It is not easy to label something ‘Content Farms’ to the companies that have huge presence in the web. Yes, many produce large amounts of inexpensive, search-engine-optimized content usually of very low value to the readers. These sites were mutually beneficial to Google and ‘content farm’ sites in terms of ad revenues. Now, Google has taken steps to de-rank such sites.
The SEO pundits have been suggesting webmasters to use such sites to increase their search visibility. Some of the popular such sites like EzineArticles, Hubpages, wisegeek, Associated Content (Yahoo’s), Suite101, Mahalo, Flixya and other such sites.
One of the most surprised (and vocal) was the publisher of CultOfMac website, Leander Kahney. He claims, ‘We can go toe-to-toe with any other tech news site out there.’
Another popular ‘content farm’ site, Demand Media’s eHow, however seems to have benefited from the steps Google has taken. Three other sites of Demand Media, namely Trails, Livestrong, and AnswerBag, were however affected by the Google algorithm change.
In response the EzineArticles CEO Chris Knight says:
Google has started using a new algorithm that helps in removing low-quality websites from its search result. It is told that the new algorithm will "noticeably impacts 11.8%" of queries done on Google. These ‘content farms’ copy the contents from other sites or make low quality content targeted to the search engine rather than the users.
Quality of a website is a relative term and it can’t be quantified. It is to be know how the Google algorithm works, but there is a chance that some legit sites might be penalized to be a ‘content farm’ if the content written is not well written. At the same time, some article sites, like ehow.com, might also come under ‘content farm’ as they collect articles from the users. The quality of such articles may not be as good as those prepared by professionals.
In their blogpost, Google fellow Amit Singhal and Google principal engineer Matt Cutts say:
This update is designed to reduce rankings for low-quality sites — sites which are low-value add for users, copy content from other Web sites or sites that are just not very useful.
Yes, content should be valued, and important content given a higher priority in search. But, in the process, unsuspecting and innocent sites shouldn’t be punished.
Anyways, search engines are the kings! (Content is NOT).
The much hyped Google Instant should be revolutionary technology in search. If it weren’t, Google wouldn’t have used it. Search is the bread-and-butter of Google so it should have considered every alternatives before introducing Google Instant. I am sure Google can’t take risks in its search business like it did with Google Buzz or Google Wave.
But, even after mulling over the facts I mentioned above, it didn’t work for my site lorla.com. When I typed "lorla" Google was confident that I will type more. It never thought there is something like lorla.com.
Then when typed a space to make a complete word "LORLA" then, it realized …. oh yes…. should be lorlas.com. Hey, I typed "lorla" and there was no "s" at the end. Wasn’t that smart?
I can take that, at least lorla.com is in the third and fourth place.
Then I wanted to test "lorla blog". As my site is a blog, it makes a sense that somebody might search it as lorla blog. The first letter ‘b’ and second letter ‘l’ didn’t see any connection with my site. After I typed the third letter… bingo! ‘Lorla.com’ is the first result. The result remained unchanged until I typed a space after the search term "Lorla blog". It is still "lorla blog" but the single space took away my site and displayed totally unrelated results!
The following video shows what I was telling:
I am very much unsure what to make out of the whole thing?
Google Instant was the search technology behind the Google Doodle made of bouncing balls. The predictive search technology is new and innovative in which the search box suggesting is extended beyond the search box.
Google, in its blog post says the "Search as you type," is a "simple and straightforward idea" in which, the results are displayed when people start typing.
Apart from other benefits, Google says that the new technology will save user’s time, that ranges from 2-5 second per search.
Note: I couldn’t test the feature myself as the it is not working here.
Tag CloudAndroid Apple April Fool Birthday Blackberry Calgary Canada china Chrome Browser Chrome Netbooks Chrome OS Egypt Facebook facebook.com Google Google Apps Store Guinness Book of World Records Guinness Record HTC iPad iPhone iPhone 4 Julian Assange Khagendra Thapa Magar Mark Zuckerberg Microsoft Nepal odd name Oldest Pets photos RIM Road Sign Rude Signboard search search technology Shortest Person Sign Board Social Networking Steve Jobs Stupid Law Twitter Video WikiLeaks YouTube
Incoming search terms
Incoming search terms for the article: