FIANLLY rid of google's damn shopping tab!!

[Tiberius]

Because it's an ad, and like all the very worst ads it's integrated into the content without informing the users that it is an ad and not content. I.e. it's meant to look like it's a search function (which is what Product Search was), but it's a paid listing service similar to Yellow Pages with the exception that no one gets a basic listing for free.

It's not a ad. If it was an ad, then all links on the Internet would be ads. At the very most, it's a link to a place where there are adverts. Are you so sure that it's not a product search though? This is what I see when using it:



Certainly doesn't look like those are all paid listings, and the text at the bottom says "Google is compensated by some of these merchants." ("some" being the important word there).

I'm not sure I'm looking in the right place though, because the "Shopping" link wasn't even on the main list for me, it was in a dropdown.

I see: Web, News, Apps, Images, Videos, More ("Shopping" is in the More dropdown).

[Minimalist]

Google does have a program where, for a small fee ( of course ) you can bump your site to the top of a specific search.  We tried it with the dog rescue for a while.  Didn't do much or cost much.

[Aractus]

At the very most, it's a link to a place where there are adverts. Are you so sure that it's not a product search though?

Tib, it doesn't look like ads because Google is deliberately being deceptive about it. Even you're fooled by it!

But even the screenshot that you posted shows that all links in the Shopping "search" are ads:



Their own URL (which has since changed) also explicitly said "ads": http://www.google.com/ads/shopping/getstarted.html

Google removed the product search feature on 31 May 2012, permanently. I used to use the product search, however I have never and will never use their premium shopping search as it disadvantages smaller retailers - plus they're ads and I abhor ads. The results are listed by order of the highest payer, instead of how product search worked which was in organic order.

Here's an explanation:

Yes, Shopping is in the drop-down sometimes, but it can appear in any position in the tab-bar (except in the no-script version where it appears to appear in only one spot, however I've altered the code now so that it'll remove it wherever it is in the no-script tab bar). I've also commented the code now on the OP (there's one section I can't remember where it blocks the link right now). And I've simplified the rules now as well.

Certainly doesn't look like those are all paid listings, and the text at the bottom says "Google is compensated by some of these merchants." ("some" being the important word there).

When I click the button it does not say "some" (see screenshot), it says "Google IS compensated by these merchants."

[Tiberius]

I wouldn't say I'm "fooled" by it. I'm well aware that Google's ranking algorithms take into account payment; they are a company after all and adverts are their main source of revenue.

I wasn't aware that all of the products featured in their shopping search were paid for, but thinking about it it does make sense. Online stores are going to be difficult to properly crawl for products, as each one uses a different method of displaying them.

I'll still use the Google product search, because it works. I take issue with your complaint that it disadvantages smaller retailers; I've used it to find sites which are the very definition of small retailer, and I don't see how I could have found them otherwise.

I still disagree with you that these are ads that need to be blocked. Ad blockers are useful for blocking intrusive adverts. Blocking links to places where adverts are displayed is silly; there's nothing intrusive about a link, and if you don't use the product search, you aren't going to click the link in the first place. Besides, do you similarly block all links to eBay, because eBay charges you to list products, and each product listing is an advert. My point being, the entire purpose of the "Shopping" site is to display links to products that you might want to buy, just like regular retailers.

[bennyboy]

Who goes to google to shop? I go there to search for stuff, some of which is not porn. At no point do ever I say, "I need a new coat. . . let me shop at Google." So I ignore the button.

That doesn't mean that on a technical level, I don't admire your resourcefulness in killing the offending item, though. It is quite an achievement.

Maybe you should make it into a plugin and sell it for a couple dollars. I bet there are other old codgers out there who would spring a couple bucks just to stick it to The Man.

[Aractus]

I wasn't aware that all of the products featured in their shopping search were paid for, but thinking about it it does make sense. Online stores are going to be difficult to properly crawl for products, as each one uses a different method of displaying them.

I'll still use the Google product search, because it works.

Two things: 1. from 2002-2012 Google DID have a non-premium product search feature. They're a search engine first and foremost, that became an advertising giant later on. But the product search function was implemented and worked fine. 2. You can't use Google product search since it doesn't exist anymore, what you are using is "Google shopping" which is a different services in that the old one was an internet search function, and the new one isn't.

I still disagree with you that these are ads that need to be blocked. Ad blockers are useful for blocking intrusive adverts. Blocking links to places where adverts are displayed is silly; there's nothing intrusive about a link, and if you don't use the product search, you aren't going to click the link in the first place. Besides, do you similarly block all links to eBay, because eBay charges you to list products, and each product listing is an advert. My point being, the entire purpose of the "Shopping" site is to display links to products that you might want to buy, just like regular retailers.

What's your definition of "intrusive"? Ads that mask themselves as page content are the very definition of intrusive. How many other websites that are comprised purely of premium links to we routinely avoid? Do you find yourself going to milliondollarhomepage.com to intentionally browse the ads? Do you find yourself ever going to pages that are all ads just to find products?

EBay is different, they list merchant products. Google does not. When we say "ad" we typically mean to a 3rd party service, not to another service provided by the same website. It's perfectly true that eBay merchants often sell their products through their own website as well as eBay, but eBay doesn't allow them a platform to advertise their website where they sell their products, they must sell them through the eBay site when using it.

You may not feel that the Google Search disadvantages "smaller" companies, but let me just say that the Product Search feature (now removed) allowed me to find many tiny stores in the past too. To claim they "need" a paid platform to provide that is pure nonsense: they had a working product search feature, it worked very well, and it was removed to be replaced wholesale by advertising (even though it did have ads of course, like the rest of Google).


How would it make you feel if Google Search was replaced with a paid platform, with no websites listed for free?

[bennyboy]

The thing is, once you've identified the link as intrusive, why do you need to disable it?

[bennyboy]

How would it make you feel if Google Search was replaced with a paid platform, with no websites listed for free?

. . . ummmm. . . don't they take payment for listing bumping as well? Isn't that almost exactly the same thing?