Google’s New European “Antitrust” Search Results: Here’s What They’ll Look Like

google-eu-featuredI’ve found documents associated with the Google-EU settlement proposal that offer mock-ups of how the new, regulated SERPs will look. It’s very interesting and greatly clarifies the settlement terms and how they will be implemented practically. These mockups look quite different (and less “disruptive”) than what I imagined.

There are three basic scenarios: where Google sees direct monetization from the SERP, indirect monetization in the vertical or no monetization (e.g., News in Europe). In each case the presentation and the rules will be slightly different. The screens below are all mock-ups that have been supplied to the EU by Google as part of the formal settlement proposal.

The image immediately below reflects what the new page will look like in a situation where sponsored results appear in the SERP (e.g., product listing ads). The current label “sponsored” is expanded to include “Google Shopping results.” This is intended to clearly indicate these results are from Google.

New Google EU SERP 1

At the bottom of the box are “site 1, site 2 or site 3.” These are going to be paid links (based on an auction). Companies eligible to bid on these links will be any vertical aggregator or supplier of multiple products in the category — in this case cameras. For example, Amazon or an OEM (e.g., Nikon) could equally bid on these positions.

In each scenario there will be informational pulldowns (from the “i” icon) to explain what the results are.

Below is a version of this same camera/product result in a mobile context. The three links will appear after a click under “other sites.”

New Google EU SERP mobile

In a situation where Google monetizes the search result indirectly (e.g., local/Maps) the three links will essentially be the top three organic vertical/directory links that would appear on the SERP. In a restaurant search scenarios those could be Yelp, OpenTable and Restaurants.com (hypothetically), although the specific links will be different across Europe. The links will not be auctioned.

New Google EU SERP 2

The text above the local listings reads “Google Places Search,” again with an informational link to further clarify that these results are from Google. Beside that heading are the three links to competitors’ sites. Below, once again, is the mobile version of this result:

New Google EU SERP mobile 2

In the third scenario, where there is no monetization whatsoever, there’s also no requirement to present the three links.

The following example shows a news search result. Here “news for X” is replaced by “Google News Search.” And the cluster of top news results is slightly separated from the rest of organic results. Again, in this “no monetization” scenario, there are no competitor links.

New Google EU SERP 3

While the three competitive links are likely to drive some traffic to Google alternatives, from a user experience standpoint this is not the radical change I was imagining. In addition there’s apparently no requirement or constraint around where Google can put universal search results on the page. In other words, it can still show products, maps, flight search and so on, where it likes.

Many Google critics will undoubtedly complain that the settlement and these pages don’t go far enough. Indeed, FairSearch has already expressed disapproval of this approach in a statement just issued:

“FairSearch applauds the Commission for laying out a clear and compelling case that Google is abusing its dominant position by giving its own products preferential treatment in search results. This is an important conclusion that must lead to meaningful remedies.

We have always said that the best remedy for consumers and innovation would be to require Google to apply the same policy to search results for its own products as it does to all others.

 However, Google’s proposed commitments appear to fall short of ending the preferential treatment at the heart of the Commission’s case based on formal complaints from 17 companies. Google’s own screen shots in its proposal (see p. 30) shows it seeks approval to continue preferential treatment for its own products.

We will study the proposal in detail and offer an empirical analysis based on actual tests.”

It is now also my understanding that while the market test is intended to solicit comments from rivals, critics and the general public, the terms of the settlement — including the mock-ups above — have been carefully negotiated between Google and The European Commission.

The Commission is not required to listen to Google’s most vocal critics if it choses not to (or modify the proposal if they’re not satisfied). And given that these terms were developed jointly during many months of discussions between the parties, it is unlikely that there will be material changes to the settlement — regardless of how upset or vocal the opposition is.

Related Topics: Channel: Industry | Features: Analysis | Google: Antitrust | Google: Critics | Google: Legal | Google: Outside US | Legal: Regulation | Top News

Sponsored


About The Author: is a Contributing Editor at Search Engine Land. He writes a personal blog Screenwerk, about SoLoMo issues and connecting the dots between online and offline. He also posts at Internet2Go, which is focused on the mobile Internet. Follow him @gsterling.

Connect with the author via: Email | Twitter | Google+ | LinkedIn



SearchCap:

Get all the top search stories emailed daily!  

Share

Other ways to share:
 

Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion. Comments using foul language, being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion will be deleted. Comments may also be removed if they are posted from anonymous accounts. You can read more about our comments policy here.
  • http://twitter.com/durant_imboden Durant Imboden

    I’m reminded of the adage to “be careful what you wish for.” Branding Google’s own results as Google results is likely to make them more appealing than the competitors’ alternatives.

  • Paul Ryan

    I assume Bing, Yahoo, et al, will need to do the same?

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

    Seems kind of a weak proposal to me. What if the users don’t like the links? Will Google be able to move them around to give better (more fair) placement?

  • http://twitter.com/onreact_com Tad Chef

    This is ridiculous. Nobody will notice those other links. Hello Kafka!

  • http://ftc.gov/ MonopolizedSearch

    Organic search is dying folks. I don’t know why most people do not want to admit it. Is it just because they are in a state of denial? Regardless of how Google labels their stuff, organic listings are getting pushed deeper down the page. In a year or two the top organic listings may be on page 2 or 3, depending on how many Adwords users buy links.

  • NewSearch

    How does this remove the problem of Google favouring it’s own services? It seems like those competitor links are not prominent at all, and actually make the competing sites look quite weak. Surely, the competitor listings should be of equal size and stature.

    To add insult to injury, the competitors then have to pay, when Google doesn’t. How is this a level playing field? Google have also moved these competitors out of the free results and put them in a diminished and paid position. I guess it’s just win, win, win for Google, now they own the marketplace.

    There are no options in Google’s results any more. Take any search such as “brown leather handbags” there is only Google shopping result and 3 pages of merchants. I cant see how this is useful for the consumer, because they have to individually check all of these sites and cannot compare them side-by-side, other than on Google shopping. This seems like a total monopoly.

    This is quite a different story on Bing. They seem to have no problem in giving customers a resonable choice of different services.

Get Our News, Everywhere!

Daily Email:

Follow Search Engine Land on Twitter @sengineland Like Search Engine Land on Facebook Follow Search Engine Land on Google+ Get the Search Engine Land Feed Connect with Search Engine Land on LinkedIn Check out our Tumblr! See us on Pinterest

 
 

Click to watch SMX conference video

Join us at one of our SMX or MarTech events:

United States

Europe

Australia & China

Learn more about: SMX | MarTech


Free Daily Search News Recap!

SearchCap is a once-per-day newsletter update - sign up below and get the news delivered to you!

 


 

Search Engine Land Periodic Table of SEO Success Factors

Get Your Copy
Read The Full SEO Guide