The broad modifier feature was rolled out in July 2010 in the U.S and was mostly aimed at scaling up those accounts not already using regular broad match type. Search marketers have to then build new broad keywords using “+” signs to effectively unlock the broad modifier feature.

Because it requires some time and effort, not all advertisers have actually implemented this feature – particularly those advertisers already using broad match type. Some of our clients reluctant to use standard broad match type did test broad modifier, and it turned out that it performed surprisingly well – with an incremental revenue volume up to 15% while maintaining efficiency on target.

The new matching behavior for exact and phrase match types announced on April 17th  (and just rolled out last week) is going one step further since it potentially impacts all advertisers by automatically updating the default matching behavior from standard exact and phrase matching to a more lenient matching behavior including plurals, misspellings, and other close variants.

In that sense, it can be seen as a logical sequel to the broad modifier feature. Advertisers have the option to opt out – however, most of them will allow the update to occur.

There has been a lot of speculation and skepticism about the latter one, as it seems it is just another way for Google to generate more ad revenue. Hence the question: what are the first takeaways a couple of days after the new matching behavior roll-out?

Where Can I See The Impact In AdWords?

While I couldn’t find any details in AdWords about those incremental queries corresponding to “plurals, misspellings and other close variants” in AdWords, you can now see that the “Other search terms” section shows impressions and clicks even for exact keywords:

In this particular case (a strong trademark keyword in exact match), we have measured an impressive 18% lift in impressions at a stable CTR. Conversions did follow with a slightly higher conversion rate and a slightly lower cost per order – not significantly though.

Overall Impact On Traffic & Conversion Volume

In this section, I will attempt to answer two questions: what is the average impact on traffic? And what is the average impact on conversion volume?

According to Google: “on average, the new matching behavior increased AdWords search clicks by 3%, with comparable CPCs”. Looking at 15 top brands managed through eSearchVision’s proprietary search query report, early findings show that clicks from queries not containing the actual keywords actually increased by 3.5/4.5% on average with comparable CPCs.

More specifically, the below graph shows that the percentage of clicks generated through exact and phrase without close variants has slightly decreased, while the percentage of “All Other Queries”, i.e. when the keyword is not included in the query, has increased from 23% on average the week before the roll-out up to roughly 26-29% the week after.

In the meantime, conversions have increased by 2.0/3.0% on average. However we can expect this number to go slightly up over time due to the post-click effect – since users who clicked over the last couple of days are likely to convert in the next couple of days or even weeks.

Main Takeaway

The new exact and phrase matching behavior seems relatively promising so far. As expected (and even a bit more than expected) we’re seeing more impressions and clicks at a stable CPC, as well as incremental conversions, even though conversions are not following as fast as the clicks for the time being.

As a result, search marketers no longer need to create additional keywords using the broad modifier feature. The new matching behavior seems to be doing pretty much the same job with no effort. Just keep an eye on search query performance and maybe add more negative exact and phrase keywords if you identify any poor performing or irrelevant queries since this roll-out.

Since they previously migrated all Yahoo algorithmic search results to Bing, the transition is now complete in these countries. The migration has been underway since February.

Next up for the transition comes Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Yahoo and Microsoft will start working with partners to make the change this month. The companies have typically offered migration assistant software, to help smaller Yahoo Search Marketing advertisers make the switch with as little pain as possible.

Previously, the Search Alliance migrated advertisers in North America and India.

The migration of advertisers follows the transition of all algorithmic results worldwide, on desktop and mobile, in 2011.

Besides the name change, marketing collateral and web sites will incorporate the large beautiful images that the Bing consumer site has become known for — to unify the brand experiences.

“Previously, there was just a lot of confusion around our brand,” Matt Lydon, general manager of Microsoft’s SMB Advertising group, told me.

The branding doesn’t need to be changed for larger enterprises and agencies because they already have account managers at Yahoo, via the Search Alliance relationship, who can explain how everything fits together. However, for small businesses, there was a big disconnect between the consumer Bing brand and what happened when they try to advertise on the search engine.

