backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by vision33r.. on Apr 16 at 1:58 PM

Microsoft was a little vague in its statement, but an executive said it was over with

Microsoft's Scroogled campaign could be over.

According to ZDNet, Derrick Connell -- a Microsoft Corporate Vice President in charge of the Bing Experiences team -- said in a Yabbly interview that Microsoft's Scroogled campaign against Google is dead.

"That campaign had a primary purpose so let me explain that first," said Connell. "The main purpose was to bring attention to some activities that we didn't like as a company (for e.g. the idea of scanning email for the purpose of selling you ads seemed wrong). As a company we deeply care about trustworthy computing and user privacy. We felt there were things happening in the industry that didn't match our world view, and the campaign was aimed at providing information to consumers.

"It is tricky as you want to raise awareness and do it in a fun way. I think we achieved that goal, and changed some policies, and we are now done with the campaign. Mostly I feel proud that we decided to do it regardless of how we might be perceived."


For those who don't remember, Microsoft's Scroogled campaign was anti-Google, and aimed to educate users about Google's practices regarding the scanning of emails for advertising purposes. 

Many saw the campaign as distasteful, as Microsoft really went out of its way to bash another company's product instead of focusing on making its own competing product better. 

After Connell's interview, Microsoft sent out the following statement regarding whether the Scroogled campaign was truly over or not:

“We are always evaluating and evolving our marketing campaigns. There are times when we use our marketing to highlight differences in how we see the world compared to competitors, and the Scroogled campaign is an example of this. Moving forward, we will continue to use all the right approaches and tactics when and where they make sense.”

Source: ZDNet



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Was it true?
By jeepga on 4/15/2014 4:19:43 PM , Rating: 2
Was it true? If so, then doesn't really freaking matter what anyone thinks. I don't think it will change anyone's mind on Microsoft one way or another. But, it might get people off the Kool-Aid and let them make a more educated decision whatever that turns out to be.




RE: Was it true?
By Argon18 on 4/15/2014 4:20:57 PM , Rating: 3
How so? Choosing between Google or Microsoft is like choosing between a punch in the face, or a kick in the balls. Neither seems very appealing at all.


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/15/2014 5:42:39 PM , Rating: 1
On this I agree. Microsoft runs the same targeted ad data-gathering business that Google does through Bing. So the ads were in bad taste, as well as hypocritical.

Negative ads are never a good way to get marketshare. Instead of telling us how horrible Google is, convince us why we should switch.

The world has been using Google for several years now, and no boogeyman has come for them. It's no wonder the "Scroogled" thing didn't work.


RE: Was it true?
By rsmech on 4/15/2014 6:18:26 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The main purpose was to bring attention to some activities that we didn't like as a company (for e.g. the idea of scanning email for the purpose of selling you ads seemed wrong).


quote:
On this I agree. Microsoft runs the same targeted ad data-gathering business that Google does through Bing


These are 2 different statements. Bing and Google are search engines both giving you adds based on you search history as well as Yahoo. The difference is google also scans your emails and may apply that criteria as well to the ads. One implies it doesn't need my free email account for search targeted adds while the other does.

It's everyone's choice, free more private email or free less private email. So are they really the same?


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/15/2014 6:25:20 PM , Rating: 1
But Microsoft scans Outlook too! Again, they're doing the SAME THING as Google.

Microsoft does not offer a "free more private" email service. They never have. They also scanned Hotmail for years.

The only difference between Microsoft and Google is that Google is actually telling it's users what they are doing.


RE: Was it true?
By inighthawki on 4/15/2014 7:30:23 PM , Rating: 2
Outlook does not scan emails for the purpose of targeted advertisement (that's even one of their advertised features). It does, however, have automated email scanning for spam filtering, which pretty much every email host does.

sources:
http://www.microsoft.com/en-US/outlook-com/compare...
http://www.itpro.co.uk/email-clients/21918/microso...
http://www.ibtimes.com/microsoft-rips-email-snoopi...

