- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Google is a business not some altruistic internet guardian.
I don’t call it corrupt – I call it inevitable – the lure of the almighty dollar.Google also gives higher placement results to sites that have adwords displayed – or that are paying for adwords ads.
They’re a business – and their business is selling adwords.
That bais is riddled through their search results.:sarcasm:
Google IS corrupt. Horribly so.
Really? Profit = Corruption?
Do you guys recommend casinos / poker rooms that don’t pay you affiliate fees?
:roflmao:@TheGooner 170345 wrote:
Google also gives higher placement results to sites that have adwords displayed – or that are paying for adwords ads.
My retail site would appear in google serp position #2 for my top keyword in the natural listings (for 3 years consistently). At the same time I advertised with adwords which listed it in either the top 3 or far right 3 sponsored listings for the same keyword depending on how much I bid. While the ad appeared on some of the google network sites it was listed twice on google, once for the adwords ad and once in the natural listings at #2.
I stopped using adwords, optimized the site and it moved to #1 position in the google natural listings for the same keyword. Plus the site has a pagerank of only 2.
well the point i was aiming for is that google claims they are not compromised in their search results but I think this says either that the algos need fixing so they don’t put copied pages in front of original writings … or more likely they are giving their own an unfair advantage.
so ya, i think its fair to call them on this.
I promote casinos that are fair-odds. If I found out one didn’t have that: i’d take them down.
Not sure that fits into a reply to G’s statement but then he kinda lost me on asking if I would promote casinos that don’t pay me or make a profit. No sir I would not.
and I understand what you’re saying and I don’t take anything away from Google for making money but you’ve either got to walk the walk when you talk the talk … or expect to be called on it.
Sounds like Slot got treated okay though. when I first started reading your post I was expecting it to end with … and when i stopped adwords I fell out of rankings.
I don’t think that’s true that they’d use their SE in such manor for simple reason there’s too many to ever have want/need to punish them if they fall out of favor.
right now google’s like a guy selling tickets to a crowd that’s got no end in sight and if the guy sold a 100 tickets to just one person and then found out the money was counterfeit … he’d lose a ton more money chasing that guy down than if he’d just continue to sell tickets
so I don’t think they’re petty for practical reason if nothing else … but I totally think they’re manipulating the system to unfair advantage … in ways that make them hypocritical to what they themselves set for guidelines.
bottom line is that something is very wrong when somebody can outrank my original material for a search targeting that material.
TheGooner;170357 wrote:Really? Profit = Corruption?
Do you guys recommend casinos / poker rooms that don’t pay you affiliate fees?
:roflmao:No but we also also don’t scream around that we promote casinos for free
Interesting debate BB1WEBS
:hattip:I’m just surprised that experienced affiliates believe that Google (or any other search engine) is some sort of benign service created for good. They’re vast business enterprises – at last count Google’s shares were $470+ each and the company was capitalised at around 148 Billion US dollars.
Google doesn’t say that it’s free or not for profit – indeed with money like that invested you can be assured that google is gouging money from nearly every endevour.
Like most affiliate sites the search engines do not charge surfers/readers when they visit and so it’s only making money at the other end, depending on what you click on.
(Just as affiliate sites only list programs that they have a contract with)
The idea that Google has weightings that reward Google adword rich content can’t be a major shock … why do you think so many naff blogs score so highly in the rankings … it’s that little sidebar of ads that does it.
Likewise Google gives itself and it’s many offshoots a PR of 9, despite the fact that it’s usually a contentless hole, again do you think that’s really justified?
In the end Googles algo is very complicated, it had better be to justify all the hype that they have made about it, but I am sure that there are several steps where “commerical” factors can be added to the weighting such as “is it ours?”, “does it have adwords?”, and “does it use adwords?”.
The content will still be relevant, but preferential ratings will push up relevant content that is ALSO likely to be profitable. That’s not corrupt – it’s business. At least in my opinion.
(Affiliate example – two casino sites suit a reader and they’re almost identical – one pays 10% more than the other – so which one do you push?)
Let’s face it – if Google doesn’t do this then they’re missing a pretty obvious money-making trick right? Free services are usually paid for by adverts.
You want a truely independant search engine? Then it’s about time you started paying a small fee for every search. Say 1c a time? Then with a paid service you might have a legitimate beef about true independance.
is a good debate.
okay my understanding is that what makes google the grand SE that it has achieved … is that they have a process for returning results which is uncompromised by human intervention.
thus you get a return of results which (ideally anyway) won’t be loaded with a bunch of spam sites. You type in looking for “casinos played while holding on foot in toliet” and you get results returned that are going to be closest to what you searched … and not be a redirect to 888.com
but that is in essence the situation where google is returning results that are placing higher the second copy to original content … and that they are benefiting from it.
if it was just happening on a random basis where google wasn’t benefiting from the occurence then it could be said the algos are needing a tweak but this instance makes it painfully obvious they are manipulating their system for their own benefit.
