listing-by-listing basis.
Note: Overture is the sole signatory among search
engines to WebWatch’s guidelines campaign to promote
Web credibility. Pledging to uphold the guidelines does
not, of course, mean Overture got preferential treatment
in this analysis, but since the guidelines are based on disclosure
principles, logic would indicate testers would
respond positively to the site.
WEB SEARCH
http://www.websearch.com
Date tested: April 6
See Figure 20
A year ago, Web Search ranked among the worst search
engines tested, when this meta-search engine mixed paid
placement and paid inclusion results without differentiating
between the two. A single disclosure hyperlink buried
at the bottom of the page led to a disclosure deemed
lacking by every tester. Before the 2004 report was published,
Web Search began identifying paid placement
results on a link-by-link basis and has since greatly clarified
the language on its disclosure page.
Note: Web Search allows users to view results by search
engine or by relevance. As last year, searches were conducted
by relevance.
Paid Placement
Web Search relies on paid placement results from
Google, Overture and others. Unlike a year ago, when
Web Search failed to provide any kind of a paid placement
heading, these listings are now identified via a
"sponsored by" heading on a link-by-link basis. These
un-hyperlinked headings precede the url of each listing
and use an identical font size and color, which tend to
make them blend in with the listing.
FIGURE 20: WEB SEARCH
Web Search's paid
placement results each
bear a "Sponsored by"
tag at the end of those
entries.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 30
Web Search continues to rely on a single "About Results"
hyperlink, one of 10 small gray links buried at the bottom
of the results page. As last year, this link is far too easy
to miss due to its size, location and placement.
Previously, this link led to a disclosure page explaining
sponsored sites would appear with greater frequency
during searches of a commercial nature. Most testers
found this disclosure unacceptable, especially given the
lack of any indication of paid search on the results page.
Web Search has since completely revamped its disclosure
page. This "About Results" page now contains three
separate and clearly delineated disclosures: one for
sponsored sites, one for Yahoo results, and one for Ask
Jeeves results. Although the page is short and the disclosures
no longer than a paragraph each, Web Search
helpfully provides links at the top of the page to take the
user directly to each disclosure.
Web Search’s paid placement listings are clearly disclosed
and explained in plain English under an "About
Paid Placement" heading — a rare and lauded use of
this phrase in a disclosure.
Paid Inclusion
Web Search uses paid inclusion results from Yahoo and
Ask Jeeves, whose paid inclusion listings were being
removed as their contracts expire. Although Web Search
now identifies sponsored listings, users might infer that
the non-labeled results were "pure," i.e. free of paid
inclusion, which is not the case.
Web Search’s paid inclusion disclosure page is only
available via the same hard-to-spot "About Results" link
but offers a much-improved disclosure. The previous version
was vague and confusing, using the term "sponsored
sites" to describe both paid inclusion and paid
placement listings.
Web Search now provides two paid inclusion disclosures,
one for Yahoo results, and one for Ask Jeeves.
Although the Yahoo disclosure forces one to wade
through some jargon, it adequately explains its paid
inclusion program. The Ask Jeeves disclosure is more
clear and concise.
YAHOO! SEARCH
http://search.yahoo.com
Date tested: April 6
See Figure 21
Yahoo — which every tester in 2004 praised for its striking
red headings, clearly delineated sections and unusually
visible disclosure hyperlinks — has given itself a radical
and consumer-unfriendly facelift, at least in terms of its
disclosure of paid inclusion. Yahoo has muted the color
and reduced the size of its headings, eliminated its easyto-
spot hyperlinks, removed its paid inclusion heading,
and made the paid inclusion disclosure harder to find.
Paid Placement
Yahoo continues to rely on paid placement results from its
subsidiary Overture, but its paid placement listings look
quite different and, like MSN, Yahoo is clearly following
Google’s lead.
Previously, these listings appeared at the top and bottom
of the page and were set apart from the main results by
thin red horizontal borders. Paid listings were disclosed
ALTHOUGH WEB SEARCH
NOW IDENTIFIES SPONSORED
LISTINGS, USERS
MIGHT INFER THAT NONLABELED
RESULTS WERE
"PURE," I.E., FREE OF PAID
INCLUSION, WHICH IS NOT
THE CASE.
CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH 31
with a bright red "Sponsor Results" heading and a small,
blue "What’s this?" hyperlink inside parentheses.
Additional listings appeared in the right column, under a
light gray "Sponsor Results" heading in blue-shaded
boxes.
After testing in 2004 concluded, Yahoo regrettably toned
down the color of its "Sponsor Results" heading from
bright red to light gray. Yahoo has since reduced the size
of the heading by almost half and moved it to the right
side of the page. Although the heading is now hyperlinked,
this isn’t apparent unless moused-over, when it
becomes an underscored blue.
Yahoo also eliminated its "What’s this?" disclosure hyperlinks,
which every tester lauded as among the very best in
terms of wording and visibility. Not coincidentally, these
same changes (less visible headings, stripped hyperlinks)
mirrored those implemented by Yahoo-owned AltaVista.
Yahoo has offset these unfortunate changes somewhat by
placing the sponsored results that appear above and
below the main listings in hard-to-miss, blue boxes (like
Google). And while the paid listings in the right column
are no longer shaded blue, they are set apart by a blue
line. The "Sponsor Results" heading is now hyperlinked –
although, again, not obviously.
The hyperlinked headings take users to a disclosure that’s
essentially the same as the one most testers in 2004
found simple and straightforward — albeit not nearly as
easy and intuitive to find as it was a year ago.
Paid Inclusion
Yahoo — alone among the top 5 most-trafficked search
engines — continued to intersperse paid inclusion listings
through its main results and supplied itself with
these listings. But Yahoo’s paid inclusion listings are now
presented quite differently — and disclosed far less
FIGURE 21: YAHOO SEARCH
Like MSN Search, Yahoo! has borrowed a page from Google and now presents paid placement results in
a colored box at the top and on the right in a column separated from main results with a thin vertical
line. It's not clear the "Sponsored Results" heading links to a disclosure unless moused over.