I agree. I am big Google advertiser in my little space. Google helps me bring people in the door, but really does nothing for my brand. All text ads *look* alike. Some read different, BUT I control that. What happens after they click is up to me and my smart marketing.

I have monitored message boards, blogs etc. for years and I can assure you that even if you have a great product there will be people badmouthing your company, your brands, your products. They will spread rumors, half-truths and lies. This misinformation will surface in Google search results.

One example: Your foreign-based company gives a large amount of money for a disaster relief effort in the U.S. Be prepared that there will be countless posts on message boards that will say that your company didn't give any money. The same posts will list the contributions of American companies. These posts will show up in Google search results and damage your reputation.

Jim, this doesn't make sense to me. Your brand is what people think it is. And the search terms at Google, Yahoo!, MSN, and the others that direct traffic to your site screens -- defines -- the image (search terms) that get visitors from 'looking somewhere' to 'looking at your site/company'.

If you stand at the door to your store picking you nose and yelling at a relative, people will make assumptions about your store and how you do business. Walk into a common Radio Shack with highly-planned lighting, flooring, employee dress code, sound management, and they get a different impression.

If porn terms direct a lot of your traffic, then you have mis-identified yourself. You need to 'clean up' your visitors. Similar to relocating your brick and mortar store, make sure your web site is placed in the right 'neighborhood' -- with keywords, descriptions, DMOZ category, etc.

How long did one household goods maker - Proctor & Gamble? - work to defuse the wackoes claiming their quarter-moon icon meant they worshipped satan?

How Google depicts your web site and company has a *lot* to do with how your company is perceived, that is, how your brand is defined. At least, that is how I see it.

Jim, I would respectfully disagree on your definition of brand. It does include perception, which is shaped by marketing and advertising.

Take diamonds for example. They are essentially useless rocks, and the market is flooded. But because our perceptions have been shaped to believe they have great financial and emotional value, we pay a lot for them and hold onto them. Diamonds have a better brand than any other rock, including those that actually look a lot prettier such as sapphires, emeralds, opals and rubies, and a better brand than precious metals that have real practical uses, like gold.

The brand perceptions people have of diamonds are a result of marketing: advertising campaigns coordinated by DTC as well as PR, including hit songs by Marilyn Monroe and Shirley Bassey.

Search for "diamonds", and Google will give you all that as well as the anti-cartel rants against De Beers.

Consumers can either accept the bad with the good, or choose to ignore one or the other. Either way, buying behavior is shaped by perceptions and emotions - brands - not by a rational weighing of the Googled facts.

Brad, your argument makes sense if you think brand is the same thing as marketing.

I don't believe it is.

Marketing is what makes people think about your product, but brand, to me, is defined ONLY when your product is touched and used.

A million people could yell and scream that my product sucks, but you know what, the only real true feedback I'm going to get on my product is from the people who actually exerpienced it. If THEY say it sucks, well, then, it probably does.

Again, if your product is good, you have a good brand. You can hardly blame the Internet for people with an agenda against your product, who haven't actually used your product.

To combat that, you need to:

A. Have a better product
or
B. Control the conversation about your product through your own blog or your own marketing messages.

Of course there are going to be people out there who bad mouth your brand and products, but what are you going to do, hide?

Make a better product, control the conversations happening about your product and if you've done your job right, the upside (more sales, more WOM, more kudos, etc...) will GREATLY outweight the downsides.

I totally agree with Brad K. - when users are at the entrance of the purchase/decision funnel and are looking around can exclude some brands because there is a negative buzz around them, and won't give the brand the chance to give it a try - it will be blacklisted just because people is talking badly about it - that's it.

Even worst the other case, when users are already at the end of the funnel and you've worked hard to get them there say, starting with some online/offline campaign (not with search otherwise they will be immediately exposed to the bad results) that drives on perfect landing pages and the user clicks all the way through towards the purchase. If the purchase requires commitment, users will probably look for references/opinions - and if google says taht your brand is no good (i.e. doesn't perform or maintain the promise or care about customers, or is committed in something evil from environmental to political etcetera) - you've just lost a customer. And possibly even more, if that customer starts buzzing around about what he found out.

I'm sorry - but I don't agree on the "tyranny of the customer" concept neither. Speaking as a customer/user/consumer (of brands, products, information and it all), I welcome a new way not tto be a target, a socio-demographic cluster, an advertising-victim. I just prefer to call it "power to customer", and it works sweet for me.

