

Scroogled, new campaign by Microsoft - Bootvis
http://www.scroogled.com/

======
potatolicious
This comes off as disingenuous to me, but is unsurprising coming from
Microsoft, which seems to have always taken a stance of condescension to its
competitors that waffles between apparent apathy and mouth-foaming rage.

At no point is MS seemingly capable of perceiving their competitors as
legitimate, and their successes as being due to shipping superior product.

Sounds a bit like Steve Ballmer. Maybe.

Let's try this one on for size: how's about MS start shipping products that
don't suck, instead of relying on smear campaigns?

~~~
lotso
Let's try this one for size: how about we look at the merit of what Microsoft
is discussing here, instead of making what is essentially an ad hominem
attack.

I had no idea that Google shopping results were more or less ads. I thought it
was an aggregator of shopping results. This is news to me.

~~~
ImprovedSilence
I agree here. I was un aware that google started doing this. Thank you
microsoft for informing me.

~~~
drivebyacct2
Maybe because you don't use it? There's a notice at the bottom of every page
and a link that says "Why these products" with the same discloser.

It's part of the reason I find this annoying, people keep parroting it and
then talking about generic _search_ results which are not involved in anyway.
Whether it's intentional or a byproduct of "Google" being so widely used for
different things, I don't know.

------
magicalist
I think the bad part here is that the google shopping page looks just like a
regular search page except with a notice at the top right (that you have to
hover over to read). I actually would have no problem with this if it were
clearer from the page that all the results on that page were paid for, just
like I don't have a problem with adwords ads at the top of search results
because google really does seem to do a good job of making sure they are
relatively relevant (though usually the only time I click on those is when I'm
going to be shopping anyways).

Microsoft calling Google out on this is ridiculous, however, because the only
way to get on Bing shopping right now is to pay for the privilege, which makes
the situation essentially the same (note that the bing disclaimer says that
they don't use payment for ranking, which doesn't disclaim the fact that you
have to pay to show up at all).

[http://searchengineland.com/microsoft-attacks-google-with-
sc...](http://searchengineland.com/microsoft-attacks-google-with-scroogled-
campaign-forgets-its-guilty-of-same-thing-140856)

In any case, this feels super shady, exactly like a political attack ad, as
others have said. It would be interesting to see numbers on how effective this
is. The Bing it on thing did seem to have some reach into popular
consciousness, but didn't seem very effective at getting people to actually
switch (only anecdotal evidence, of course). I imagine awareness went up, but
the key there was that Bing it on was a relatively positive ad: "we're just as
good now" vs "look how bad those other guys are".

~~~
mtgx
I think I've lost track of how many times Microsoft has accused Google of
something, only to find out a few days later that they were doing the _exact
same thing_. At least make sure you aren't doing that, too, if you're going to
accuse someone of something. Seems like attack ads 101 to me.

And yes, all these negative FUD spreading ads remind me of the old Microsoft,
which is the same as the new Microsoft it seems.

------
rpm4321
I was particularly surprised to see how aggressive the TV campaign was. I've
seen these all over. They're really running with this thing:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WIluNt0mvA>

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_6bSCW_UI0>

Not surprisingly, they've apparently hired a former political hack to help run
this campaign. It's interesting, because these ads definitely have a dirty
politics feel to them:

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2012/07/23/can-
mark-p...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2012/07/23/can-mark-penn-
fix-microsofts-bing/)

[http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/07/19/mark-penn-
microsoft%E...](http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/07/19/mark-penn-
microsoft%E2%80%99s-new-strategist-hopes-to-boost-bing/)

