Webfly blog

Google, Microsoft & Yahoo – The Deal

Now then. This is all starting to sound like the plot of a 1930s Hollywood blockbuster, glorious Technicolour and all. It has that Gone With The Wind feel about it somehow. In a move similar to Rhett Butler’s 'Frankly My Dear I Don’t Give a Damn' pronouncement, last night Yahoo announced a joint advertising and online search deal with Google and told everyone that the Microsoft talks were over. Microsoft say they don’t want Yahoo anymore, but aren’t ruling out a fresh attempt to buy some of the company.

Confused? The bald facts are as follows: In a press release yesterday, Yahoo stated that ‘talks with Microsoft have concluded’. Yes. Well, I think that’s because Microsoft drew a line in the sand at 47.5 billion dollars. But, hey, what’s a couple of weeks and good PR! Now it’s Yahoo who has ‘concluded’ talks. But, if you can believe it, Microsoft have said today that they will be open to an ‘alternative transaction’. Meanwhile in a separate press release yesterday Yahoo announced they’d signed an agreement with Google which allows the following:

‘[It] enables Yahoo! to run ads supplied by Google alongside Yahoo!'s search results and on some of its web properties in the United States and Canada. The agreement is non-exclusive, giving Yahoo! the ability to display paid search results from Google, other third parties, and Yahoo!'s own Panama marketplace. 

Under the terms of the agreement, Yahoo! will select the search term queries for which - and the pages on which - Yahoo! may offer Google paid search results. Yahoo! will define its users' experience and will determine the number and placement of the results provided by Google and the mix of paid results provided by Panama, Google or other providers. The agreement applies to paid search and content match and does not apply to algorithmic search. The agreement also applies to current partners in Yahoo's publisher network.’

While I’m not sure Microsoft will look painfully out at the ravaged techno landscape, pull their shoulders back, run a hand across their brow and say: Tomorrow’s Another Day, I do think they’ll be back for another stab at buying part or all of Yahoo. Lets face it, the bigger and more successful Yahoo becomes the better for the eventual purchaser…And you can read anything into that you want! 

No more ‘fake’ reviews, blogs or ads

Now then. It’s fair to say that companies will try almost anything to get one over on their competition. And it’s also fair to say that a proportion of companies have played artistic games with the truth in order to establish their brands online. One way of gaining ground has been to ‘create’ ‘fake’ reviews and blogs by people that, strictly speaking, don’t exist! This was a fairly commonplace business practice, known as stealth marketing, though some would call it less than savoury. But business is business and where you draw the moral line has, until now, been entirely a personal decision. 

Dubious reviews and the like are not new. They look something like this: “I always use x product, it’s amazing! It makes my skin feel so smooth I look 18 again.” Mrs J Smith, Bournemouth. We all know that either Mrs Smith doesn't exist, does exist but didn’t actually say that, or she is a conglomeration of real feedback and artistic license with the name changed to protect her real identity.

So what’s happened? Well the law has just changed and it is quite a big deal because millions of companies use this device to a greater or lesser degree to get their message across. The nuts and bolts are that on 26 May 2008, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) came into effect. The new law makes the UK consistent with other EU Member states by implementing the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Directive.

Only two of the 31 regulations are applicable here: Sections 11 and 22.

Section 11 prohibits using editorial content to promote a product without indicating that the content is an advertorial and therefore a paid insert.

"(11) Using editorial content in the media to promote a product where a business1 has paid for the promotion without making that clear in the content or by images or sounds clearly identifiable by the consumer (advertorial)".

Section 22 prohibits you from giving the impression that you're not motivated by business and prohibits you from falsely representing yourself as a consumer:

"(22) Falsely claiming or creating the impression that the business is not acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession, or falsely representing oneself as a consumer".

Prosecution under these laws is a possibility and it carries, on a first conviction the maximum penalty of not more than £5,000 (for now) and up to two years in jail! Yes, JAIL! That’s a large multi-occupancy mixed-use residential/commercial building that provides permanent long-term accommodation - and once you go inside you don’t get to go home.

All this boils down to two things: Don’t even think about making up any customer reviews online or in print and get expert help with the wording for advertorials.