Google does define your brand for prospective customers. They do this by deciding how heavily to rate your key words and which key words deserved to be picked up. Here's an example, if your company has a very robust website in terms of offering information about how to repair a certain item you sell Goolge will probably give you a good ranking for those key words. If however, you want to be known as a seller of many different items/brands then Google may very will not give you a favorable ranking due to the diluted number of key words you're using. It's for this very reason why search engine optimization is so important.

I went through all the comments above and it's difficult to say you are completely right and you are totally wrong. In my opinion Google is indeed a factor, a new powerfull factor added to the various way to influence a perspective customer. But this may prove to be more impactful on new brands, or brands with a weak identity. if your brand is strong, it has a strong reputation in customer care, in delivering what it promise, well no Google, nor any other factor may undermine it. It's clear that, anyway, any brand needs to have a guardian to overlook on it and defend it when it is required. Look at what happen recently to Apple with the rumors about stock options.

It comes down to your definition of brand. Perhaps my next entry will cover that. Thanks for all the comments.

Jim,

You state that "... Your product/service defines your brand, bottom line. ... The experience your customer has with it is your brand. ...". Perhaps we think of 'Google defines your brand' in different ways.

What I responded to was not what Google does with the brand, but that it reports what others have experienced. A Google (or MSN, Yahoo!, or other search engine) search on your brand should turn up some vendors, some reviews, *and your brand web site*. The other stuff that pops up may or may not influence how a customer thinks about your brand. If the few words in several blurbs are negative, and the sources are familiar ('recall' articles in ABC, CBS, Drudge Report, Fox, and Netscape start to ring one kind of bell), that starts to form a message. If nothing relevant turns up -- not even your own web site -- that also sends a powerful message.

I think of search engine search results as a 'report of available information'. That report can be positive or negative, and will certainly affect your brand's image (or kharma). Google search results are one report of various experiences with your product.

For people who only experience your brand through your Google results, Google DOES define your brand. This is particularly true when it comes to personal branding. 37% of executive recruiters admit to eliminating candidates based on their Google results. They didn't meet the candidates or experience their offerings, they developed brand perceptions based on the volume and relevance of Google results. In today's world, your Google results may not be your entire personal brand, but they have a major impact on brand perception.

When Accenture developed its study of the top management gurus, one of the three criteria they used to come up with their top 50 list was Google results.

Like it or not, when it comes to personal branding, to people who don't know you, your ARE your google results.

Jim,

Unfortunately, the entire premise of your arguement is flawed.

It actually doesn't matter what you think the term "brand" means because it's meaning is empirical.

Brand, brand-equity, branding strategy, brand-position are all terms that refer to the market's perception (or the influencing thereof), whether or not the individual consumer has ever used, or come in direct contact, with your product/service.

Lamborghini has massive brand-equity and is positioned as the top-most luxury automotive brand across all segments - yet how many actual people own or have driven one? Funny enough, Lamborghini has higher brand-awareness in housing projects across America, then they do in middle-class neighborhoods. How many boyz in the hood do you think have ever sat in a Diablo or seen one in real life?

Look at President Bush as a political brand. His position has gone up and down like a yoyo, yet when average people or people in politics have actually met him, he gets phenomonally positive feedback. But notice how the Republican party (as it's own political brand) and it's November candidates, are trying to distance themselves from him, going so far in some cases, as to oppose him.

Brand, and all things associated with branding, are within the domain of perception and marketing - period. Thinking of it otherwise is simply bad business and very bad marketing. If you think a brand's meaning or value is only truly defined by those who have actual experience with the product/service, then you have limited your abilities as a marketer and severly hobbled the marketing efforts of anyone who has hired you. Perhaps that is why some of us work in marketing, and others of us work as bloggers.

Great conversation here. I see Google as another marketing vehicle within the Internet "media category." Therefore, it should be leveraged for the good of your brand just like radio, TV, word of mouth, print, outdoor, etc.

Just like TV commercials (political ads, consumer good ads, etc.) can badmouth competitors (candidate A vs. candidate B, detergent 1 vs. detergent 2), the same can be done on the Internet. Google doesn't define a brand absolutely, but it sure as hell lends a huge hand in today's marketplace. I think at the very least, most anyone can agree to that.

I agree, great discussion. I stand unwavered though, and my follow up blog entry will make your heads spin. Stay tuned.