Small businesses are a particularly important audience for Bing, given the strength of Google AdWords among smaller advertisers. Since many of these folks are acting as CEO, CFO and CMO in their small businesses — not to mention running operations — it’s a challenge to get them to devote attention to a second PPC solution. Microsoft is hoping making things easier to understand will lower some of the existing barriers.

The company has already rolled out a new branded landing page for small- and medium-sized businesses, building on other efforts it’s making to simplify everything to attract these marketers. Lydon says it’s his group’s top priority and one of the top two priorities for engineers, as well.

Part of that effort has been to simplify the sign-up process for new advertisers. Previously, the company had “somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 to 20 pages” of information to fill out to sign up for an account. It took around 20 minutes. “We now have that down to two pages and five minutes,” Lydon said.

Additionally, the company is working to hide away some of the advanced — and more complicated — functionality in adCenter, hoping to make it easier to understand for new advertisers.

“We make them [the advanced features] available, but they [the advertisers] don’t get hit with all that in the initial phase,” said Lydon.

The new branding will be rolled out on web pages and marketing collateral that goes to current small- and medium-sized advertisers first, and will slowly be rolled out to every other communication platform, including those aimed at bringing aboard new businesses. On something public-facing like Facebook, the company will have two separate pages — Bing for consumers and Bing Business for advertisers.

Social Media Examiner announced the results of its fourth annual survey, which this year had replies from more than 3,800 social media marketers around the world.

When asked what other marketing channels they use, search engine optimization (SEO) was the No. 2 response behind e-mail marketing. Paid search — or “online ads” as the survey called it — was far down the list at number six. Sixty-five percent of social media marketers say they use SEO, compared to only 38 percent who use paid search advertising.

B2B social marketers were slightly more likely to do SEO (67 percent) than their B2C counterparts (62 percent).

Going forward, 68 percent of respondents said they’re planning to increase their SEO efforts — a number that’s down slightly from 71 percent in 2011. Only nine percent this year said they have no plans to use SEO.

Only 43 percent of the social media marketers surveyed say they’re planning to increase their use of PPC advertising.

As you’d expect, Facebook was the No. 1 social networking site with 92 percent adoption. Google+ was a distant sixth, but most respondents say they’re planning to use Google+ more in the future. I’ve written up more about that aspect of the study on Marketing Land: Survey: Only 40 Percent Of Marketers Are Using Google+, But Many Plan To Change That.

(Stock image via Shutterstock.com. Used under license.)

Currently, the ads are provided through ad fees from Google and Bing. Blekko has yet to build out their own ad network.

Rich Skrenta, Blekko founder and CEO said, “we’re still ironing out the kinks.” They are testing out the RPMs, page revenue per 1000 ad units. Skrenta said he expects the CPMs to be worth between $50 and $100 because of the targeted nature of search ads.

I have yet to see any signs of ads on the search engine but they are indeed testing it. If you find an example of an ad, please share the query and an image in the comments below.

Related Stories:

• Blekko Expands: Bigger Index, More Slashtags & New Design
• Blekko Slashes More Spam With “Zorro” Update
• Blekko Adds Facebook Comments To Search Results (But Why?)
• Blekko’s SEO Tools: What Information Do They Provide?
• How To Track Emerging Search Engine Blekko In Web Analytics Systems
• Blekko Tightens Privacy Options, Will Keep User Data Only 48 Hours
• Google And Blekko Head-To-Head: Blekko Lives To Fight Another Day
• Blekko Bans Content Farms From Its Index

Commercials Drive Searches

Since the 2009 Super Bowl, I’ve monitored how the ads influence search interest, and every year, the trend has been the same. As people watch the Super Bowl, they search for everything they’re watching: teams, players, performers, and of course, commercials. The trend continues the day after the game as people talk about the commercials and turn to Google (and Bing) to watch them again. Take a look at the spiking searches for February 7th, the day after the game according to Google Trends:

Nearly every search is Super Bowl related, and searchers are clearly seeking out the ads. As you can see from search #8, commercials often cause people to search for the brands directly. Google Insights for Search shows that brands that advertised saw significant search spikes on Sunday. See for instance, the search volume for [bud light platinum].

