Is Google Losing It?

[Andilinks]

I was wondering this long before I had an axe to grind on this matter, but then I was reluctant to bite the hand... Now that they're not feeding me so well I'm sharpening my incisors but really I'm simply now being honest about something I've been keeping quiet on.

It was well before I joined the AdSense program that I began to notice that the organic search relevance was inferior to to paid results.

This is a short article that mostly just asks this question.

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=170704242&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_news%20“Is%20Google%20Losing%20It?”

I'm currently promoting Ask.com, formerly Ask Jeeves, being run by Barry Diller the QVC guy. But that's just because all the others seem to have an unpleasant history with me.

Are there any opinions here?

[Jeff]

I know how you feel worrying that google might get "too big" but honestly I still get great results searching in google - find what I need, and faster than using ask.com. Also, while I worried about them expanding beyond search engine to "mega empire" I have to admit that gmail is working well for me, froogle is actually very handy now, image search works, and even the new google maps are pretty neat - very much like the drag and scroll interface better than any I've previously used.

It's definitely a worry that one search engine controls so much of the traffic since things will always go wrong at some point and having only one search engine dominating so much means that when it goes wrong, web sites will be affected so drastically. So hopefully others will continue to get better to compete with google. But I have yet to see google losing... anything.

[Wassercrats]

I don't know how Google compares with any other search engine, but I get lots of annoying spam results. I was looking for a "black clip-on fan" to put near my computer. They all seem to be white, which doesn't match. Most of the results are spam, or otherwise irrelevant.

[Andilinks]

Most of the results are spam, or otherwise irrelevant.Yes, that's my problem, fake blogs and useless directories filling the organic listings while the paid results remain relevant.

Gmail and Gmaps are both working great for me and other G stuff that I don't use probably works fine too.

It's the search that is failing me. A lot could depend on the types of searches you do.

[Andilinks]

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/rsstory/46239.html

They did sneak $4 billion cash in the back door yesterday with amazingly little press coverage. This might help with cash for new technology, but it might blunt their edge as they go shopping for villas and private islands.

[Randall]

I don't know if they're losing it so much as failing to improve on the core search technology. They expand it (local search, phone numbers, etc) but the basic search feels like it hasn't changed at all since they finished designing their logo. Probably not true, but that's my perception.

But then again, when I see other companies trying radically new approaches, I'll do a few idle searches, and then I go back to Google. Too gimmicky, maybe. :dunno:

And MSN and Yahoo don't seem to offer anything better, just a little different.

Dunno.

Randall

[Andilinks]

I indicated in another post that my site has finally been unbanned, and this past day I've been carefully examining what they have indexed and how it has been categorized, trying to deduce why on Aug 22 it was unacceptable yet today is back in--no changes.

About all I can say for sure is that something is definitely amiss with the Google index. Is it irreversible? If they were a company with a cash flow problem it would probably be terminal, but Google's only cash flow problem is the sheer bulk of the hundred dollar bills spilling out of their breifcases--so let's hope they fix it.

I base my conclusion on observations I've made over the past 54 days and in particular discussions with other webmasters whose sites have been banned for unknown reasons which Google will only hint at and seems to be changing their standards about in mid-stream.

Reiterating, my site was rejected for inclusion on Aug.22 but accepted Sept 22 and no changes have been made to the site during that time, so the change must be external to the site; i.e. in the way Google evaluates it. Also possible that they were using different versions of their cache, or updated versions of their algorithm.

My sense is that they are frantically fixing things by hand and claiming that it is all in the automation...

If I could put my finger on the problem I wouldn't be sitting here typing I'd be in Mountain View pitching myself as a seven figure consultant.

I'm just looking at the black box and concluding that there's something wrong here...

I sure hope they fix it and if they don't I sure hope some competitor comes along with a better solution.

Andi

[Wassercrats]

I think Yahoo did something like that to me, but their solution was faster and more personalized, even though I had to email their domain's administrative contact because they haven't posted an appropriate email address for such complaints on their website for years. In my case, it was just one page that was omitted. One day after their form letter reply explaining that they don't index every webpage, mine was indexed.

I think Google and Yahoo can go on just fine with problems like this. I don't follow this stuff as closely as you, but I don't think there's a huge problem here. You do have a ton of unoriginal content, you know. How carefully selected it was makes the difference, but that's hard for a robot to detect.

I think when Google appraises a website for Adsense, they should take advantage of that appraisal and use it in their search results, good or bad. Even that might not have helped you, but it's something I thought of yesterday.

Remember to update your blog. It's starting to turn into a forum for stock tips, but I think the last post by me is keeping it in check.

[Andilinks]

...but their solution was faster and more personalized, Yes exactly. Google's idea that pure automation works is rubbish, people are still better and people know it.

The 2005 invasion of the scrapers and splogs created a big mess and I do think they are fixing it but their insistance that it's all automatic and their shabby treatment of honest websites caught in the crossfire is a disgrace. I got caught in it because I thought Google could tell the difference. While I admit to making pages for profit there was no indication from Google that it would cause a problem--it is after all what THEY do to make money and I was getting a lot of positive feedback in the form of eft from GOOG itself. On the other hand I did have a nagging feeling that Google's search team just might be stupid and arrogant enough for a wholesale ban.

Stupidity and arrogance get a free ride in departments loading bundles of cash from Wall Street, that should be no surprise.

Remember to update your blog. You're right, I haven't looked at it in weeks. So it's getting spammed now, it figures. This whole Google mess has disrupted all my routines, but I never was much of a blogger.

[Andilinks]

This is a good commentary:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7BF4B89695%2D08A5%2D4E20%2DB08B%2DC94B4E143F03%7D&siteid=mktw&dist=