“Outlook.com does not go through the contents of your sent and received email messages in order to display targeted ads. ... Outlook.com does not go through the contents of your incoming email from other email service for the purpose of targeting ads. ... Outlook.com does not through the contents of your entire inbox for the purpose of targeting ads.”

So no, they are NOT doing the same thing.


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/15/14, Rating: -1
RE: Was it true?
By inighthawki on 4/15/2014 7:52:37 PM , Rating: 2
I never said they did. I don't use outlook so I couldn't tell you, but I'm willing to bet they have ads. They just don't scan your email for targeted ads, which is kind of the whole point to why people are upset.


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2014 7:26:51 AM , Rating: 1
"People" aren't upset at Google. What you see on the Internet is a tiny subset of biased people making up excuses to hate Google.

When Google was a little underdog company, they were the greatest thing ever, everyone loved them. Now that they are big and influential and can challenge Apple and Microsoft, they're the worst thing ever bla bla bla. Such is the way of things it seems.

The world at large happily uses Google services without a worry or second thought. They accept the tradeoff gladly.

quote:
I don't use outlook


I do for work. Did that make you and atechfan faint in your chairs? It's a fine service, and I haven't noticed any ads. But I'm not so ignorant as to think Microsoft is providing me a free email service out of the kindness of their own hearts. They're monetizing me somehow, but just like Gmail, I don't care.


RE: Was it true?
By inighthawki on 4/16/2014 11:49:07 AM , Rating: 4
I'm getting this impression that you constantly think I'm disagreeing with you. I don't think people will care, and I don't think it's going to impact Google at all. Google offers a great free email service. One that I use myself for my two primary personal email accounts (gasp, I bet you just fainted now!).

I was simply pointing out your incorrect information .You stated "But Outlook does the SAME THING!!!!" and that's simply not true. I do not know how outlook monetizes, but it's not from targeted ads. Otherwise I'm not going to pretend to know what they do. Is it monetized? Is it free? Maybe it's provided as a service backed by the revenue source of Office sales and subscriptions (after all, it is one of the backbone services of office365), or maybe they just serve regular ads and that's enough to cover the costs, or not make the hit so bad. I don't know, and truthfully don't care.

Point being, I just want you to realize I have nothing against gmail. I use it all the time and I'm perfectly pleased with it. I don't find the concept of an automated server scanning my email for ad purposes that big of a deal. It's something that I honestly thought happened a long long time before it was ever made public. I just want you to be clear that not every service operates the same way as google. Not all free services are backed entirely by ad revenue like Google's.

To me, Google is just another big company. I don't hate them for anything. Their products seem fine to me. I'm just not enthusiastic about them as you tend to be. That doesn't mean I think you're wrong all the time, or that Google is some kind of evil corporation out to destroy the world.


RE: Was it true?
By rsmech on 4/15/2014 10:13:41 PM , Rating: 4
Don't take this the wrong way please. I've accepted free gifts before or used free services before but MS and Google aren't the same, maybe similar but not the same. It doesn't objectively make one better than the other it's subjective.

MS revenue isn't Bing and probably not hotmail. It's money is in selling software, hardware, and online services. Bing is a loss leader for windows desktop and phone. Outlook email may be a loss leader for office. Office and windows among others cover these loss leaders. That's why they are free. Granted you need to cut your losses so yes you do get ads but only to cut your losses not make your profits.

Google's profits are almost the opposite. They give away the software, hardware, and services to make profits off their use.

So no they are not the same. The better way is subjective.


RE: Was it true?
By atechfan on 4/15/2014 10:30:53 PM , Rating: 4
Nobody was criticizing Google for monetizing. They were criticizing the way they were monetizing. You can scream "MS does it too!!!!11!1!!1" until you are blue in the face, but you will still be wrong. MS does not scan e-mails for ad keywords and Google does. End of story.


