londrum - 7:47 pm on Sep 23, 2013 (gmt 0)
sometimes i think it would be great if we could just return everything to the way it was in the old days -- ranking pages by the words written on them.
you want a page about red widgets? just show us all the pages with red widgets in the title and red widgets in the text, that's got images called red widgets. forget about all the backlinks. who cares where it came from... i don't care whether its a big "trusted" company or a little mom-and-pop site. if its got the words that i searched for then i want to see it.
i'm sure that technology has moved on far enough now to distinguish between real information and gibberish spam stuff, and spun text. if search engines would just focus all their efforts on sifting out pages with gibberish and spun stuff, instead of wasting all their processing power tracing back and forth ten million levels of interconnecting backlinks, then what's left will probably be decent stuff.
and i know that they can recognise what's in a picture, because google images can do that even now. if you stick a picture in the search box then it will tell you what it is. so any search engine should be able to tell whether the images on a page are relevant.
when i look at the results these days, i sometimes wonder whether they take into account the on-page stuff at all. it seems that a "trusted brand" gets shoved up the serps even when the page content is non-existent.
here is a good example. if i search for "president obama school", what i get back is the wikipedia page about... "president obama". i dont want that. i want a page that focuses on his school. if search engines went back to weighting the actual text on the page, then they would never return that "president obama" page -- because 95% of it is irrelevant to my search