Infinite Path » Search Engines

Can Twitter and Bing really change the face of search engines?

admin — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 13:40:18 +0000

When Twitter and Google had something of a falling out in July, it was perhaps inevitable the microblogging site would look to strengthen its relationship with other search engines with Bing the most likely suitor. Now, in a slightly flirtatious series of tweets, the pair have confirmed a closer partnership is indeed the way of the future. With @Twitter suggesting they “stick together and do bigger and better things” and @Bing replying it “can’t wait for what comes next” it seems changes are on the way.

Which is just as well because even though the exchange saw Bing praised for “using tweets to make search better” things seem very basic right now. I struggled to get any tweets to appear following a Bing search, and in order to get those I had to look for results on “@Twitter” and “@Bing”. By way of a further experiment, I decided to look for one of the microblogging site’s most popular and prolific users, but a search for “@Stephenfry” led Bing to ask if I’d meant “@Stephen Fry”. Not particularly useful.

When this is compared to the way in which Google used to display tweets, offering as it did realtime updates on queries at the top of the results page (and plenty of them to), it’s easy to see just how far Bing has to go in order to truly make tweets part of its search experience. Of course, it had there been a major breaking news story at the time of my limited test things may have been different, but it doesn’t seem likely.

One also has to ask what both parties expect to gain from a stronger partnership. The exposure Twitter gained through Google would have helped boost the number of people signing up for the social network, but Bing has a significantly smaller user base. Furthermore, with Twitter growing in popularity, it is now many people’s first port of call for breaking news. Take the recent London riots where a number of journalists who were actually reporting on events used Twitter to keep the public up to date. Personally, I followed events via a few trustworthy accounts on the microblogging site using a Twitter client on my mobile, the Guardian and BBC’s live blogs, radio and TV. I didn’t once put the phrase “London riots” into a search engine because there was a quicker and easier way to access information.

Ultimately, it’s not hard to see Twitter making realtime search obsolete. Who wants to log on to a PC in order to use a search engine, or faff on with the mobile equivalent, and then wade through results when, if you’re following the right people, Twitter will present the information to you with nothing more than a quick refresh? With this in mind, the value of joining forces with a search engine is, in the long term, questionable.

For this reason, the stronger partnership between Bing and Twitter cannot merely focus on displaying tweets on search engine results pages, they also need to look at seamlessly integrating them into mobile search and perhaps even try offering smartphone users something completely new in order to grab a bigger slice of this vastly important emerging market. Sadly, given that the pair appear to be starting from such a poor position, it’s hard to see them coming up with anything even remotely approaching revolutionary.

Is Google always best for long-tail SEO keywords?

admin — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 13:27:48 +0000

The received wisdom when it comes to search is that although long-tail keywords are generally easier to rank for, short-tail keywords offer more value. However, an interesting study by Chitika Insights indicates that this may not always be the case.

Although the results revealed the average search query is, as expected, pretty short – the least verbose, AOL users, average 4.17 words per search and the most, Ask.com users, 4.74 words.

However, things became a little more interesting when the company looked at how often people used queries of eight words or longer, a figure that stood at almost 15 per cent for Ask.com searches. Just 8.38 per cent of AOL searches, the next highest figure, featured eight or more words.

This won’t be much of a surprise to anyone who is familiar with Ask’s history – it sprung out of Ask Jeeves, which was as much a question and answer service as a search engine and has recently switched back to this business model.

So why, when Google is so dominant, should firms bother to optimise longer phrases with Ask in mind? The answer may depend on the demographic you are targeting. Longer searches are often associated with older, less confident web users and those companies looking to target older age groups may find it beneficial to optimise for some of the question-type searches that Ask encourages.

Facebook and Bing embrace social search but does it have a future?

admin — Thu, 19 May 2011 15:40:45 +0000

The battle to bring social search to the masses continued this week as Bing launched a service which sorts results using Facebook “likes”.

It’s a move that seems to make sense with users benefiting from Microsoft’s search algorithm and the opinions of their friends, with whom you’d expect them to have at least something in common.

The potential benefits are plain to see – users should end up with more useful search results, boosting the number of people using Bing and increasing interaction of Facebook. But will it work in practice?

Clearly the first problem the project will have to overcome is Bing’s poor slice of the search market. Introducing Facebook ‘likes’ could have improved the relevance of results 100-fold overnight but few people would have noticed as the majority of web users search using Google. To some extent, it doesn’t matter how good your search engine is if huge numbers of people are habitual users of your main rival – how will they discover the benefits you have to offer?

Pushing Bing through Facebook may help tackle this issue, although the fact Google has such a strong brand familiarity makes it incredibly tough to dent its market share.

However, there’s another major issue that will be even more difficult to address – that of privacy. The increasing number of partnerships between online companies means they are keener than ever to share customer information, while at the same time growing fears about privacy and the internet mean individuals are more and more worried about what is happening to their data.

Although social search does offer potentially huge benefits to companies who have well-established social media presences – just imagine the impact 1000+ likes on top of a good search engine optimisation campaign would have – there are issues that need to be addressed if internet users are going to feel comfortable with it.

With high-profile data leaks rising questions about the ability of even the biggest firms to protect people’s information and a growing feeling among both the public and government that individuals should have a greater say in what is done with the details they provide internet-based firms.

This means that a workable social search engine may be more effort than it’s worth – how many people, for example, would bother to opt in to the kind of service currently being offered by Facebook and Bing? It’s unlikely to be many, but the way things are going the companies may be legally required to gather active consent in the near future.

For now though the battle to dominate social search will continue and it would seem more than likely the next shots will be fired by Google. However, whether anyone will win the war is another matter entirely.

Google’s Panda hits eHow, but what impact will it have on your SEO techniques?

admin — Fri, 06 May 2011 10:47:17 +0000

Google is by no means perfect, but it seems to have struck another blow in the fight to make its search results as relevant as possible with the news eHow has experienced an significant drop in referrals.

Most web users will have stumbled across eHow at one time or another, in fact that’s the whole point of the site. Demand Media, the company behind the project, say it is designed to offer useful information on a range of topics. Its critics say it’s a hodgepodge of poorly written but well optimised content designed to attract visits through search engines in order to help generate ad revenue.

Google clearly felt something was amiss with eHow (along with similar sites) and earlier this year launched Panda, an update designed to penalise sites with low-quality content which didn’t actually provide people with what they were looking for.

Now in an earnings report Demand Media has revealed just how hard it has been hit by Panda, with search referrals falling by 20 per cent in the second quarter of the year and overall traffic dropping by 12 per cent. Clearly, the company has some thinking to do.

But what about other firms using search engine optimisation techniques? Should they worry about the impact Panda might have had on their traffic levels? The short answer is “not if they’re doing it properly”.

Google wants people to find what they’re looking for and as long as your SEO efforts are relevant and involve high-quality content then there’s no reason to fear Panda. In fact, you should probably welcome it – with sites like eHow being penalised there could be more chance of potential customers finding their way to your site through Google.

Of course the advent of Panda means getting your SEO techniques spot on is more vital than ever before because each time Google tweaks its algorithm, the margin for error gets smaller and smaller.

Now it’s Google vs Groupon

admin — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:11:45 +0000

Not many firms turn down an offer from Google, and not many firms turn down a bid of $6 billion to buy them, but that’s exactly what Groupon did and it seems the social buying site may live to regret that decision.

The search engine giant made the offer towards the end of last year, but the powers that be at Groupon decided it the best course of action would be to remain independent. Now Google has revealed that it is to launch its own group buying site, meaning it will be going head-to-head with the company it tried to snap up.

Operating on the same model to Groupon and other sites such as Groupola, Google Offers will offer deals on services and products from local businesses and will incorporate social networking tools from Twitter and Facebook.
Groupon’s owners are unlikely to panic at the news of Google’s entry to their market, after all their firm was named the fastest growing company of all time by Forbes in 2010. However, Google Offers will no doubt give them a lot to think about.

As it stands, Groupon is well-established and is by far the most successful social buying site around, but Google will be confident of closing that gap quickly. The firm has been putting a lot of emphasis on local search lately, and this will no doubt pay dividends when it comes to Google Offers. Its status as a high-profile brand and its presence across numerous markets will also be a massive bonus.

Indeed, the growing popularity of Android, the firm’s smartphone operating system, could provide Google Offers with hundreds of thousands of users in a very short space of time. According to Gartner 20.5 million Android phones were sold in the third quarter of 2010. If they’d shipped with a Google Offers app preinstalled, that would have been 20.5 million people who had the service at their finger tips.

The worst case scenario for Groupon would see them go the same way as Friendster, the early social networking site that rejected a $30 million bid from Google in 2003 before sliding into obscurity.
On the other hand, Google’s game plan of using its size and massive resources to expand into and dominate new sectors can’t go unchecked forever.

Is Google really cheating other firms?

admin — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:49:53 +0000

Google is in trouble again as more companies have accused it of prioritising its own content over theirs.

A number of firms, including travel site TripAdvisor.com, health site WebMD.com, and local business review site Yelp.com, have complained their sites are being pushed down Google’s results pages because the search engine is providing so many links to its own services, the Wall Street Journal reported.

They certainly seem to have a point a search for “Leeds bar reviews” has links to Google’s own review service at the top of the page with other sites taking second place.

According to TripAdvisor, their search traffic has dropped by ten per cent since mid-October, just before Google changed the way it shows local search results.

So do they have a point? Well, it certainly seems unfair that Google is muscling its way into the top of results pages, but of course none of the firms have actually paid the search engine for the privilege of appearing at the top of page one, so it’s not like they have any right to be up there.

Google also launched a staunch defence of its methods, pointing out that its purpose is to provide the information people want.

“We built Google for users, not websites, and our goal is to give users answers,” a spokesperson said.

Sometimes, the most relevant answer to a query isn’t a link but a map or a series of images, and Google’s results reflect this, she added.

Which is a fair point, but the fact remains that companies are spending a lot of time and money to rank on natural search and this isn’t the first time that Google has upset companies because of the way it works.

Although the circumstances are slightly different, the search engine is currently being investigated by the European Commission admin claims of anti-competitive practices.

Businesses of all sizes will no doubt be keeping an eye on Google in the coming months as it looks to fight off accusations that it’s serving its own interests.

Google’s algorithm to be uncovered in anti-trust investigation?

admin — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:42:38 +0000

Google is being investigated by the European Commission amid allegations the search engine is using its dominance to disadvantage its rivals.

A number of firms, including Microsoft and price comparison website Foundem, claim Google gives “preferential placement” to its own services and, in some cases, “lowers the ranking” of unpaid search results. They also say the same applies to paid-for search.

For its part, the search engine giant denied any wrongdoing, but did admit things could be done better.

“Since we started, Google we have worked hard to do the right thing by our users and our industry,” the company said in a statement.

“But there’s always going to be room for improvement, and so we’ll be working with the Commission to address any concerns.”

In February Founem claimed the Google “removes legitimate sites from natural search results, irrespective of relevance”, but the US company countered by saying there were “compelling reasons” why sites rank poorly.

It’s impossible to guess at what decision the European Commission will reach, not least because much of the investigation will revolve around Google’s mysterious algorithm.

However, regardless of the end result the case will no doubt be fascinating for the search community, especially if further details about how the search engine ranks results come to light during the process.

Still, I wouldn’t hold your breath. When Microsoft was investigated by the EC, there was a ten year gap between the initial complaint and the body’s preliminary decision.

Google gets the Instant buzz

admin — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 12:59:01 +0000

Instant seems to be the current buzzword at Google. First there was the annoying, but intriguing, rise of instant search results and now the firm has launched the latest addition to its results page – Instant Preview.

You’ve probably noticed the small magnifying glass which now appears alongside results and discovered that by clicking on it you can see a preview of the page in question. According to the company, the move will stop people from going to irrelevant pages and hence save them time.