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2014 7:34:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nobody was criticizing Google for monetizing.


Yes they are. That is what all of you are doing. You want Google to provide free services, but make little to no profit whatsoever.

Do you even have a clue how much money it costs to provide Gmail and Google to billions of users across the world?? Obviously not.

But hey go around raising your pitchforks high, go burn that witch, I really don't care. Just the ignorance here is a little hard to swallow.


RE: Was it true?
By atechfan on 4/16/2014 9:23:24 AM , Rating: 2
I don't care that Google is monetizing Gmail. I would expect them too. It would be stupid otherwise. I don't even care that they are targeting ads based on scanning the e-mails. No human actually sees that. I am just trying to explain the way it is perceived by people. I am definitely not saying that Google is wrong to be doing it from my own point of view. But unlike you, I CAN understand other people's views, even when I disagree with them.

Perhaps you missed where I posted that it isn't likely to bring about Google's downfall in the article about Google changing the wording of their TOS to better reflect what they are doing. Of course you did. In your narcissistic world, if it isn't in reply to one of your posts, it doesn't matter. Otherwise, you wouldn't be accusing me of trying to pick on you or of only posting in MS articles.

Grow up. The world doesn't revolve around you. I don't follow you around. I read every article, and I tend to refute idiotic posts, no matter what the topic. You just have an unusually large share of the idiotic posts. The red headlines draw my eye to them.


RE: Was it true?
By atechfan on 4/15/2014 10:26:49 PM , Rating: 5
Did you have this same level of impotent rage at the Samsung ads? They didn't just attack a rival company or its products, but its users. If the Scroogled ads have your panties in such a wad, you should have been foaming at the mouth over the way iPhone users are portrayed as clueless sheep. But no, not a peep from you about them. You have one set of standards for Google and a different set for everyone else.

I found the Samsung ads amusing, if stereotyped and inaccurate. I also found the "I'm a Mac" ads sometimes funny. Unlike you, I don't emotionally identify with any one company to the point that I take it personally when said company is slighted.


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/15/14, Rating: 0
RE: Was it true?
By themaster08 on 4/16/2014 2:00:01 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm pointing out why I thought it was ineffective. It gained Microsoft NO ground, which is why it's being canned.
Do you have proof of this? Or is this another statement where the "facts" have been pulled out of your ass?

As controversial as the Scroogled campaign was, it has at least done its job by bringing to attention Google's practices. So much so, that Google has amended its terms of service disclosing their email scanning:

http://www.dailytech.com/Google+Updates+Terms+of+S...

Everything that Microsoft mentioned in those ads has turned out to be true. That, for Microsoft, is job done.

quote:
If I praised Microsoft with every post, you wouldn't be trolling me on a daily basis.
No one is trolling you for having a preference. It is because of your irrational stance of everything that Google does, you must support, and your unreasonable approach to those that contend your arguments with valid criticisms.


RE: Was it true?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2014 7:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
As controversial as the Scroogled campaign was, it has at least done its job by bringing to attention Google's practices.


Ah so the campaign was a public service announcement from Microsoft?

See I rather thought the "job" was to get people to switch from Google services to Microsoft services. There's been no significant uptick of this occurring, so I would view the campaign as a failure.

You believe I'm saying this out of some misguided loyalty to Google. No, I'm being objective. I was just as critical of HTC's Robert Downey Junior ad campaign as well, last time I checked they made Android phones. Where is my bias there?


RE: Was it true?
By themaster08 on 4/16/2014 10:57:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ah so the campaign was a public service announcement from Microsoft?
Read the article:

quote:
"That campaign had a primary purpose so let me explain that first," said Connell. "The main purpose was to bring attention to some activities that we didn't like as a company (for e.g. the idea of scanning email for the purpose of selling you ads seemed wrong).
quote:
"It is tricky as you want to raise awareness and do it in a fun way. I think we achieved that goal, and changed some policies, and we are now done with the campaign. Mostly I feel proud that we decided to do it regardless of how we might be perceived."