[http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-03/did-mark-
pen...](http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-03/did-mark-penn-
swiftboat-google)

~~~
quotemstr
Holy cow: I knew about the Penn hire and the Scroogled campaign, but the
connection didn't "click" until I read your comment. I should have realized
that there was a connection. The dirtiness I feel when loading the Scroogled
site now makes a ton of sense.

------
notatoad
>Higher visibility: Paid offers will be highlighted throughout Bing Shopping,
including search result and product pages

from [http://advertise.bingads.microsoft.com/en-us/search-
advertis...](http://advertise.bingads.microsoft.com/en-us/search-
advertising/bing-shopping)

well, okay then.

------
sbilstein
Google very publicly announced the changes and Microsoft is attempting to
conflate product search with general web search. It isn't shady to create a
paid listing catalog (which is essentially what Google has done with its
product search) if people are aware of that fact. While Microsoft isn't lying
in this campaign, they are attempting to paint Google as being dishonest with
their general search results, something that isn't true.

The quotes on the top banner are all Larry and Sergey talking about search,
not product search...a feature which is no where near as popular or used.
Putting these quotes on the same page with attack language could easily
confuse anyone to think Google was now accepting paid search results a la
Overture back in the day.

~~~
Alaskan005
How do you know that Google search is pure? I for one can barely see what are
ads vs regular search and am deeply suspicious of Google's humongous increase
in profits and Adwords revenue this past year after Panda and other updates.
Occam's razor and all. Google has changed

~~~
sbilstein
Both Google and Bing have ads that are clearly marked as ads on their web
search results? How does one know Google search is pure? Start a company, get
some press, build pages in an SEO friendly format and start seeing traffic
trickle in from organic search without paying a dime to Google.

Google has a lot more incentive (as they've proven over the years) to maintain
really high quality organic search and paid ads separate. That is what set
them apart in early 2000's. When they integrated g+ results, they had an
orthogonal incentive (take down Facebook, spar with Bing) but if the incentive
is just to make money in the business of search it is extremely unlikely they
would pollute their web results with ads.

------
vidarrapp
I click on "Try Bing" and it brings me to their landing page.. fine. So I
click on "Shopping", thinking it will give me an "honest search result" but
where does that take me?

It takes me to "www.ciao.se", a price comparison site that I stopped using
years ago (pricerunner, pricespy or even amazon will all give better results
in terms of prices and the information presented). As far as I know, the
retailers that want to be listed on ciao.se need to pay for that privilege.

At least clean up your own house before you go acting all high and mighty, MS.

Also, I've never seen google present "Commerce" as anything but a commercial
service, bought and paid for by the sellers on that service.

~~~
AdamTReineke
Maybe something is different if you're out of the US, but I didn't see a
ciao.se website at all. From the Scroogled site, I clicked "Try Bing",
searched for "toy trucks", and clicked "Shopping" at the top of the results
page. (There was no shopping link that I spotted on the Bing homepage.) I was
directed to the following page:
[http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=toy+trucks&qpvt=to...](http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=toy+trucks&qpvt=toy+trucks&FORM=HDRSC6)

------
frio
Cheap, tacky. Makes me seriously concerned for Microsoft's health if they feel
they need to resort to this kind of childishness.

~~~
JasonFruit
I think that concern is valid even though I agree that Google's shopping
results are deceptive to the average user; if Microsoft can't make a campaign
out of it that is less about Google's failing and more about how Bing offers
better value, it doesn't do them any good.

~~~
bcoates
I think the point is more to tarnish Google's halo in general than to promote
Bing. They want to level the playing field and have people to see Google the
way they already see Microsoft, as a generic big evil corporation.

------
ChuckMcM
Wow.

What is particularly interesting is what this says about advertising versus
search. I'm sure lots of people are familiar with magazines which are
"published" with a bunch of articles that are really just long form
advertisements for the people who paid for that month's print run. These
'manufacturer supported' publications are more common in the trades than in
general circulation but still, few people reading them thinks "Wow this is a
really honest evaluation of which oscilloscope is best."

I find it interesting that it accuses Google of switching to a more extractive
business model. If that is true then this change would mark the nadir of
Google's ability to grow that market. The tying of Google's search capability
to their advertising business seems analogous to the way Microsoft Office and
DOS were tied together, the 'team' being much much harder to dislodge than
either element.

