Microsoft ending anti-Google ‘Scroogled’ ad campaign

It looks like Microsoft is done bashing Google — for now.

Late last week, Microsoft’s Director of Search Stefan Weitz told California’s KQED that the company’s “Scroogled” campaign is “about finished.”

Back in November, Microsoft attacked Google’s new shopping advertising model and they even created a new word and website to prove it.

Then early last month, Microsoft re-launched the Scroogled assault by featuring ads highlighting the fact that the search giant uses the contents of Gmail messages to deliver ads. That caused Todd Bishop to write how the ads felt a lot like those endless election campaigns full of not-quite-complete information designed to motivate us based on our fears.

Scroogled.com is still up and running, though, so the campaign is not completely toast. Microsoft is also going toe-to-toe with Google in its bid to dethrone Gmail with a new-and-improved Outlook email service.

UPDATE, 5:50 P.M. — Microsoft said that while the ad portion of this phase has ended, the “Scroogled” campaign will continue.

Previously on GeekWire: Microsoft’s new Scroogled ads: Aren’t we smarter than this?

  • Guest

    So, did it work and was it worth it? They did get over 100K to sign their petition. That’s a success.

    Everyone I know who’s seen the ads hate them. They think they they’re over the top and manipulative (like political ads).

    Most commentary on the ads is the same about the tone and saying it’s not clear that this kind of ad works outside of politics.

    The best analysis I’ve seen is this: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112421/microsofts-scroogle-ads-and-mark-penn.

    I suspect the net around this is that it’s not done much to change things. It probably reinforced already negative opinions around both companies and tipped a few people into negative opinions on both.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gervelis Gabriel Gervelis

    Personally, I hate it when companies slam other competitors in their marketing efforts to gain market share. It shows a lack of creativity and highlights desperation. I’m sure this campaign caused more harm then good.

  • http://twitter.com/EricBurgess Eric Burgess

    It wasn’t a clever campaign. It was stupid, really. They just can’t come up with good names for their campaigns. “Bing it On?” C’mon.

  • Guest

    Kudos to Microsoft! Without the added expenditure of a time-intensive campaign, Microsoft got a maximal amount of eyeballs and major social stickiness. “Scroogled” has truly paid dividends and will continue to do so long after the last spot leaves the airwaves.

    • The Other Guest

      Kudos to Google! Without any expenditure of a campaign, Google got a maximum amount of eyeballs and major social stickiness. “Microfumbled” has, again, truly paid dividends and will continue to do so long after the last spot leaves the airways.

      Leave it to Microsoft to shoot themselves in the foot with some lame campaign that drove at least some of their users to Google and further fuelled the negative perception of Microsoft as a responsible, grown-up company that seems incapable of being original and creative. “Bing it On”? Really? That’s just laughable and sad.