Google and Objective Search Results
December 31, 2010
English majors rejoice. The Inquirer, a widely read Web log and news service, reported “Google Defends Against Accusations of Search Bias.” I don’t know what’s objective any more. I gave up on search results reflecting substance when I left the commercial database world. Commercial databases, for the most part, have an editorial policy, a method for selecting content, and some means of tagging each abstract, bibliographic citation, or full text document with key words. The Web is different from the commercial database world. Whatever objectivity existed in the commercial database world is turned on its head in the wild and wooly Internet environment. With hit boosting and pay-for-place, tiny extra cost flags on maps and who knows what, money rules the data coop.
What I found interesting about the write up was this passage:
“We built Google for users, not websites,” was the firm’s retort to the accusations. In its cleverly worded statement, Google essentially laid the blame on websites, saying that its algorithm is designed to pick out the best answer for the user, which just happens to be Google’s own services. However unlike its competitors, Google knows with absolute certainty how to game its own search algorithm, putting it at a significant competitive advantage over other websites. On the flip side, can any sensible observer fault Google for promoting its own services over others? After all, it has invested millions of dollars in its software, even giving some of it away such as Android and Chrome, and if users don’t like it, well, there are alternatives.
I assumed that Google was responsible for Google. More evidence that I am a silly goose. I thought those number one positions for Google were a result of just paying the Google ad sales team more money for Adwords that hook to the GOOG.
Stephen E Arnold, December 31, 2010
Freebie
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
