I occasionally get asked this question, and I usually answer that different methodologies may produce different estimates. But I know that doesn’t really get at the heart of the matter. After all, given how many searches are conducted across the U.S. each month, shouldn’t the search share number from the various measurement services be pretty close to each other?

Let’s examine the Google search share figures in November 2008 for the three largest online measurement services, in order: comScore, Nielsen and Hitwise.

comScore and Nielsen are within about half a percentage point of each other, while Hitwise shows Google at a substantially higher 72%. Now, why is it that Hitwise consistently shows a search share about 8 percentage points higher than comScore and Nielsen? A behavior as ubiquitous as Internet search yields extremely robust sample sizes, which means that there should be little variation between the services if each was sufficiently representative of the U.S. Internet audience.

Let’s investigate why that may not be the case…

Both comScore and Nielsen build their Internet panels by recruiting consumers directly and then installing patented software on the panelists’ computers to collect their online behavioral data. comScore is the only service to also include complete AOL proprietary activity. This ensures that all Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are correctly represented in the comScore database. However, Hitwise obtains its clickstream data by purchasing it directly from those ISPs that are willing to sell it to third parties. It’s unclear exactly which ISPs or how many provide their data to Hitwise, since the company does not disclose that information. However, what is publicly known is that, mainly because of privacy concerns, the vast majority of ISPs are, today, unwilling to sell their data to third parties. The most prominent one – and likely only one of the major ISPs – that is willing to sell its data is United Online/NetZero. Interestingly, an analysis of Google’s market share across ISPs (using comScore’s data which represents all ISPs) suggests that the Hitwise data may be mainly reflecting Google’s performance at United Online/NetZero, an ISP composed primarily of dial-up users.

The analysis below shows how Google search share varies across ISPs in the comScore panel:

Here, we can see that Google’s search share peaks among United Online/NetZero users at about 73% – a number that is strikingly similar to what Hitwise reported as Google’s overall U.S. share in November. The other ISPs shown above are all major broadband providers, who do not sell their data to third parties. Google’s market share in each of them is significantly lower than within United Online/NetZero. Note, especially, that Google’s share is lowest among AOL ISP users, an ISP that Hitwise does not measure.

So, is it possible that Google’s high share as reported by Hitwise overstates reality and is simply a result of the fact that Hitwise’s estimates are predominately based on ISP data from United Online/NetZero, the ISP where Google’s market share happens to be highest?

What do you think?

It’s not that big of a history lesson, but online ads have evolved from novelty to absolute bedrock; they are now a part of many major brands’ ad spend. As soon as this became status quo, advertisers began to demand planning tools to find the right audiences for campaigns, and the industry responded. Then, the next logical demand was issued: give us the ability to evaluate the results of these campaigns – and by the way, please do this with measures consistent with what we use in traditional media.

Lo and behold, several mainstream solutions now exist to do just that. It’s closed the loop on advertising in the digital space: plan, buy, evaluate results.

We’ve just released data indicating that while the economy may be slowing, people’s tendency to play games has increased dramatically. The reasons are fairly elementary. People are seeking a diversion from the economic storm clouds as they watch their bank accounts dwindle and credit card debts rise.

Games, as it turns out, are a great diversion. Lost your job? Kill some trolls. No pay raise this year? See how far you can whack that penguin into the void. Pressure on because fewer people are having to do the same or more work? No problem, Bejeweled will take your mind off of it.

Many pundits out there have said that gaming is recession proof, but as much as demand for diversions like games might be increasing in this economy, discretionary income is nevertheless in decline. Which means that if you don’t have the money to go out to eat or the movies or vacation, you are probably short on the cash to buy a cartridge game or a PC game as well.

I predict that, if gaming remains recession resistant (my term for it), it will only remain so with a shift in the monetization model. Thirty to fifty bucks for a game is a hard pill to swallow if you aren’t sure you’ll have a job next month, and while micro-transaction models might act as a buffer, discretionary income is still just that -- discretionary.

Which brings us to an alternate monetization model, not so directly dependent on discretionary income: ad-supported games. Over the next 24-36 months, game sales may suffer along with the rest of retail. But as gaming demand increases and people turn to free alternatives, the window of opportunity for ad-supported games is getting bigger. Meanwhile, as our data has indicated, ad impressions targeting gamers and in-game ads will continue to climb.

There is a caveat; pressure from the agency and planning community continues to drive demand to evaluate the effectiveness of campaigns. The gaming audience is no longer a niche, as many mistakenly think – rather, it is decidedly mainstream. So measuring who was reached, how frequently, and what happened as a result of the campaign must be evaluated.

And not only must campaigns be evaluated, but they have to meet basic conditions; the measurement has to be from a third-party, the methodology needs to be rock solid and the measurements taken need to be compatible with the same metrics used in measuring traditional media.

Close the loop. Plan, buy, evaluate. Gaming ad impressions are on the rise when many other categories are down – but it won’t last unless everyone gets on board and starts providing the measurement and metrics that are status quo out there on Madison avenue.

Game on!