Is this wrong? No, not from a biz pov but it is wrong in that their claim to fame is having such a sterile and true process. That’s why I use them. Now I am to question them on every search I do.
its all about crediblity and I think they have lost on this particular battle. Set aside whether or not i like google, I always respected them for returning results that might be spammed but I never thought the results would be tainted by google itself.
Get where I’m going with that?
How is their credibility effected however if this sort of thing isn’t brought to light? They need to be accountable for such matters and supply a reasonable explanation for when these things happen if they want to stay at the top of the game.
And this sort of thing definitely needs to be given more exposure when it happens because I had no clue about this aspect until I read this article. I really think much less of them now than before and I might start looking around to do my searches instead of being so loyal to google.
How many reading this thread were aware of this angle? Well even if you were … I think you’re in the minority.
But it won’t take long for word to spread if they keep up this behavior.
@bb1webs 170522 wrote:
You type in looking for “casinos played while holding on foot in toliet” and you get results returned that are going to be closest to what you searched … and not be a redirect to 888.com.
I’m not saying that Google go to paid links to gambling sites – but after finding 1000 results that sort of match your specific search … I believe that commerically viable content (adwords) or own content (at google) then gets extra ranking points to rise to the top.
Internet advertising is a multi-billion dollar enterprise – google leads it – and it’s all adwords. Google categorises content and prefers to display content which pays them.
@bb1webs 170522 wrote:
I always respected them for returning results that might be spammed but I never thought the results would be tainted by google itself.
Get where I’m going with that?
I sort of get where you’re going with that – except for the “tainted” by google part – it’s all Googles own work and rankings – it’s all produced by google.
The whole search algo is Google’s proprietary research, run on Google’s hardware, sucking up bankwidth paid for by Google.
The fact that a small (but important) part of the calculations in their complex algo reflect the commerical reality of making money doesn’t surprise me … or particularly offend me.
@bb1webs 170522 wrote:
But it won’t take long for word to spread if they keep up this behavior.
Word might spread – but all FREE services do this. All search engines. All free-ware. It’s all advertising supported.
Can you find a better SE set of results?
I looked at Cuil.com – it’s bad.
Want to try yahoo? They just signed up to re-sell Google’s adwords and probably did their own algo rejiggle. (in an attempt to avoid Microsoft’s takeover).
Perhaps you prefer MSN? Fancy Microsoft now being held up as a source of truth and non-profit? I suspect that they’re just the same as the rest.
In the end mate, I guess I’m agreeing that it is not pure – but I’m old enough and jaded enough to not be surprised about it … and if I was given three choices :a) a pay Google search engine that is not “commercially adjusted”.
b) a free Google search engine with “commercial tweaks”.
c) no google at all …THen I’d rather choose option B. The free search.
Wouldn’t you?Hi gain all (G),
no you’re right G, about the finding a better SE. I doubt it will happen soon.
But if Google is not made to be accountable for such actions … at least let them know we’re aware and not happy about it … I fear it will get more blatant as time goes on.
It is ad supported, but that’s what the right side of the results are for, and I can tell you personally (though I think Paul was there with his wallet out right next to me … at least for a while) … that google does just fine with what they make on adwords and their other enterprises … they don’t need to be pushing their own agenda so that it does what I’d call being just short of virtual plagurism
Anything but the original at the top of the results for that search of almost a paragraph of text is plagurism because its saying this IS the original copy of the story, you don’t need search any further.
I mean how can a copy be more important than the real thing? There is no logic possible to explain a copy ranking above an original with exception that perhaps the original is setting on a page with malicious script on it etc.
Google themselves by their actions have proven duplicate content is at very least only worthy of their supplemental results … yet now when its to their benefit then duplicate content actually allows it to rank above the original.
That ain’t right on a lot of levels and to me its not about money but about them being fair for the sake of being fair, and for the sake of providing most relevant results and those will always be with the original author’s version.
Google owns it. They can do with it whatever the hell they want. Either you play with them, or you play without them.
It’s pretty simple. Corruption doesn’t even enter into the picture.
Dominant yes. Confusing definitely. Annoying? For some. Corrupt? Not really.
@TheGooner 170502 wrote:
Interesting debate BB1WEBS
:hattip:I’m just surprised that experienced affiliates believe that Google (or any other search engine) is some sort of benign service created for good. They’re vast business enterprises – at last count Google’s shares were $470+ each and the company was capitalised at around 148 Billion US dollars.