------
frozenport
This page looks terrible! There is a clutter of fonts, overlapping text
elements, a scared girl and a scrolling banner. Its disorganized information
overload! I would expect this from the Time Cube, but and not Microsoft.

It looks better through the Geocitiesizer

[http://wonder-tonic.com/geocitiesizer/content.php?theme=2...](http://wonder-
tonic.com/geocitiesizer/content.php?theme=2&music=4&url=http://www.scroogled.com/)

------
film42
All this does is make Microsoft more evil.

Edit: People don't like my short reply I guess, let me elaborate.. All this
site does is say, "Google is secretly being evil and shoving ads in your
face," but all I see is Microsoft low-blow trolling its competitor, and if
that's not evil, then 4chan may as well be wikipedia.

------
dropdownmenu
Regardless of the message the Microsoft is trying to deliver here they could
at least make a website that does not make me close the tab in the first 10
seconds. What a mess.

------
neya
FAIL. Shitty design, and none of the messages about Google posted by Microsoft
inspires trust (infact, it arouses suspicion). It seems more like Microsoft is
desperate to get more customers this festive season. It's a very very
desperate attempt.

------
thaumaturgy
OK. So you're a wealthy business with a huge talent pool. You discover that
your competitor is doing something that might annoy its market and create an
opportunity for you.

Do you:

a. Improve your product in the space and make it so amazing that people flock
to it and abandon your competitor, or

b. Run a marketing campaign with smear ads?

Hint: if you're a technology company, you choose the first.

I haven't been enthusiastic about Google Shopping in a long time. I'm not
surprised they've decided to turn it into a bidding war. But, Microsoft still
isn't offering something better.

...Huh. Why does this feel like politics all of a sudden?

------
tzaman
What Google is doing is, indeed, shady - but then again if I imagine my mom
(and Google's knowledge of her) she might be browsing best offers for her (And
purchase what is really best for her), despite the fact that G makes money off
it.

~~~
myko
What is Google doing that is, in your opinion, shady?

------
pnathan
The page is strangely put together. It feels very ... Geocities? ...

I had not thought MS played the attack ad game until recently. It denotes that
there's some kind of strategy shift going on.

------
Bootvis
I'm quite surprised by the aggressiveness of this campaign, but maybe that's
because I'm not from the US. Is this also over the top in the US or is this
considered normal?

~~~
guyzero
It's over the top.

------
jlgreco
What a terribly chosen name. I wonder what the Scroogle guy has to say about
this.

~~~
biscarch
I'm trying to figure out whether it was intended as Scrooge-google for the
holiday season or screw-google...

~~~
jlgreco
I'm guessing "screw-google", as I always assumed scroogle.org meant, though
now that I think about it perhaps Scroogle is "scrape-google"?

------
ville
It's only missing "I'm Steve Ballmer and I approve this message" in the end.

------
pmelendez
I feel like having a DejaVu. Wasn't this on HN a couple of days before?

~~~
alpb
It really was.

------
tjholowaychuk
As if we've never been screwed over by microsoft, fuck off

------
drcube
"Scroogled"? Wasn't that an FSF campaign or Cory Doctorow story or something?
Pretty sneaky of MS to co-opt it. Perhaps we've been Microscrewed?

------
VikingCoder
What's particularly bad about Google is that they've clearly copied the look
and feel of Bing, and I remember a story about how they even used shady opt-
out in their browser to track user's searches and clicks in order to copy
search results from Bing!

Oh wait, that was Microsoft who copied Google, stole search results from
Google, and is now bashing Google.

Disclaimer: I have a soul.

------
NDizzle
This reminds me a lot of the anti-Microsoft stuff that Novell put out in the
90s.

------
confluence
Reminds me of Edison vs. Tesla. Too bad this time Tesla is worth $200 billion
(Larry Page made sure of it) and Edison and Co. is run by a bald idiot named
Ballmer.

If you have to litigate or advertise your way against the superiority of your
competition via attack ads - you've already lost.

------
jborden13
Desperate much?