They seemed to have really liked those ads in Iowa.

Google reported that searches for [super bowl ads] were 122 times higher this week and that the big search winners were Acura, GoDaddy, and M&Ms.

Where Are Advertisers Sending Potential Customers?

As I do every year, I took note of what advertisers included in the commercial. Did they include a web site URL? A Facebook page? Did they seem to even be aware of this crazy new thing called the internet? And then I looked at the advertisers’ search visibility. I was looking for the following flow:

Last year, many only paid attention to a flow like this:

I understand that Super Bowl commercials are about branding, not necessarily instant purchases, and I realize other positive outcomes exist (discussions on social media and the like). I’m just saying that if someone is searching for you, you may as well show up. And if you’ve gotten potential customers to view your commercial, you may as well make it easy for them to view more information about your products.

This year, many advertisers simply included their domain name in the ad (33 of the 53 advertisers I tracked did this). This approach can help cut out the search step, although as the response to the Dockers ad during the 2010 Super Bowl showed, advertising a URL causes people to, well, search for the URL. So you can’t always cut out the search step, no matter how hard you try.

Last year’s Super Bowl ads were all about Facebook fan pages (that often were impossible to find; don’t say “find us on Facebook” unless that’s an achievable task). This year, only fourof the ads included a nod to Facebook and all used actual URLs. Pepsi Max even went with an easy to remember redirect to Facebook: pepsimax.com/facebook.

Four commercials advertised Twitter hashtags (last year was the first year for this, and then it was mostly only for movie trailers). I was astonished to find that when a hashtag was included in a commercial, people instantly started using it to tweet about the commercial and the hashtag began trending. (As you can see, even the bands with songs in the commercials started trending.)

Of course, there’s a risk in this strategy. Things may go really well, as Audi found with #SoLongVampires, or very awry as Bud Light found with #MAKEITPLATINUM. (Did people really even use the same capitalization in the hashtag as was used in the commercial? Amazing.)

What began trending on Twitter also tended to show search spikes. For instance, take a look at searches for [echo and the bunnymen]:

So what we talk about, we also search for.

The Future is… QR Codes?

It may have seemed like GoDaddy used the same tired formula as always in their ads (although, apparently sex does sell, so I can’t knock sticking with something that works), but in fact, they tried something new this year: including a QR code in the ad.

The online version of the commercial includes the QR during the entire length of the ad, but when aired during the Super Bowl, it appeared only briefly at the end, so I’m not sure if  anyone managed to pull up the QR code reader on their mobile phone, rush to the TV, and scan it before it disappeared from the screen. Including it in the online version seems even more nonsensical though, as the idea seems to be that you’re watching the ad on your computer, see the QR code, scan it with your phone, and are brought to the godaddy.com site on your phone. I would guess that including a link to the web site in the commercial so that you can simply click and access the web site on your computer would make entering your credit card information for all those domain names quite a bit easier.

Scoring Search Visibility

So how did advertisers do in search? It’s difficult to come up with exact search coverage percentages. For instance, if a brand advertised multiple products and ranked well in search results for one product but not the other does the tick mark for that brand go in the yes or no column for search visibility? What if the product showed up for its name but not for its tagline?

For the purposes of the stats below, I used the following guidelines:

• I counted each brand once, even if they aired ads for multiple products
• If they ranked organically for at least one of brand, product, or tagline queries, I put a yes in the organic search column
• If they had a paid search ad for at least one of brand, product, or tagline queries, I put a yes in the paid search column

In a follow up column, I’ll point out some interesting choices, but for now, let’s just look at how well advertisers thought out web sites, search, and social media.

