The Consequences of an Echo Chamber for Google Search

January 19, 2018

I read “Google Memory Loss.” The author is a fellow who created a text search engine, helped found OpenText, did some time at the GOOG, and swam in the Semantic Web pond.

The write up provides useful information to anyone wondering why a Google query for a company name goes off the rails or why the Google suggestions have zero relevance to the user’s query.

There were some important points in the write up; for example:

  1. Search is “crushingly expensive”. This means that when Google needs to cut costs and maximize revenue, the company will make business decisions. The decisions may favor advertising revenues. Maybe.
  2. Archival information is not popular. The reasoning may be, “Why index this stuff or revisit the archive to figure out if there is “new information” in the old archive? If old information is not important, what about unpopular sites the National Railway Retirement Board Web content?
  3. Google is into the timely, not the research-centric type of query.
  4. Dr. Bray uses Google but supplements the look up by using very un-Googley search systems.

Here in Harrod’s Creek, we love the Google. Filtered, ad-tailored results are perfect for looking up KY Fry or the NCAA rules committee’s favorite team, the Louisville Cardinals.

A search for Cardinals returns this results page this morning:


Lots of Googlers love March Madness. Too bad if a 7th grader has to look up information about cardinals with feathers.

Stephen E Arnold, January 19, 2018


Comments are closed.

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta