Here is an interesting study, conducted by Benjamin Edelman and Benjamin Lockwood from Harvard Business School. Study measures how search engines, Google in particular Prefer their own Web services.
We believe that each search engine favors their own services for each search engine links with their own services more often than other search engines. But some machinery to promote their own services search significantly more than others ... We find that Google's Algorithmic Search results link to Google's services more than three times as often as other online search engines with Google services. For selected keywords bring biased results search engines interests at the expense of users
People have discussed this topic awhile or watch, some say that search engines can do what they like, others consider these search engines should be brought to justice.
However, the investigation brings up an important point. If Google demands have algorithms, "objective" search results, and then follow that Google should prefer their own businesses, unless those properties achieve a top ranking on the basis of their merit.
Google may not have two ways.
The problem is, of course, that Google could tweak the algorithm to favor regardless of the qualities of his properties screen for example. The Google PageRank of pages could own calculated on actual cryptic and oblique fashion-highest "value". There is no such thing as "objective", when it comes to the syntax, which is the function of a search algorithm. There are only points along a continuous tone subjectivity.
But when it gets interesting is the investigation goes one step further. Trying to understand what would the user when it is searching. You want the user to find a service by Google # 1? And if it is not Google doing the user a dis-service by placing a Google from # 1 property?
In principle, a search engine may operate their own services, because users prefer these links. For example, if users of Google's search algorithms usually click links to other Google services, while Yahoo search users tend to click links in Yahoo algorithms can then any search engine optimization systems coming to facilitate their respective ancillary services. We call this "user preference" held by the above theory "Offset"
They tested the theory that using data click-through. Regarldess of keywords, users Prefer almost always # 1 result-72% of the time. So what if the user clicks further downwards, indicating that the first result is less relevant?
Gmail, the first result, take 29% of users clicks, while Yahoo mail, different outcome, receiving 54%. Throughout the keywords we receives the top-most result usually 5.5 times more clicks as the second result, but here Gmail is only 53% while Yahoo. Nor was the "e-mail" only the expression in which Google sales, its own service. other names such as "Post", show a similar reversal a few days in our data set, even if "email" is the only term where the difference is large and stable throughout the period
There is a huge incentive for search engines, which are increasingly crossing the line under publication, the meat is at their own properties. Traffic is valuable and whatismore, can be channelled away from competitors.
As Aaron pointed out a few months ago, if Google chooses to write a new vertical like travel or locale, you'll see better if you compete in these vertical. No matter how relevant it is to the search term is below the fold is likely to come-.
So, Yes, it may be Google's search engine, but may not be able to submit applications for user focused above all else, otherwise return the results the user wants, as opposed to possibly directing user Google properties. How can you tell me "Democracy Project", if you do not favour regardless of site link chart "votes" more relevant? And this does not reduce somewhat the wrong side of the "evil"?
So, what does?If you believe that Google may place their own Web sites where they like, then nothing.
I believe that any company can do what it wants, until they reach a point where they become so influential that they can use their mere size to reduce competition and choice. If we believe that free markets requires healthy competition to thrive, so we must be careful about any device that can reduce competition through anti-competitive behaviour.
I am not saying this is what Google, but watch this space. Some agencies invest complaints about violations of antitrust.
The Commission will examine whether Google is abuse of a dominant position on the market in electronic searching reducing allegedly ranking of results before searching competitive services, which specialises in allows users to specific online content, such as comparisons of prices (so-called vertical search services), and depending on the privileged location of the results of its own vertical search services for the closure of competitive services
Fact Marissa Mayer said:
No comments:
Post a Comment