In face of Google search monopoly, what can individuals do?

[cnvi]

The following message was cut out of May 2019 Updates and SERP changes thread at:
https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4944194.htm [webmasterworld.com] by robert_charlton - 3:18 am on May 17, 2019 - (PDT -8)



So many asking questions that are completely un-answerable in 2019 because an (illegal) monopoly totally controls web search.

The US DOJ does nothing because we say nothing ... what do you expect? What is stopping you from shouting/saying/speaking up/filing complaints/talking to attorneys/ demanding PUBCON has realistic discussions on this topic?

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 11:39 am (utc) on May 17, 2019]
[edit reason] Cleanup after thread split to new thread [/edit]

[Mark_A]

I think it is a question relating to how good your SEO results have been with Google. Personally my feeling is we get more and better quality enquiries from G ads than G organic despite putting some resources into G organic SEO over the last 6 months (without great results).

If you are getting good ROI from G organic then I can see continuing with it being important for you, but if - as is the case for us - your results have just been a bit meh then it will take some persuading to invest in more of the same.

So that leaves G ads, which are more expensive than some other options, but G does still seem to have quantities of quality traffic for our niche so we continue with G ads, trying not to spend too much or too little.

[Shepherd]

In the U.S., anyone who feels harmed by anticompetitive conduct by a monopoly can bring an antitrust lawsuit seeking damages and injunctive relief. There's no need to "demand" that others act on your behalf.

[MrSavage]

Individuals have to wait for Google to step on the toes of a big player with a big voice (PR). When the big players are easy to please (just fill their pockets) you can get a sense of hopelessness. Government isn't in the profit business but they also need to get re-elected. Last time I checked, politicians can lean one way or another. Curious. This has to turn uglier for anyone to really give a S.

[StupidIntelligent]

Now that Bing has open sourced its vector search algorithm, there would definitely be young kids out there, who would want to build Google like search engine. We'll see. For now, Google is the King of the internet.

[StoneSolid]

I already wrote a few times that we all need to contact our representatives (usa congress, eu parliament) and articulately elaborate the insane level of monopoly of the internet.

[cnvi]

@Shephard: "anyone who feels harmed by anticompetitive conduct by a monopoly can bring an antitrust lawsuit seeking damages and injunctive relief"

I've spoken to a number of attorneys that agree G is restraining trade due to the fact that G freely does this within its own published "webmaster guidelines" and that a class action suit is possible. But not probable in the current environment because no attorney will take on G on contingency due to their massive legal pockets. So as MrSavage indicated, its going to take a number of large companies to team up to generate enough legal $ for something to happen.

The World Wide Web should be just that.. as it was designed. We should be free to link and be linked to like it was in the early 2000's before G came along and said not to do it establishing penalties for activity that the WWW was supposed to support. I don't think Tim Berners Lee wanted 1 dominant force to point you to whatever you seeked.

[tangor]

Webmasters are looking in the wrong direction for dealing with g ... You can't code your way out of the current market malaise.

Talk to your elected officials, loudly.

Meanwhile, the political landscape is changing and the tech industry is coming under increasing scrutiny in the USA. A tipping point is approaching and all of g's lobbyists and "donor" dollars might not be sufficient to forestall legislation/anti-trust actions.

As for what individuals might do? Get off g (reliance) and do all the OTHER THINGS possible to drive traffic. Don't forget there are other search engines, some less odious, but still not in your corner. The web works even if there is no serp involved. That's what a domain name and dns is all about.

Can mom and pop do this? Not easily. Can small-mid biz? With expense in other media. Brands don't worry about it as the big fish swim together.

OP ... do what you need to do to keep it going, within budget, with revised expectations, and if you can't, consider getting out of the game. Fish or cut bait.

Reality is there's no contract, no guarantee of income, no nothing. All your site is to the world is a phone number in a very large phone book you can't edit.

The time for webmasters to have organized and met g head on passed years ago (just before the turn of the century).

At this time Individuals don't have clout, but class action and legislation might be the way forward---if there is a will in your representatives. And as an individual you can call those folks, write them, and stand outside their offices.

[StoneSolid]

I strongly believe we're at some spot where it can't get much worse than it already is, and that it won't last for too long.

