Politics and Search: It’s All About the Hamiltons (Part Two)
|
Written By Debbie Frank | October 27, 2006 | Share This
|
|
Last month, Eric Schmidt announced in a speech to the Tory party conference in Bournemouth, “The Internet has largely filled a role of funding for politicians . . . but it has not yet affected elections. It clearly will.” He advised them to be aware of how truth emerges on the Internet, and stated Google’s intentions to work more with governments to create regulations and a “truth predictor” to decipher the truthfulness of politicians’ statements.
What news reporters didn’t mention, was that the theme music from the Apprentice was playing in the background as he spoke…”money, money, money… MONEY!” That’s why all the Tories were smiling during his speech.
Don’t get me wrong, I love politics, and as an advertising sales gal, I’ve been trying for years to get political campaigns to spend ad dollars online. But, historically, politicians just don’t do search advertising - and no matter what stories are coming out about Google Bombing, the fact is that they still don’t. Sure, you might see a few ads here or there, but in terms of taking advantage of the huge opportunity that the Internet offers to motivate core consituencies, reach and influence swing votors, and respond to attack ads - politicians are seriously lacking.
Yes, politicians have websites. But the funciton of their websites doesn’t extend beyond a fundraising vehicle. As far as campaigning of actual platforms is concerned, politicians continue to be stuck in the world of radio, TV and direct mail. And when we’re talking about funding TV, radio and direct mail ads, we’re talking big money– nearly $4 billion was spent on the presidential election alone in 2004.
So what do I think when I see Google diving head first into the poltical game? (cue the music) Money! Granted, they’re not overtly making the case for political dollars being spent on paid search, but they’re putting more than a toe in the water. Consider the “truth predictor” - if people are using Google to fact-check what a candidate says, then logic follows that campaigns will advertise to those people, right? More people using Google for political information = more campaigns advertising through Google = more money for Google!
Okay, I’ve been avoiding a fairly large problem with the concept of a “truth predictor”. The public already views organic search results as “objective”, but objectivity is merely in terms of placement, not in terms of purveying the truth. Sites that rank the highest are the ones that are most search engine friendly. I’m extremely skeptical of the alleged “truth” test that Google intends to algorithmically run against the contents of a site, and it seems that with proper SEO techniques, politicians could take advantage of this public misconception. In light of the recent Google Bombing stint, Democrats are already starting wise up to this vulnerability of the public perception of search.
Humoring Google, if a “truth” algorithm was to be created, it seems to me that some form of human editor would have to be involved. But, once human editors get involved, this “truth” algorithm will become an even bigger mess between individual bias, scalability, and inconsistency. And money! Suddenly, in the pursuit of truth, it looks like the Internet would become an even more tangled Web (sorry, that one was hard to resist). Whether or not Google succeeds in building this alleged engine, I can tell you one thing — Google has a financial incentive to encourage politics in search. Call it “truth”, call it bias, but atleast we can all agree on one thing…(cue the music)…
Topics: Google, SEM: Paid Search |