• http://europeforvisitors.com Durant Imboden

    There’s an argument to be made for or against Schmidt’s definition of “products” or “services,” but since Universal Search is the Google Search default, it isn’t unreasonable for Google to fold results for news, images, videos, maps, etc. into its SERPs.

    Mind you, I’d prefer to have the option of a pure “Web Search” along with Image Search, News, etc., but that’s different from saying that Universal Search isn’t a legitimate way of presenting search results if the user hasn’t drilled down to a more specialized form of search.

  • TimmyTime

    >> “But who knows if the Senators will buy his argument. They didn’t come across as very knowledgeable about the internet in general — and search more specifically — during the hearing in September.”

    You do know that they have aides right? Plus they did ask pretty good and probing questions.

    Google could shut them up by releasing data that shows that users prefer to click more on paid ads, after all this is what’s happening. Release the data Amit. If the organic results are better, why are users clicking a lot more on ads, as sites, including mine, have been sent to Panda’s graveyard for no reason?

    The funniest part is that the guy that stole from Steve Jobs while being his ‘pal,’ and then eulogized him as a ‘friend,’ used Danny Sullivan and MG Siegler as expert sources. It even beats his saying that since another site raised $6 million there’s enough competition.

  • http://blog.cpcstrategy.com Andrew Davis

    As a user of Google and Google products it’s interesting to see how Eric referred to their products and what they do. Especially the differentiation of Google Product Search from other comparison shopping engines.

  • Shivaun

    I am the CEO of Foundem, one of the companies at the centre of the European Commission’s formal antitrust investigation into Google.

    During the recent Senate Antitrust hearing into Google, Senator Lee referred extensively to a Foundem study of the US price comparison market, which found that Google consistently places its own price comparison service at or near the top of its search results for virtually all product- and price-comparison-related searches.

    We have produced a video highlighting some of the more important inaccuracies and inconsistencies of Mr Schmidt’s testimony (and, as it turns out, his written response). Anyone who would like to understand more about the subtext of the hearing or the semantic acrobatics of Mr Schmidt’s written answers might find this video illuminating: http://www.searchneutrality.org/foundem/highlights-google-senate-antitrust-hearing

    Shivaun Raff
    CEO and Co-Founder of Foundem and SearchNeutrality.org (a Foundem initiative)

  • vinsin

    Isn’t this Google’s favor to the it’s one of the product blogspot

  • http://www.seo-theory.com/ Michael Martinez

    On the first point, it’s NOT “semantics”. He is simply lying.

    On search market share he is technically correct, as I have been pointing out for years. There is a whole lot of Web search going on beyond the advertising page view counts that the bogus search market share metrics report.