It is also a fact that more and more younger representatives are now in parliament / congress / whatever (and they understand the internet much better than old ones)

This situation isn't just bad for webmaster because we're "losing business" but also for the searcher / consumer, since he is getting paid search results shoved on top of good ones, meaning that he definitely doesn't get the top quality item that he is probably searching and researching for. With this state of google, only google profits and everyone else is losing (searchers and webmasters).


@Shepherd as you're probably aware, a lawsuit wouldn't work here, because this isn't a typical kind of monopoly and damages are near impossible to calculate. This is something new, hard to even name at this point, and it needs to be addressed as such. However, I don't even know why I'm commenting you at all, considering I've already noticed before that you're just trolling in these kinds of threads.

[jmccormac]

The search algorithm is only a small part of a search engine. The most important thing is a good and clean search index. That's the single point of technical failure for most of the search engines that have failed in the past twenty five years or so. The other vulnerability is a failure to monetise the results. Google is not a search engine. It is an advertising company that sells adverts on your content.

Regards...jmcc

[cnvi]

Google is not only a search engine anymore, they are the largest crook in the world by telling website operators (through their webmaster guidelines) that if you exchange links with another website, you will be penalized. That is restraint of trade which is illegal according to Attorney Gary Reback who specializes in Federal trade law.

[MrSavage]

Look no further than the EU and the fact they are on an island. Alone. What does that tell you? Does it seem anyone else is supporting their efforts? Anyone who is/has gone hard at Google ends up being the bad guy. People will lose all the Google perks and when they ask why, Google points to the regulators. People blame who? The people are know nothings. Hogs to a trough. Everyone loves free. Nobody likes copyright or ownership especially if it means they can enjoy that material. Be damned the owner or creator. The populous thinks like Google. Give me that information (for free) that you spent your time, money and effort on creating. A bunch of entitled babies is my view. So how can you expect anyone to stand up? The information you collected and all the knowledge that you bring to your site viewers, well that's content for the boxes now. Take that away or expect compensation? Google will alter the service, the babies will cry, and the owners of the information will be insulted and ridiculed into eternity. This rot needs to rot a lot more before anything happens. If history tells us anything, we are generally stupid.

[tangor]

@MrSavage ... Please don't hold back! Tell us what you really think!

Seriously ... there is some truth in the assertions made, yet there is still that reliance on g that can't be overlooked (should have been addressed years ago, just never was while chasing "free money").

Nothing is free. TANSTAAFL ...

But there are business practices that can give that illusion, until the market is captive with little room to squirm.

g, and other tech giants, are facing examination by an increasing number of entities (some governmental) as 2020 rolls up in the USA. Will take that thought no further, but will be a significant aspect on how g (and others) are watched in the coming months.

THAT SAID, most of the above has nothing to do with webmasters reliant on g advertising income as a business model. g has moved the goal posts, once again, to their advantage and in most cases there is nothing the webmaster can do to alleviate that change in method, or recapture "lost" income.

We live in interesting times.

[brotherhood of LAN]

Support alternative products where possible, encourage others to do the same.

[MrSavage]

I find it rather interesting. Has anyone noticed who is catching heat on privacy? What company is facing the most public scrutiny and news coverage? It sure isn't Google. It's Facebook. Apparently Facebook is enemy #1. This, if anything, should indicate to people how misguided the authorities are. Facebook? Like for real? Facebook has its issues but really, their issues are minutia in comparison to the Google. As for using other products? LOL. Oh right that's going to make change happen. I'm sure the droves are waiting to join you in that quest to "hit 'em where it hurts". This goes so far beyond the individual. There is a good portion of what Google does that is brilliant and is real game changing for the better. Unfortunately it's all a ruse. They can't stay in their own lane without crushing everyone because that would be so not corporate and deemed illegal. They have to data to take it all over, should they choose to.

[brotherhood of LAN]

As for using other products? LOL. Oh right that's going to make change happen.

I sparingly visit these Google threads but it seems like you've been saying the same thing for years - yet you're blind to the alternatives. It really is a borefest and solves nothing. What do you need to hear?

Use DuckDuckGo - their result are decent. Use alternative analyitcs, spreadsheets, whatever. People use G out of habit but there's products out there that are more than adequate for 90% of what Google offers.