Of the 53 brands I tracked:

• 33 ended the ad with a URL to the brand site, 4 went with a Twitter hashtag, and 4 sent viewers to Facebook.
• 44 bought a paid search ad
• 51 ranked organically for the brand name (although far fewer ranked for the promoted taglines or hashtags)

Chrysler and YouTube

Last year, Chrysler’s Eminem ad was one of the most popular commercials of the game. I found it odd at the time that although they designed their site’s home page to tie in quite well to the vibe of that ad, they bought search ads to the commercial on YouTube. I felt they lost an opportunity to further interact with potential customers and lost some control of the experience (related videos could easily be to competitors, for instance). Their flow looked like this:

That’s not a bad outcome, but I thought that if they had used paid search to drive visitors to the commercial on their site, they might have been able to better leveraged the opportunity. This year, Chrysler once again had a much-talked-about ad, and they decided to mix things up a bit.

For [chrysler]-related searches, the paid search ad points at their home page, which is a great tie in to the commercial. But for other searches, they’ve once again chosen to promote YouTube.

This time, the YouTube link makes a lot more sense as it’s to the channel, so there are no competitor links and the entire page is focused on getting votes for the YouTube AdBlitz, engaging socially, and even includes an ad for the car featured in the commercial. All in all, I fully support this approach. They keep the branded searches pointing at their home page (after all, not everyone searching for the brand is searching for the commercial), which is tightly-integrated with the campaign, and they send those looking for the commercial to a page designed to specifically engage with them.  What a difference a year makes.

2012 Paid Search Ad to YouTube:

2011 Paid Search Ad to YouTube:

Acura NSX vs. Bud Light Platinum

We’ve already seen that the #makeitplatinum hashtag strategy both worked and didn’t work for Bud Light (they definitely got it trending, but for perhaps the wrong reasons). What about organic search visibility? Sadly, the brand web site doesn’t appear at all in Google for searches for [bud light platinum] (although they have bought a paid search ad to the YouTube page).

Acura NSX, on the other hand (which was a spiking search on Monday), does an excellent job with organic search, taking the top spot with a page devoted to it. (Although including the commercial on the page would have been a good idea.)

Overall, I felt brands did a much better job of keeping things simple and driving viewers to interesting, relevant pages that engaged them. Watch for my next post in the coming days for some specifics on what went right and spectacularly wrong.

(Stock image via Shutterstock.com. Used under license.)

Related:

• Super Bowl 2012: What Time Does It Start?
• Super Bowl 2011: Commercials and Search Visibility
• Super Bowl 2010: Commercials and Search Visibility
• Super Bowl 2009: Commercials and Search Visibility

There’s a great deal of data already in the market about SMB adoption of social media. What they show is that between 45 percent and 70 percent of SMBs say they already have a presence on social media sites (mostly Facebook).

Borrell reports that between 60 and 64 percent of SMBs have a formal presence on social media sites. An earlier 2011 study by Palore found that 58.2 percent of SMBs are on either Facebook or Twitter. And a late-November survey from MerchantCircle found that about 70 percent of SMBs said they promoted themselves using Facebook.

Borrell also found that social media marketing was just behind paid-search for SMBs in 2011. Given the ambivalence that many SMBs feel about paid search (though not organic) one could expect that social media advertising and other promotional spending would surpass paid search in 2012.

Borrell’s report estimates that roughly $6.2 billion was spent in 2011 on social media advertising (all in) and that Facebook captured or saw about 65 percent of that. The SMB-specific component of social media spending is smaller, roughly $1.14 billion, according to the report.

Another interesting piece of data in the report is the way that SMBs measure social media success or ROI. Most use “new customers” as the key metric (it’s not clear how many actively or successfully track that however). Additional fans/followers comes in at number two.

