TheOptimizationIdiot - 9:20 pm on Apr 30, 2013 (gmt 0)
@ Rish3 - I totally agree.
Something's wrong in the algo.
Or something's wrong with their entire line of reasoning.
If there are two stores on a street and one's "a 'brand', shiny, looks good and has competitive prices", while the other is "Mom & Pop unknown, a bit rundown, but has the same merchandise at the same prices" it could be argued people "trust" the big brand franchise more, because they know the name and "all things being equal" they would rather shop there.
In real (non-algorithmic) life all that changes if the people find the ownership of the "big brand" franchise is stocking their shelves with stolen merchandise. Theft, lies, deceit, etc. destroy trust in real life, they don't build it and they certainly aren't a non-factor of it.
Think "political scandal" and how many politicians who were once "trusted" have had to retire after one too many stories proves to be false. (Sometimes one is enough to destroy people's trust.)
If people truly trust the thieves more than the originators it's likely in part attributable to Google promoting the "trusted thieves" above the originator so no one who uses their search engine gets to know who the originator actually is.