Register: When algorithms attack, does Google hear you scream?

[unc70]

Inside Google's search penalties gulag

One day in June 2006, search startup Foundem vanished from Google. Foundem is the developer of a "universal vertical search" technology, and currently offers comparison shopping across a range of consumer and travel categories by drilling down into vendor sites and returning details of actual flights and products. But on 26 June 2006, Google flipped a switch and all of the obvious comparison shopping keywords no longer applied for the company.

Foundem had been effectively 'disappeared' from Google search results.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/19/google_hand_of_god/

This article goes on to study the changes made at Google in 2006 and 2007 so that the search results produced by Google were no longer solely the result of algorithms without human biases.

While the primary focus of the article is on shopping related commerce sites, the implications apply to other areas like medical research, politics, news archives, blog sites, and most anything else where impartial web searches are crucial.

[Laelth]

1. k&r for exposure. This is very important. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[unc70]

4. Even I missed these important changes affecting Google search results

Until roughly 2007, whether Google results seemed reasonable or not, Google had claimed claimed they were the result of algorithms applied equally to all sites. That apparently changed about two years ago, not just with commerce sites, the primary focus of The Register investigative article, but apparently with other types of searches.

I suspect that most of us who use Google had still thought that its results were entirely based on it algorithms and ranking system. I am relatively aware of these things and had still missed some of the Google policy changes documented in this article. There are may sites that clearly state that they use human experts to filter results in efforts to produce higher quality search results. Whether valid or not, you are on alert that humans are involved in selecting what results you see from these sites.

It's a bit of a long story, but glad some others agree on its import.

[nilram]

5. very important! it's just how many of us filter the internet.

I'm thinking I absolutely need to branch out to other search engines. Even... even... Bing.
<cough,cough,aack>

[annabanana]

2. k&r. . . . . n/t

[annabanana]

3. k&r. . . . . n/t

[Canuckistanian]

6. K&R