Google doesn’t say that it’s free or not for profit – indeed with money like that invested you can be assured that google is gouging money from nearly every endevour.
Like most affiliate sites the search engines do not charge surfers/readers when they visit and so it’s only making money at the other end, depending on what you click on.
(Just as affiliate sites only list programs that they have a contract with)
The idea that Google has weightings that reward Google adword rich content can’t be a major shock … why do you think so many naff blogs score so highly in the rankings … it’s that little sidebar of ads that does it.
Likewise Google gives itself and it’s many offshoots a PR of 9, despite the fact that it’s usually a contentless hole, again do you think that’s really justified?
In the end Googles algo is very complicated, it had better be to justify all the hype that they have made about it, but I am sure that there are several steps where “commerical” factors can be added to the weighting such as “is it ours?”, “does it have adwords?”, and “does it use adwords?”.
The content will still be relevant, but preferential ratings will push up relevant content that is ALSO likely to be profitable. That’s not corrupt – it’s business. At least in my opinion.
(Affiliate example – two casino sites suit a reader and they’re almost identical – one pays 10% more than the other – so which one do you push?)
Let’s face it – if Google doesn’t do this then they’re missing a pretty obvious money-making trick right? Free services are usually paid for by adverts.
You want a truely independant search engine? Then it’s about time you started paying a small fee for every search. Say 1c a time? Then with a paid service you might have a legitimate beef about true independance.
Before Google went public they were to say the least “very cool”. The Adwords setup was a mere $5 bucks. Yahoo/Overture $50 bucks but you got cpc credit for it. However the cost per click was rather high.
Plus Google didn’t have the bidding on keywords like Yahoo/Overture did until they went public. It became a bidding war to get the first, second or third ad position. You could also pay a premium per click and have your ad placed on certain target sites. Now they have to answer to the stock holders which changed their business model somewhat. I also think they cut down the amount they pay those in their Adsense program. Before the bidding I used to get monthly checks from them, now it takes 2-3 times longer to get the minimum payout.
Google does hire the best people, taking about 11 hours in total interviews just to get hired. Lunch is always free for all employees as well. Many Google employees take lunch back to their desk instead of going out for 1-2 hours. The cost of the free food is less than the lost production.
Hi gain all,
ya I saw a tv show about google and if I recall correct not only is the food free but its fixed by some kind of fancy-dan chef.
Seems like i remember they had an excellent break room area with all kinds of neat toys (of the grown up kinds) and the atmosphere was painted very bright and it struck me as being a dream place to work.
Back to the corrupt. I think it is fair to call them corrupt if they’re going to not be what they claim and they claim their SE is set to provide the most relevant search results possible and that they can not be tainted by human interference.
Or at least that was my understanding.
I’d be hollering just as loud if it were MSN or Yahoo that was providing results that were above the original article .. for a search that should return that original article at the top of the results.
If that is allowed to happen (which it wouldn’t, people would switch engines when it became common knowledge) … it takes all the incentive out of writing fresh content, which destroys the whole purpose of the net.
I know I’d stop writing if I knew it was only going to feather somebody else’s cap. wouldn’t you? The whole idea doesn’t work without protecting original work to credit the original writer. Things may not stop on a dime but in the big picture it just doesn’t hold up over the long view.
I’m surprised not more people are voicing concern over this because it could be much more than just a slight injustice if it continues.
@bb1webs 170736 wrote:
I’m surprised not more people are voicing concern over this because it could be much more than just a slight injustice if it continues.
i think it’s because most people don’t think of it as an injustice that’s why. It’s Google’s website – they can display anything they want in any order they want. Just like you or I can order programs as we see fit.
They still produce the most relevant search results of all the search engines I reckon, it’s just been given a new “cost recovery” tweak.
:wink-wink@TheGooner 170768 wrote:
They still produce the most relevant search results of all the search engines I reckon, it’s just been given a new “cost recovery” tweak.
:wink-winkWell, they don’t. I have been doing a lot of research online over the last 6 months or so. All kinds of topics related to building, materials, tools, laws and regulations, furniture, appliances and, and, and.
Google has proven to be pretty crappy and I don’t know for the life of me how a lot of the results get in there.
Google has been an exercise in frustration. And the bigger the web, the worse its going to get. Indexing the entire web is going to be more and more taxing.
I would like to see a true “elite search”, with hand picked listings and quality control.
And, while I generally agree with Gooner’s business thinking, I do have to say that copied content should not rank above original content, period.