Of course, in an ideal world, Microsoft would have loved for a surge of users migrating their Gmail accounts to Outlook, but that was never going to be the reality. This has at least brought attention to the subject and got some people talking.

quote:
I was just as critical of HTC's Robert Downey Junior ad campaign as well, last time I checked they made Android phones. Where is my bias there?
Maybe so, but HTC are not Google, or Samsung; two companies you are never critical of.


RE: Was it true?
By atechfan on 4/16/2014 9:32:57 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Why would I criticize Samsung's campaign? Making fun of the "Cult of Mac" is never a bad thing.


This one statement shows what I am saying about your double-standards is true.

quote:
And my panties aren't in a wad over the Scroogled campaign.


If you had merely stated that the Scroogled campaign wasn't as effective as MS had hoped, I would have agreed with you. While technically the ads were not untrue, they were not clever and didn't stick with people the way the "I'm a Mac" ads did. But instead you have had a history of saying things like:

quote:
Microsoft is just a hypocritical, patent trolling, underhanded double-dealer.


Nope, that doesn't sound the least like you are upset. And that was in reply to an article that had absolutely nothing to do with Scroogled, yet you mentioned it anyway.

I find it hilarious that you hate Obama so much, considering you both have the exact same rhetorical tactics. When called out for something you said, you both resort to trying to claim you did not say that. Neither of you seem intelligent enough to know that "I didn't say that." as a defense does not work when your words are kept on record.


typical ms bs
By sprockkets on 4/15/2014 6:13:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"That campaign had a primary purpose so let me explain that first," said Connell. "The main purpose was to bring attention to some activities that we didn't like as a company (for e.g. the idea of scanning email for the purpose of selling you ads seemed wrong). As a company we deeply care about trustworthy computing and user privacy. We felt there were things happening in the industry that didn't match our world view, and the campaign was aimed at providing information to consumers."


Which is why you did it all those years with Hotmail but told no one!




RE: typical ms bs
By Reclaimer77 on 4/15/2014 6:18:23 PM , Rating: 2
LOl exactly. I mean who are they kidding?

Microsoft, the company with more security and privacy exploits in their software under their belt than anyone by a huge margin, is "deeply caring" about user privacy...


Bing sucks
By vision33r on 4/16/2014 1:58:26 PM , Rating: 2
Whoever managed and ran Bing should be fired. Oops, he's the new MS CEO.




huh?
By Argon18 on 4/15/14, Rating: -1
RE: huh?
By amanojaku on 4/15/2014 3:26:35 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Who gives a crap how they "see the world"?
We feel the same way whenever you post.
quote:
Is it too much to ask for a company to focus on what its customers want?
Do you live in a bubble? You mean to say that Apple hasn't run ads like these? Or Google? Or HTC? Or Samsung? Or any other company? Marketing doesn't make good products, but it does help consumers learn more about those products. I would love to live in a world where companies don't advertise by bashing their competitors, but that just isn't the case.


RE: huh?
By inighthawki on 4/15/2014 4:06:42 PM , Rating: 2
The "I'm a MAC" commercials are coming to mind right about now.


RE: huh?
By Argon18 on 4/15/14, Rating: -1
RE: huh?
By inighthawki on 4/15/2014 6:23:18 PM , Rating: 2
Huh? How did you get that? I thought many of them were hilarious. I was just pointing out that it was similar because it was basically a smear ad.


RE: huh?
By atechfan on 4/15/2014 10:34:42 PM , Rating: 3
And, unlike Scroogled, they mostly lied. They were funny sometimes, but untrue. Trying to claim that the Mac is a gaming machine while PCs are just for work stands out as one of the biggest untruths in my memory.


RE: huh?
By Flunk on 4/15/2014 3:31:07 PM , Rating: 3
Making up excuses is generally a good sign that something failed.


"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki