Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.159.214.250

Forum Moderators: goodroi

Another Story of google Removing a Competitor from the Search Results

   
10:33 am on Jun 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

Top Contributors Of The Month



Fact: google removed a competitor from the search results.
[pando.com...]

Caveat: I don't believe this to be illegal (U.S.), I think it's google's search engine and they can do whatever they want with it.

That said, I do believe that google should be required to disclose to the public that the search results they provide may not be entirely unbiased or impartial.

Matt Cutts came out and said this story is silly. google can spin this however they want but the fact still remains that a competitor was removed from the search results, whatever the reason, doesn't matter.

This story is not the first and it won't be the last. You don't have to look hard to find other competitors of a google company/product/investment suppressed in the search results.

google invested in a competitor of ours over 2 years ago. For the last year and a half the ONLY ecom site listed in the top 10 organics was the company google invested in, a dramatic change from the diverse listings (including our site) prior to google's investment.

So here's my question, or poll if you will:

Should google be required to disclose when they have an economic or ownership interest in the search results? For example, when the media does a news story that include information about a company they have an financial interest in they have to disclose that interest to the public, should google have to do the same?
12:25 pm on Jun 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I have read the post in pando.com, the comments below the post as well as Matt's response published on Hacker's news:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7819466 [news.ycombinator.com]

and the comment on Seroundtable
http://www.seroundtable.com/google-vivint-penalty-18629.html [seroundtable.com]

The fact is there were spam links to Vivint's site. The timing might or might not be coincidental, I have not researched it closer.

Should google be required to disclose when they have an economic or ownership interest in the search results? For example, when the media does a news story that include information about a company they have an financial interest in they have to disclose that interest to the public, should google have to do the same?

I suggest this is the question the further discussion in this thread should focus on.
2:04 pm on Jun 1, 2014 (gmt 0)

Top Contributors Of The Month



google has the ability, and most likely the right, to remove their competition from the search results.

Websites that compete with google or google invested websites HAVE been removed from the search results.

Since a reasonable person using google to search for a product or service does so under the assumption that they are receiving unbiased search results it is my stance that:

google should be required to disclose whenever they return a search result for a website or company that they have a financial interest in.
10:45 am on Jun 2, 2014 (gmt 0)

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



A good argument could also be put forward for them saying something along the lines of "these are not the best or most useful sites in the category, but the biggest companies providing minimal information".

Same answer: yes they should. But they won't. Not unless they are forced to by legislators who are immune to 'lobbying'.
 

Featured Threads

My Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month