Whether Google is a monopoly isn’t the point. Much has been made of Google chairman Eric Schmidt’s admission on Wednesday that the web giant might be a monopoly, during his testimony before a Senate hearing into Google’s market dominance and its effect on consumers and the marketplace.
But despite the howls of outrage at Google’s size and dominance in the search market, the fact remains that — for the purposes of U.S. antitrust law at least — being a monopoly isn’t illegal. What is illegal is either acquiring that monopoly by nefarious or anticompetitive means, or using that dominant position in a way that harms the market for those services. The problem with applying that to Google is that even if you assume it has a monopoly and is being anticompetitive, it’s not at all clear how that is bad for consumers. How Google Ambushed Microsoft and Changed the Subject. In previous posts, I wrote about the epic battles that are brewing between spammers and content farms—which are turning the web into a massive garbage dump—and search providers, which have to choose between profit and customer satisfaction.
This is a serious problem. The content farms are “dumbing down” the web by churning out thousands of mostly low-quality articles, every day, on topics that Google tells them they can make money from. All of these players are raking in billions of dollars at our expense. I had the opportunity to moderate a panel discussion this week between Google, Microsoft, and Blekko. Blekko Launches Spam Clock To Keep Pressure On Google. Every hour, one million spam pages are created.
That’s a stat that start-up search engine Blekko has now put out — complete with a new “Spam Clock” showing a count-up of spam pages created since the first of the year. Currently, the Spam Clock estimates that there’s been about 155 million spam pages made since January 1. Why Google Needs The Manipulative Web. The Internet sometimes doesn’t work as we hope it would, or think it should.
In certain verticals, great content doesn’t create great links, and because of that, in my opinion, SEOs are often forced to resort to manipulative link practices to get their clients and websites to rank. Websites with low “content link efficacy” are vertically positioned in areas that aren’t socially friendly, such as health insurance or payday loans, and because of this, are often incapable of truly (and naturally) driving lots of links to their site, no matter how impressive and link-worthy their content is.
Websites with high content link efficacy, on the other hand, can occur when sites expect their fair share of links when great effort is put into a piece – because it exists in a space, such as Funny or Die or I Can Has Cheezburger, where users aren’t afraid to use word-of-mouth and also, because the users expect that their friends would also enjoy the content. Once Again: Should Google Be Allowed To Send Itself Traffic? This fall, Google made its links to its millions of Place pages even more prominent on the first search results page, pushing sites such as TripAdvisor.com farther down the page for searches on “Berlin hotels,” for instance.
Place pages for businesses give basic information such as location and hours as well as a summary of user-generated reviews from sites like Citysearch and Yelp. Carter Maslan, a Google product management director, acknowledged “a little bit” of tension between Google and local-information sites. But he said the changes are meant to improve users’ experience by getting them more information about businesses faster, and to provide links to review sites. Upset over lost traffic. Google, These Aren’t Really The Best Answers For Users. They Are The Best Answers For You. Over the weekend, the Wall Street Journal ran an article pointing out how Google is increasingly favoring its own properties, in search results over natural results to outside sites which previously commanded the top spots.
This practice is especially noticeable with Google Places and local results, but there are other examples as well from product and mortgage search to health search. We’ve seen these spats before, particularly between Google and Yelp. Citysearch and Tripadvisor are also taking a traffic hit, it seems. Google responded yesterday with a post on its public policy blog titled “Local Search: It’s all about the best answers for users.” Yeah, right. 2015 : le démantèlement de Google ? Is Google Changing Quality Score Rules Again? In the past few months, two significant issues have been messing with AdWords quality scores—or at least with how many of us perceive quality scores.
Google has developed several bugs in how it displays quality score.Keywords with low quality scores are acting like keywords with high quality scores. Google Quality Score Display Bugs Google’s quality score bugs have been well documented. I’ve seen reports of quality score in AdWords accounts not matching what’s being displayed in the AdWords editor. There are other reports of the quality score in the account not being accurate, etc. Hard-Coding Bias in Google "Algorithmic" Search Results. Disclosure: I serve as a consultant to various companies that compete with Google.
But I write on my own -- not at the suggestion or request of any client, without approval or payment from any client. Google gives its Finance and Health services top on-screen positions. Search for a stock ticker (example: CSCO), and the three most prominent links on the page -- the large-type all-caps ticker symbol, the large price chart, and the left-most details link -- will all take you to Google Finance. Google Finance isn't the most popular finance site; according to ComScore, Yahoo Finance claims that title, and indeed ComScore puts Google Finance in position #60 (as of April 2010). Nonetheless, the three most prominent links all promote Google's in-house finance service.
Google chasse les avis négatifs de sa méthode de ranking - Journal du Net Solutions. La partialité du moteur Google démontrée - Journal du Net Solutions. Bruxelles pourrait ouvrir une enquête anti-trust sur Google. L'UE ouvre une enquête sur Google pour abus de position dominante.