Borrell says, “On average each [SMB] has a network of more than 4,000 friends and followers. But this statistic is skewed by a few respondents who claim tens of thousands or more. Perhaps a better gauge is the median reported: about 250 followers.”

Yet even 250 fans/followers is probably more than a substantial percentage of SMBs have on their pages. The mid-2011 Palore study argued that about 38 percent of SMBs on Facebook had very few fans/Likes and very little engagement. The percentage of SMBs showing limited follower activity was even larger on Twitter (44.5 percent).

The Borrell report illustrates the increasing demand for social media marketing among SMBs. However it doesn’t explore the gap between that demand and the often ineffectual or inept social media efforts of those same businesses.

Related Entries

• Survey Says SEO The Single Most Important Marketing Channel For SMBs
• Report: 58 Percent of SMBs On Social Media Sites, Most Have Only Limited Engagement
• SMBs Need Most Help With Keyword Selection, Tracking
• 3 Ways Small Businesses Can Use Social Media To Drive Customer Loyalty
• Local Search Complexity = SMB Frustration
• Search + Social Media Increases CTR By 94 Percent: Report
• Nifty Hard Core Local SEO Tactics From SMX Advanced
• Local Search Marketers Share Ranking Factors
• Infographic: Local Search Evolved
• Recent Trends Should Guide How Businesses Grow Local Search Strategies

In life, timing can be everything. But in marketing, it can make the difference between a sale and a missed opportunity. That’s why the topic of recency is so important to marketers. Fortunately, search retargeting can help marketers capitalize on recency to drive performance.

Understanding Recency & The Window Of Opportunity

The concept of recency has been a key element in marketing for decades. It speaks to customer engagement in relation to time. For example, a consumer who interacted with your brand two days ago is more engaged and has a better recency score than someone who did the same a year ago.

In short, recency informs marketers about the window of opportunity to reach a consumer. I think industry legend Erwin Ephron said it best:

“… there is a window of opportunity for the ad message preceding each purchase. Advertising’s job is to influence the purchase. Media’s job is to put the message in the window.”

The Problem With Search & The Window

For today’s marketers, putting the message in the window is about using digital media to reach prospective customers at the optimum moment, when intent is expressed and they are in the proper mindset to receive your message and purchase your product.

While this is exactly what search does, it only addresses a small fraction of the effective recency window.

Why?

First, while search engines offer consumers immediate results to their queries, some conversations — depending on the vertical — require more detail or time to resonate with consumers.

In other words, to properly hit the window, advertising may need to be both now and later.

Second, only some initial offers get through — fewer than 5% of search results are actually ever clicked.

What Search Retargeting Can Do for Your Window of Opportunity

Search retargeting extends the brand conversation with a consumer beyond the initial point of exposure or expression of intent. Because of that, it gives marketers a better chance of hitting their window of opportunity.

In fact, some search retargeting solutions enable marketers to retarget consumers with granular recency settings that span from instant all the way to a full month out. Capitalizing on recency within search retargeting allows marketers to fine tune their efforts in regard to both timing as well as messaging. Doing exactly that will help them boost campaign performance.

Marketers can also improve performance in search retargeting by understanding how recency (the time between the search event and when an impression is served) impacts their success metrics, whether those metrics are CTR, CPC, ROAS, or something else.

The impact of recency will vary with different verticals, as well as with different campaigns within the same vertical. Once data is collected on the impact of recency on a particular campaign, it can be used to fine-tune campaigns.

Whether you use manual optimization efforts or automated multi-variate optimization algorithms, your recency data will help inform you, so you can raise bids for impressions within the valuable recency windows and lower bids for impressions outside of these windows.

The Impact of Recency On Search Retargeting Campaigns

In a recent study, Simpli.fi analyzed aggregate performance data for search retargeting campaigns over a 30-day period. We examined click-thru rates segmented by recency: delivery of impressions from Instant (on the page after the search results), all the way to 30-days post initial search.

