http://www.searchenginejournal.com/adwords-automa…

Also interesting Bill Slawski's post and comments from November 2007 regarding "Google on Generating Statistics from Search Engine Query Logs (Hot Trends and More)". The discussion goes then into personalized search as well.

http://www.seobythesea.com/?p=913

Carsten

"Glad to see this being talked about more." Thanks Pat, I think this is an important issue..

Susan stressed in the article that “This effort to improve ad relevancy does not involve personal information databases.” However the examples from the bloggers within my article do not show relevancy within their screenshots, just a garbalation (My new word for the week) of ad serving based specifically on their previous search behavior.

What concerns me is Google’s authority here and power in delivering natural search results for web pages that have not been optimized with the previous query keywords, what is the criteria on these web pages that Google determines as relevant to display these sites in natural search as a previous query, current query combination? This throws everything we know about site optimization out the window.

"Google builds up a detailed profile of your search terms over many years. Google probably knew when you last thought you were pregnant, what diseases your children have had, and who your divorce lawyer is."

“It sets a tracking cookie on your computer that does not expire until 2038. This means that Google builds up a detailed profile of your search terms over many years. “

– BBC technology commentator Bill Thompson, Feb. 21, 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2786761.stm

Organic query results must be pulled from something, if not previous query current query optimized web content, then perhaps from consumer search history? Oh-Snap!

Regarding the feature itself, I dislike it. Sometimes a follow-on query is related, sometimes it's not – knowing the difference is very difficult (if not impossible) to figure out as an observer. And since search is a tool, the user should be told how it works (meaning label it as different and explain why) or the data retrieved (and used to implement and tweak the idea) will be skewed. Further, if there's an apparent randomness to the PPC results, people won't place as much trust in them.

Just finished my ham and cheese sandwich… honey smoked ham sure was yummy, think I'll grab a solo slice and woof it down… When I open the fridge and slide out the meat and cheese drawer, looking for that slice of ham that I hope is still in there… I don't want my cheese drawer to rearrange things, putting a slice of cheese on top of the pile, because I just finished making a ham and cheese sandwich the last time I opened the door. And if it shoves a jar of mayo and mustard up right next to the drawer, I'll look at this idiotic contraption and think of the absurdity of a machine trying to anticipate my desires, based on past sequences and NOT WHAT I DIRECTLY EXPRESS TO IT AS MY PRESENT AND IMMEDIATE NEED… and I'll pine for the good old days when meetings between me and my fridge, were simpler and more efficient… and the labels all over the inside of her, didn't feel like ads being shoved at me based on guesses and algorithms gleaning fallibly thru the data it collected while it watched me and took notes, but more like information I wanted to be there and chose to put in front of me.

If search and its PPC & SEO matching were nearly perfect today, delivering results that are so fantastic that we're each fulfilled with nearly every search, I suppose I'd be less resistant to mind reading efforts, but if they can't reliably deliver what I told them I wanted, I think their guessing, to improve things, is a sign of arrogance. And one that ills serves the consumer as well.

Having seen expanded broad match go wonky to try and show irrelevant ads, I think adding a guessing layer to it all, is a real step backwards.

As evidenced by the number of emails and phone calls I've gotten asking me to explain what the heck is happening in the SERPS, I'd say I'm not alone in some of my views of it.

But giving it a name, talking it up in the press, others mimicking, means like other behavorial marketing "advancements" yearned for today, this one's got legs, not thru effectiveness, but thru the promise its surface seems to hold.

Time will tell if this is Sh%t or Shinola.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinola