Posts tagged with 'SERPs'
Last week, Google unveiled an algorithm update designed to ensure that its SERPs aren't dominated by low-quality content farms which specialize in producing rivers of search engine-friendly pages.
The rationale for this update is clear: faced with increasing public criticism over the quality of its SERPs, Google had to act.
You'd think that after being caught red handed copying Google (or not), the engineers at Bing would come up with something original. But copying Google is just far too easy.
Sarcasm aside, Bing announced yesterday that it has added new personalization and localization features closely resembling similar features Google has had in place for some time.
Have you started questioning the quality of Google's search results?
You've probably noticed that a lot of people have been lately.
Before you start asking too many questions, however, Google's Matt Cutts
wants you to take into consideration a fact you may not know: Google
really wasn't all that good in 2000.
Google and Microsoft are rivals, and they have been for some time. Everybody knows that. But what was previously a healthy rivalry between two of the most prominent names in technology increasingly looks like a bar-room brawl.
Earlier this week, the two companies became involved in a very public spat that created a social media spectacle and led TechCrunch's MG Siegler to write, "Wow, Microsoft and Google are punching each other in the face right in front of us."
Blekko may not be a big player in the search space, but the upstart search engine is trying to make a name for itself by playing up its focus on eliminating web spam and content farms from its SERPs.
The company's timing couldn't have been better: Google is increasingly criticized over the quality of its search results, and many say the search market's 800 pound gorilla isn't doing enough to crack down on those who look to game it for profit.
As consumers, techies and the media trade some of their infatuation with
Google for the latest crop of super-hot web upstarts like Facebook, the
world's most dominant search engine is finding that more and more
people are pointing out its flaws.
The quality of Google's SERPs have increasingly come under question,
with some complaining that Google isn't doing enough to weed out web
spam and low-quality content that ranks well but doesn't offer consumers
much value. I am one of those who have been highly critical of Google's
capabilities in these areas.
Since Google launched Instant, there have been numerous claims that Instant has a bias towards brands. In October, for instance, Siddharth Shah of Efficient Frontier Insights observed that "of the 26 letters in the alphabet, 21 have brands as the first suggestions."
Based on this, he suggested that Google Instant is "going to make
brand key words more expensive, increase impression volumes by 30% -
Last Friday, the New York Times detailed the antics of a gentleman who
may be a contender for the web's most unscrupulous merchant. Unlike
other unscrupulous merchants, including the lazy, the flaky and the
scammy, "Mr. B" has taken great pride in his unsavory -- and potentially
criminal -- treatment of customers.
Many of the responses to the New York Times piece have centered on
Google's role in Mr. B's online business, which sells eyewear online.
That's because Mr. B worked his site up the rankings by taking advantage
of the fact that many of the complaints being posted about his business
online were generating valuable backlinks despite the fact that these
backlinks, of course, were not really positive signals.
Google's dominance in search stems from a lot of things. One of the biggest contributors to that dominance is the perception that Google's algorithm is capable of delivering relevant, high-quality results. Those results, Google has repeatedly told the world, are as objective and unbiased as is possible.
But is that really true? According to Harvard Business School assistant professor Ben Edelman, the answer is 'no'.
Google loves brands. Google's Vince update was referred to by many as
'the brand update' because major brands seemed to benefit most from it.
That Google would seek ways to incorporate 'brand equity' into its
algorithm is not entirely surprising. After all, in many cases, there's
an argument to be made that the websites of recognized brands are more
likely to offer Google's users what they're searching for when it comes
to particular queries.