The results indicate that the highest impression loads were delivered between one day and one week of identified intent, while the highest CTR performance was clustered within earlier stages of exposure, 30 minutes or less. And while such aggregate data is interesting, the more powerful data speaks to how recency impacts individual campaigns.

For example, the study shows that the tech vertical tends to favor a shorter recency window than the clothing vertical, but within those verticals different types of keywords (eg, upper funnel vs lower funnel) can perform differently.

How To Make Recency Work for Your Retargeting Campaigns

Below are four tips to help you best capitalize on recency in your search retargeting campaigns, whether these adjustments are made manually or “automagically” by optimization algorithms:

1.  Start with long windows, refine to shorter windows

2.  Analyze recency by vertical and campaign

3.  Analyze recency by keyword type

4.  Adjust based on your goals

Overall, by leveraging recency with search retargeting, marketers have a better shot at hitting their window of opportunity and boosting their campaigns’ performance. Smart marketers will be sure to tap into recency with their search retargeting efforts.

But does this overlap really exist, and does 1+1 really equal 3, or does is it actually just equal 2?

In order to find out the answer, I recently asked several experienced figures within our industry for their insights and comment.

• AKQA Media – Drew Wahl, Director of Business Development
• Booyah Advertising – Emily Iverson, Director of Display Media
• ethology – Jeff Pruitt, CEO (and former President of SEMPO)
• iCrossing – Chris Wallace, SVP Media

Each of these people are knowledgeable in both types of media, and are actually involved in the oversight of plans or teams where both display planning and search engine marketing are occurring, and our thanks to them for taking part in this discussion, the conclusions from which are published below (the full, unedited responses can be viewed in their entirety here).

Each contributor was asked the same two questions:

1. Is there really an overlap between search and display that benefits campaigns, or is it just hypothetical?
2. If there is, what are those benefits and what advice would you give a search marketer to capitalize on them?

A Convenient Story

Early in my agency days, I remember adding a slide to my overview display deck that stated (in a big, bold font of course) that ‘1+1=3’ and would wax lyrical about how we had an integrated media offering. I stood by my slide, believing that marketing across SEM and display as isolated channels could not be the right approach. In my mind, each channel had a halo effect on the other and this surely must create additional value for the advertiser.

I would quote the usual studies that demonstrated this uplift in return of anything from 2.4x to 10x when adding a display buy to a search program, but true behavioral insight always seemed to be lacking in those studies. And so a question remained in my mind as to why and how this effect occurred, and what strategies were best at making it happen.

1+1 = Something More Than 2

All our contributors report seeing real benefit from running display and search programs together in ways that help explain the mythical halo effects we have seen for years, but also that reveal themselves with quantifiable measurements.

At ethology, Jeff reports seeing that individuals will search multiple times on multiple keywords before they make a decision. This consideration window is clearly prime time for a marketer; it is the “opportunity to expose [individuals] at different points during the research experience with very targeted display that result in a higher likelihood to take an action”.

With each individual performing more searches than ever before, this window is broad, creating a greater chance a competing brand could steal that customer for themselves. Display is a tool to combat this potential leakage.

The effect of this window is measurable too according to iCrossing’s Chris Wallace. They have seen situations where this repeated exposure has led to an increase in branded search queries that has “an efficient and meaningful impact on digital campaigns”, a logical outcome when we think about how during that research phase an individual will often start with a broad query (“chicago hotel”) before narrowing it down to a solution (“doubletree hotel Chicago rates”). And if that is the case, it means we can look beyond generalizations and start to quantify.

Whilst these points suggest that display is merely increasing the frequency of an event that was occurring anyway, AKQA Media have built a digital analytics platform that is seeing users across multiple channels and is showing cases where individuals are performing brand searches that would not have done so without first having the display exposure. Clearly these agencies are able to prove today that the benefits are real.

