Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.145.120.69

Forum Moderators: goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Does Panda = Grounds For Class Action or AntiTrust Litigation?

     
1:30 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Mar 22, 2011
posts:416
votes: 1


If there was ever a case for Anti-Trust on the part of Google, the Panda numbers is by far the greatest piece of empirical evidence ever!

Seriously take two seconds and think. Google has defined internally the characteristics of a high quality site. Without any level of classification of what is high quality. Of course they are not going to concede that any of their properties are not high quality, of course unless Aaron Wall or the NY Times calls them on it.

So in turn their own definition favors them! Somebody needs to step to the plate and sue them. Problem: None of us have deep pockets and most class action lawyers are just not going to understand it.

Do you guys concur or am I just ranting?
1:45 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from GB 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Aug 11, 2008
posts:1443
votes: 156


Could you sue Google if they closed their SE? Then no one would get their sales.

Truth is, Google can do what it likes with its editorial opinion. The fact that it is algorthmically determined is beside the point. Promoting their own services just means they are a business- that's what businesses do.

In fact, its perfectly intelligible to suggest Organic SERPs is just traffic bate for them to leverage their services.
2:35 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Mar 22, 2011
posts:416
votes: 1


You have a point...

I guess it is just like a TV channel that advertises it's own shows or a magazine that highlights new issues. So I really can't question that practice.

Question is though, since they have such a stranglehold on the market place, is it grounds for Anti-Trust? Does it give them an unfair advantage in the market place?
9:55 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Dec 29, 2003
posts:5428
votes: 0


I guess it is just like a TV channel that advertises it's own shows or a magazine that highlights new issues. So I really can't question that practice.


Nope, more like a TV station with 70-95% market share that advertises it's own companies while BASHING others based on their secret formula. So McD owns CBS with 70% US share and bashes Burger King all day based on some secret stuff they know. Of course McD products are shown on every second.
11:28 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

Moderator

WebmasterWorld Administrator skibum is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 20, 2000
posts:4472
votes: 1


Could you sue Google if they closed their SE? Then no one would get their sales.


Everyone would still get their sales. They would just flow through a different toll booth.

Truth is, Google can do what it likes with its editorial opinion. The fact that it is algorthmically determined is beside the point. Promoting their own services just means they are a business- that's what businesses do.


There is an editorial in the newspaper that slams, say Overstock or JC Penny or some other company that gives people a bad impression for a while. There is an "editorial opinion" at Google that can shut even the largest of online companies down. It might be all "editorial" but they are quite a bit different. An editorial decision doesn't normally block consumers from finding a business.

It also begs the question, just how much of Google is algorithmically determined and how much is manual? It seems like the human element may be pretty big and the algorithm is given a bit more credit than it really deserves.
11:51 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Mar 22, 2011
posts:416
votes: 1


It seems like the human element may be pretty big and the algorithm is given a bit more credit than it really deserves.


You are right. Look at the sites that got press as false positives (Panda style) in the big time press (Wired Interview). They just happen to pop back up in the rankings 48 hours after they go to press. Then Google has the Nads to say that they did not manually correct it, the algorithm got it right after a few hours. Really google?