Comments
holokinesis t1_ja5wq1q wrote
This is the topic here:
> One of the biggest concerns is that if AI-powered search engines provide all the information people need without them having to click through to any websites, it will reduce traffic and ad revenue for publishers.
No site visiting => no content creation => no reliable information.
potatodrinker t1_ja7060k wrote
Ads will just be sold into AI responses? Asking Chat how to stop bleeding? For a limited time, get 40% first aid training with (company name) if you bleed 1 Litre before 31 March. Sign up today.
BigMax t1_ja7m0oh wrote
Well, that covers some ads, sure. When you are directly selling a product or service, they can easily put ads alongside the AI response.
But some portion of ads are directly geared towards driving traffic. I might pay to get you to come read my blog, or in general want you to come to my site for information or some other reason. If the AI gives users that thing right away, there’s no need for them to click through to any other site.
Specific example… I might search how to get rid of mice on my house. AI might recommend traps. Awesome, the trap manufacturers could put an ad right there!
But what about the countless sites that pest amateurs and professionals have, that give you advice? That have content about mice, where you might read several before finding out what you need? Now the AI already gives you that info - no need for any other sites. Those sites would throw ad money away, because why would you bother going to them now?
potatodrinker t1_ja7mdaf wrote
Yeah true. Guess I'll have to learn some new skills and walk away from my six figure Google Ads specialist job soon...
BigMax t1_ja7ocvu wrote
Not sure i was saying that… I certainly could be wrong. I guess you’re saying AI won’t affect advertising then? I’d certainly be open to the decent chance I’m wrong! Maybe some categories of ads will go away but some new ones will appear?
My main point was that some ads are there to get you to click through for content, and that if the content is already right there in front of you, what would the ad do?
potatodrinker t1_ja96byc wrote
There's a type of ad called native that more closely resembles an article, or useful info for the user even if its still trying to link a brand to it. That might be better positioned to fit into an AI environment if done well and not rammed down users throats as a "sponsored response"
josefx t1_ja6y1t0 wrote
Just use an AI to generate content and another AI to check the generated content against Google search results.
Odysseyan t1_ja7cio4 wrote
The point is there will not be any NEW verified content this way. Think about newspaper sites. Why should they publish new articles when they don't get ad revenue since no one visits their site and just asks an AI what's new?
Sure the AI can just make up some headlines but whats the point of it then?
josefx t1_ja7e0ru wrote
With the amount of time it takes to train an AI you wouldn't find any new content using AI powered search engines anyway, the current year is and will always remain 2022.
SnipingNinja t1_ja7ev7d wrote
What would actually happen is AI search engine companies will run their own news sites too
AzulMage2020 t1_ja9phwf wrote
"GASP! People don't buy things if they don't have money! Regardless of how many pop-ups we throw at them!!!! What do now????"
marketrent OP t1_ja5s8gw wrote
Excerpt from the linked content^1 by Ryan Joe, Lara O'Reilly, and Lauren Johnson:
>As Microsoft and Google duke it out to control the future of search, the advertisers and publishers who rely so much on search-generated traffic are struggling to figure out how it will impact their businesses.
>"It's possibly the most enormous set of changes in the tech industry since the birth of the web in the '90s," said Paul Bannister, chief strategy officer of CafeMedia, which oversee the ads business for about 4,000 publishers, like Merriam-Webster and the food blog Half-Baked Harvest.
>While both Microsoft and Google are racing to bring AI-powered search to consumers, they have said nothing to either publishers or advertisers about how these tools will impact traffic and ad revenue, multiple sources told Insider.
>Microsoft declined to comment. Google didn't respond in time for publication.
>"It's simultaneously exciting and terrifying," said Chris Schimkat, global head of analytics at the IPG-owned performance marketing agency Reprise Digital.
>"But for a lot of marketers in particular, if this is taking over content writing and image generation, where can we continue to provide value? And that's going to be a pretty prominent question."
>
>One of the biggest concerns is that if AI-powered search engines provide all the information people need without them having to click through to any websites, it will reduce traffic and ad revenue for publishers.
>Bannister doesn't think AI-powered search will change advertising drastically in the short term, but even small changes can have an impact on business.
>"If it decreases search click throughs by 3%, that's 3% less page views to a lot of sites," he said. "So I think it's right to be worried. But we also want to get the facts and figure out how it's going to work and what are the new opportunities."
>Many publishers are familiar with how their traffic has been chipped away by search engines as they've evolved.
>"We've been dealing with this shrinking search landscape for many years now, as Google and the likes have tried to answer these questions directly within search results," said Kyle Sutton, director of SEO and product at the publisher Gannett, which owns USA Today and local news sites.
>"Look no further than sports scores. You know that used to be guaranteed traffic?"
>Now, when people search for scores or similar types of basic information, Google populates the answer in a module called a Featured Snippet on the search page, Sutton noted.
^1 Ryan Joe, Lara O'Reilly, and Lauren Johnson for Axel Springer’s Insider, 10 Feb. 2023, https://www.businessinsider.com/the-search-war-between-microsoft-and-google-has-the-ad-industry-caught-in-the-crosshairs-2023-2
taisui t1_ja72wzm wrote
You mean I don't have to buy something just because the Internet told me to? How shocked. /s
[deleted] t1_jaa49kc wrote
[removed]
M4err0w t1_ja7f4uo wrote
also ai search engines use like 50 times more ressources in some server center out there, so... honestly lawmakers just outlaw this today
Financial_Owl_7245 t1_ja721fc wrote
Whatever Google does, I am certain it is 100 times better than anything Microsoft ever could do.
pancakeQueue t1_ja7yl3i wrote
And then kill it 5 years later.
hawkeye224 t1_ja7uh1b wrote
Lol, why is that? Microsoft has good products too. I think Azure is more successful than GCP for example.
[deleted] t1_ja7vnap wrote
[deleted]
IMTrick t1_ja8ozeo wrote
Now do that, but just include search.
I'm not a fan of either company, but they're not even in the same league there.
AmalgamDragon t1_ja9rfxe wrote
Yes. Google's search has become increasingly terrible to point of being useless for anything that isn't popular and Microsoft's is still useable.
Google's search used to be the best by far. But, they haven't kept their eye on the ball.
[deleted] t1_ja81e4z wrote
[deleted]
aquarain t1_ja60vse wrote
There is no search war. 19 years after the Microsoft CEO swore to kill Google, their efforts to compete are still a rounding error. The billions spent on the attempt could have solved world hunger, polio, Guinea Worm and built a human colony on Mars.
blueSGL t1_ja65i86 wrote
> There is no search war.
yep nothing to see here, move along...
https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/chatgpt-caused-code-red-at-google-report-says/
77magicmoon77 t1_ja65j7h wrote
But Bilk Gates wants you to survive on insect protein foe diet ... so there is that.
Rkozlow t1_ja5umhb wrote
There is a internet search battle? Are they talking about Bing? I thought that was only good for porn.