Universal Advice – Measurement Matters

In terms of advice from the experts of what you should do, the message is loud and clear – measurement is going to be critical to understanding the overlap, but it is also not going to be easy.  The ideal solution is an attribution model that can see all your marketing investments and sort through the results to understand how each one influenced every transaction.

In previous articles,we have discussed though how this is often not possible, and at the very least is cumbersome.

With a need to measure something though, you must cut through the clutter and find something that works for you, a process that involves understanding the difference between on site and off site interactions.

At Booyah Advertising, Emily’s team will look at standard metrics such as CTR and CPA but also carry out incremental lift studies with partners like Chango in order to examine the percentage of interaction from each channel that is incremental – this helps to get a read on the maximum potential impact one channel could be having on another.

Clearly this is a good starting point, and is probably the easiest for you to report on internally – “we launched display and saw a a 20% increase in our CTR in search” for instance.

These metrics are primarily occurring and being measured off site though, they are at the point of exposure to the campaign itself. Agencies iCrossing and AKQA both responded to the questions with points that demonstrate how the behavior of individuals changes for the better ON the client’s site if they are first exposed to both search and display campaigns.

This can be measured by looking at ‘engagement metrics’ from incoming traffic such as time on site, pages visited and a very interesting point from ethology, the time to convert.

Be Prepared

So now we know that the overlap exists, that it is quantifiable, and even where we should look for the signal of evidence, should you go out and add display to your search program immediately?

Chris thinks not, and instead would “advise marketers to consider a measurement strategy BEFORE campaign launch that will be used to evaluate search and display’s combined impact during the campaign – this method allows for adjustments to made before campaigns terminate and allows for improvements to had within the campaign flight period.”

This is sound advise, especially given that in order to be looking at the overlap you must make use of unique IDs that can be read across channels, something that requires technical investment and careful planning.

Conclusion

The result of the equation, 1+1, does indeed equal more than 2, and with careful thought and measurement, quantifiable metrics can be discovered that will help you understand the exact answer for your own campaigns – best if planned in advance.

Clients working with AKQA Media, Booyah Advertising, ethology and iCrossing are benefitting from working with experienced and integrated teams who know how to bring these things together, and advanced techniques like search retargeting capitalize on the best of both of these worlds, and are helping all 4 agencies take this integration a step further.

According to Jeff, “advertisers that don’t take the next step to build or obtain systems that allow the search advertisers to manage the two channels in a centralized technology that appropriately attributes the impact each channel has on performance and conversions, will not be fully maximizing their advertising spend and the resulting actions.”

Feel it’s a lot of work? As Emily plainly states, the overlap is real, and if you don’t believe it then “pause one of your campaigns (search or display) and measure the drop in your key performance indicators, see for yourself!”

Why is this so shocking? Placing search ads inline with organic free listings is somewhat taboo for search companies.

Years ago, search engines had “paid inclusion” programs which guaranteed content to be indexed, but they had no ranking factors. In fact, Yahoo after much controversy dropped their paid inclusion program in 2009.

But to allow advertisers to inject ads with guaranteed rankings in the organic results seems unethical to me.

Danny scolded Google for doing a form of this within Google Product Search.

If you look at the ads here, they are almost completely blended into the organic results that they look to be completely unbiased, free, organic listings. The “ad” label all the way on the right can be completely missed.

I have emailed Microsoft for a statement on this and to confirm this is a real test. I will follow up as soon as I hear back.

Postscript: Microsoft has confirmed this is a test they are running. A Microsoft spokesperson said:

We’re constantly testing and experimenting on Bing, and with that, we carefully measure user engagement and reaction to these changes. We have nothing further to share at this time.

Related Articles:

• Yahoo To Drop Paid Inclusion Program
• Ask.com’s CEO, Jim Lanzone, Calls Yahoo Paid Inclusion “Hypocritical”
• Google Experiments With Paid Inclusion & Does “Promoted” Meet FTC Guidelines?
• Drill, Baby, Drill: Google Finance Gets Ads; Google News Testing Them