Rant and Rave About Google – The Search

I recently purchased a book called The Search” by John Battelle that explores how Google and its rivals rewrote the rules of business and transformed our culture. What really caught my attention was Chapter 7, titled The Search Economy. It related how a small e-commerce store got caught off guard when Google made an unexpected algorithm change in 2003, which virtually wiped out their business.

Google did it again in late 2005 and will likely do it again. Rumor has it that it will happen again in March 2006.

Google Giveth, Google Taketh Away

Those of you who are webmasters already know how this happens. A group of eager Google engineers laid waste to thousands of mom-and-pop businesses by tweaking Google’s indexing algorithm. These businesses depended on their Google links and listings for their income and livelihoods. Google giveth and Google taketh away.

Knowing that the Google paradigm will always change puts you ahead of the pack; not putting all your marketing eggs in one basket will keep you there.

Your unpaid or “organic” rankings in search engines are free. But how many times have you heard the axiom “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”

Starting to get the picture now?

Google Still Likes Links

I’ve been getting tons of automated requests for two-way and three-way linking. I can’t believe what these people are thinking. The rules are displayed in black and white on Google’s website. Allow me to paraphrase “Build pages for users, not search engines.”

Here’s a typical email I get every day:

Hello, I’m emailing you to exchange a three-way link with your site. Although we are accustomed to reciprocal link exchange, the fact is that a three-way link is always better, as all search engines give more attention to three-way links. When search engines can’t trace a link back from one site to another, or they think that site is significant because other sites are linking to it, it’s similar to using Google or Yahoo on our website.

Do these bozos really believe this?

The fact of the matter is that you should link to a website that you believe will be of value to your website viewers. That’s it. No schemes, no tricks, no 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, or 6-way linking. Provide your visitors with good content and good links. Period.

Vertical Channels and Directories

Websites like GlobalSpec (for engineers) and FindLaw (for lawyers) are quasi-vertical advertising channels and global directories. Vertical marketing is a great way to target businesses in the same genre that you practice and participate in. It’s also an excellent way for regional companies to enter new markets or regions at a low cost.

For web professionals like me, there are similar verticals or directories, such as Design Rush. But here’s the rub. These directories have an unfair advantage in Google’s linking scheme. But who said life is fair?

Directories have “muddied the Internet waters.

With so many links from so many sites across so many states, it is the equivalent of being a 500-pound linking gorilla. I keep hoping that the next Google dance will place these linking monsters accordingly, but that has yet to happen. Once everyone catches on to this flawed “link ranking” scheme, a search for any term or phrase in Google will provide you with nothing but a page full of directories.

Pure Search

This leads to my next point. Say I have an xyz disease (God forbid). If I search for “xyz disease nutrition” in Google, I want to find websites about nutrition for xyz disease, or how to battle xyz disease with a proper diet, and so on. I don’t want to see a directory full of re-packaged information, filled with ads, newsletters, and other useless directory fluff.

I want my search engine to emulate the Library of Congress. Let’s say the librarian says, “Books on XYZ disease nutrition are located on aisle 700B, row 3.” I stroll over to row 3, section 700B, and pull out a book that systematically lists all the books in section 700 B, row 3. Wait a second! This isn’t a book about XYZ disease nutrition; it’s a directory or reference book that belongs in the library’s reference section.

Are you listening, Google?