Writing on the Google blog, product manager Raj Krishnan said: “In our testing, we’ve found that people who use Instant Previews are about five per cent more likely to be satisfied with the results they click.”

So does it work? Well, yes and no. Clicking on the magnifying glass does give you an instant preview, but often it’s so small it’s hard to tell what the site really looks like. Its major strength could be in helping people to avoid spammy sites that could be potentially harmful. As far as search engine optimisation goes, it probably won’t have a huge impact. It could reduce the number of clicks for sites that have used black hat techniques, but they tend to get penalised in the long run anyway.

For the rest of internet, it gives people a chance to show potential customers just how well-designed and relevant their site is to users before they click through. And if your site isn’t well-designed and relevant, well, you’ll just have to get cracking on some improvements, won’t you?

Can Blekko save SEO from spam?

admin — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:47:18 +0000

As anyone who has ever used a search engine will tell you, finding what you want is not always straightforward. Unless you have a very specific term you’re searching for you can struggle to find relevant results, while certain words and phrases can see you accidently heading down the internet’s more disreputable paths.

For Rich Skrenta, co-founder and chief executive of Blekko, there’s no reason this should be the case. Speaking to the New York Times, he explained his company will look to triumph where Google has failed. As he puts it: “The goal is to clean up web search and get all the spam out of it.”

So what is Blekko? Well, as you would expect from any firm looking to take on the might of Google, it’s a search engine. But, according to Mr Skrenta, it is a search engine with a crucial difference – better quality control.
It scours what the firm refers to as the “worthwhile web” and uses “slashtags” to help users sift out the junk. There’s also a social aspect to the process, with people able to log in and save their own lists of slashtags which others can then use to find relevant content.

So does it stand a chance of usurping any of its more established rivals? Right now, you’d have to say it doesn’t look like it. Admittedly it’s early days, but the results Blekko returns are much less relevant than those produced by Google, especially if you’re based outside the USA.

Slashtag creation is also a pain and rather than offering a true search experience, it’s more like sorting through a list of bookmarks which you’ve already saved. Not much use if you want to find something new.
Even where extensive slashtags have already been set up, they don’t seem to do much good. The top result for “toys /starwars” is a site called Brianstoys.com, which boasts the world’s largest collection of such items. On Google, the top result for “toys Star Wars” is Amazon. I know which is more useful to me.

Blekko may be on to something and it could have excellent SEO applications, but few people will have the patience to configure a search engine themselves, especially when Google’s mysterious algorithm offers results which are, 99 per cent of the time, almost impossible to beat in terms of relevance and speed.

It will certainly be worth keeping an eye on over the next year or so, but don’t be too surprised if it fades into obscurity like that other search oddity, Wolfram Alpha.

Google mobile search trounces Bing in PPC

admin — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 13:33:13 +0000

As everyone knows, Bing has set its sights on Google as it looks to gain a bigger share of the search market. Unfortunately, it appears Microsoft may have taken its eye off the ball when it comes to the bigger picture as its rival has just managed to overtake it in an important emerging sector.

According to data released by Latitude, Google UK mobile search traffic for PPC is growing at an average of 76 per cent a quarter and has just passed the number people who accessed such ads via Bing on their PCs.
It’s not the most exciting fact of all time, but it’s certainly a rather interesting one, not least because Bing’s efforts currently seem to be focused on the more traditional computer-based search.

And it seems like the mobile search market is set to grow, not least because the sector currently accounts for four per cent of PPC volume on Google, while taking up just two per cent of the spend. It seems like value for money.

Then there’s the issue of smartphones, the devices which are driving growth in mobile search. Currently, there are 11 million users of such devices in the UK and that figure seems set to grow. As Apple’s Steve Jobs pointed out this week, non-smartphones currently account for the largest proportion of the mobile market and a significant number of people will convert to the new devices in the coming years.

This means mobile search will keep rising and, through its Android OS, Google already has a significant head start in a market Microsoft is still trying to crack.

Of course, as the two search giants battle it out, other firms would be wise to spend their time ensuring their mobile SEO plans are spot on.