GML2022: Thoughts & reactions from the panel
One of the underlying thoughts from the panel was this GML2022 was a very different Google Marketing Live event than past shows.
“So this year’s Google Marketing Live was all about commerce,” Gales said. “Commerce was the star of the show and I don’t know that I was expecting that.”
Bacchini highlighted the point that this year there was a lot of talk about auto-generated creative and speculates that we will see more of this in the future.
“In the keynote, they said ‘Let’s build the future of marketing together’ and then every mention of the future of marketing was AI and automation,” Henderson said. “It felt a little over the top.”
The consensus was also that folks were expecting more about some of the newer campaign types like Performance Max, but real news on the topic never materialized.
All agreed that the lack of talk around keywords and bidding was surprising, and unique, for a Google Marketing Live event.
Reaction to Amazon & Tiktok
The panel thought that the event felt more “reactive” to Amazon and TikTok with announcements aimed at taking market share from the ecommerce and social media giants.
Everyone on the panel also agreed that this year’s event was the most ecommerce heavy event to date.
Gales was most excited about the new vision for the search experience. She said:
- “We always think of search as more bottom of funnel, demand capture with people looking for exactly what they want and finding a solution … and instead this new vision informed by shopping features, by video features was really about discovery and engagement.”
She also went on to state that this vision may be a longer-term play and that not all of the plan will come to fruition immediately.
“In previous Google Marketing Lives I was always looking for more video and in this year’s Google Marketing Live video had its place,” Henke said.
Henke also praised the efforts of Google in competing with the likes of TikTok and Instagram with the creator funds and full adoption of vertical video on Google’s biggest stage.
There were also questions about how video will actually fit together with the new story ad types.
Other positives from Google Marketing Live
Some additional GML2022 elements that the panel liked were:
- Shareable asset library. Henderson noted that he wasn’t expecting the new shareable asset library, but that he was delighted at the prospect of it.
- Google tag. The panel had high hopes for the new Google tag that was announced but are still hungry for more information.
- Connected TVs. Henke made an astute point that you can currently target TV-only campaigns, but with new partners like Hulu this is yet another way to “step on more turf” of competitors.
- Geo-experiments. Henerson was excited to test the geo-experiments feature around conversion lift.
- Discovery campaigns. The panel was excited about the ability to bring video into discovery campaigns and on the continued buildout of that campaign type.
Potential concerns from Google Marketing Live
One main element of concern for the panel was the risk posed by uploading user data.
Bacchini made it clear that while Google wants advertisers and agencies to upload first-party data, there may be a risk associated with that, which falls directly to the advertiser/agency.
She made a plea to consult with your legal team before acting on some of the first-party data uploads.
Whether you like or dislike the changes announced at this year’s Google Marketing Live, they will be coming to your accounts soon. This roundtable gives a fair look at how four ads experts are planning for these changes.
Watch the full SMX Advanced roundtable
You can view the full discussion at no cost until Aug. 31, along with all of the other sessions from this year’s SMX Advanced.
At this year’s SMX Advanced Julie …more
Remember, the need to create new campaigns, leverage new channels, improve targeting, etc., means you are going to add more technology to your stack. That’s okay, as long as you keep the CAC impact in mind.
Is smaller better?
There’s an idea going around that we should all make our stacks smaller via consolidation. The argument is that a smaller stack will be easier to manage and less costly – but will it? Replacing five products with one product doesn’t guarantee easier stack management and lower costs. A new product could add a new level of complexity and require a long implementation and onboarding period and extensive training. It could also cost significantly more than the products that are being replaced.
Consolidation is a favorite theme of vendors with large multi-function systems that want you to use their product over everything else. There are times when this makes sense, particularly when integrations are involved, but there are plenty of times when it doesn’t. As yet there is no single platform that can deliver the functionality needed across the stack so don’t waste any time thinking about that.
Consolidation can be needed when a stack gets out of control due to lack of centralized oversight and purchasing. Then bloat becomes obvious through skyrocketing expenses without the ability to demonstrate return on investment. We’ve worked through this process with a number of customers and in every situation it’s because of redundant contracts, products and functionality. If you have processes in place to prevent this, your only risk of bloat is keeping products that didn’t live up to expectations or no longer serve your marketing objectives. This is easily avoided by establishing performance benchmarks and conducting regular stack reviews.
If we can’t define the optimum size of a tech stack then we certainly can’t look at a stack and say “that needs to be consolidated.” Stop worrying about stack size, the perfect size for your stack is one that ensures you meet your marketing objectives in a cost-effective way.
Get the daily newsletter digital marketers rely on.
How big should a martech stack be? The answer is, …more
Knowledge panels are not to be confused with business boxes. These are not based on the Knowledge Graph, but on an entry on Google Business. To what extent the data from Google Business is also taken into account in the Knowledge Graph is not clear, but it is not unlikely.
Google uses different templates for the knowledge panel. The placeholders for the content in the knowledge panel vary depending on the entity or entity type that is searched for. The placeholders are based on the standard attributes of the respective entity type.
How does Google determine the relevance of an entity to serve a knowledge panel?
The criteria by which Google evaluates this relevance are not clearly documented or there are no concrete statements from Google.
Wikipedia plays a special role for the proof entity. The surest way to be recognized as an entity is to have an entry on Wikipedia.
But other platforms that provide semi-structured data, such as Soundcloud, can also be used by Google to identify entities, as the hack for the keyword “SEO services India” has shown.
There it becomes clear that SoundCloud was used as the source for the entity detection. Websites such as SoundCloud or Wikipedia always present information in a consistent structure. This means that the information can be easily extracted from the websites without mark-ups.
How does Google create a knowledge panel?
The knowledge panels were first presented in the SERPs with the introduction of the Knowledge Graph in 2012.
The presence of knowledge panels has been increasing in Google’s …more