[StoneSolid]

Any of us switching to alternative is not a solution.

Google got the premium products from user perspective (search, mail, maps, youtube) and all of those are integrated on phones and wherever possible.
There will never be a boycott or something that starts the global change.

Google needs to be regulated, plain and simple.
- advertisement limits needs to be set on serp pages
- info boxes and anything showing other site content needs to go away
- while I'm aware that rank algos need to be a secret, there must be an outside agency (or few) monitoring the fair play
- google needs to respect content origin, copyright and authors

Related to last, there needs to be a massive team in charge of manual stuff (review, evaluation, communication), a team that will take no longer than 24 hours for reaction when spam / hack / whatever gets reported - yes, it isn't possible to manually review and evaluate entire internet but just having a quick reaction team that responds when reported is enough to make shady tactics not worth starting.

It sounds harsh, yes, but - with great power comes great responsibility.

Google is welcome to quadruple its profits in every quarterly report if they can, but not with current methods of leeching more and more on other people content and pushing people into paying for clicks.

[tangor]

Any of us switching to alternative is not a solution

Anyone not making the attempt is playing inverted ostrich head sub-surface.

I don't avoid g. Then again, I don't seek it out. I have NOT sought it out for the last 8-10 years. All mysite priorities have been on EXPANDING reach by any means---not relying on a single factor/source.

The real work is in the site. That's where it starts. Getting the site out to the world is making use of the "phone books" (search engines) AND other media, word of mouth, or skywriting (if you can afford it).

G is not the only way to success. However, g can be a great help!

[tangor]

I also believe that webmasters are still "stuck in the early 2000s" ... the ad markets have changed significantly, especially in the last three years ... and income is NOT the same as it once was. G's automated ad space is part of the reason why this is changing, what advertisers are willing to pay is changing, and increasing government oversight is changing. Webmasters need to change, too.

[tangor]

Any of us switching to alternative is not a solution

Anyone not making the attempt is playing inverted ostrich head sub-surface.

I don't avoid g. Then again, I don't seek it out. I have NOT sought it out for the last 8-10 years. All mysite priorities have been on EXPANDING reach by any means---not relying on a single factor/source.

The real work is in the site. That's where it starts. Getting the site out to the world is making use of the "phone books" (search engines) AND other media, word of mouth, or skywriting (if you can afford it).

G is not the only way to success. However, g can be a great help!

[wondering]

If there's a strong political will, there's only one potent option for fixing the Google monopoly abuse- split google into 3 parts.
Search plus Adsense
Android plus PlayStores with multiple competing stores.
Youtube plus other media properties

Each of these units will innovate in their own ways and offer real competition to others in their respective areas.
Google has no incentive to innovate so long as it can derive free cash by shuffling and penalizing the web.

If you go far back enough, Google's number one threat/vulnerability has always been the emergence of another viable search engine. That was the reason they bought YouTube initially- youtube was driving way too much search traffic. Imagine Youtube being independent and getting top dollars from Bing or DDG for search.

Search is the moat and Android and YouTube are the enablers of the ever widening moat. Sooner or later, someone will ask for this breakup.

Just like the breakup of AWS from rest of Amazon....but that's for another thread.

[iamlost]

@cnvi OP:

The US DOJ does nothing because we say nothing ... what do you expect?
What is stopping you from shouting/saying/speaking up/filing complaints/talking to attorneys/ demanding PUBCON has realistic discussions on this topic?

All but the last is US-centric and many of us are not American. That said, taken in order:
1.0 There is a cycle to both business and business regulation. The past several US administrations has been a time of corporate amalgamation. That the finance sector was almost totally bailed and let out of responsibility in 2008-2009 debacle is a prime example of the tail wagging the dog aka regulatory capture but it is far from the only. If ~9-million losing jobs, ~6-million losing houses, and ~$8-trillion value stock market loss (2008-9 in US alone) didn't get 'corrective action' why does anyone expect the same players to take on Google that is far more 'too big to fail' ridiculousness?
Note: FB is primarily in trouble for continually lying to authorities plus selling personal private data directly to third parties, i.e. Cambridge Analytics. Google parses commentary finely but rarely if ever actually lies plus sells 'black box' data use rather selling the data itself to third parties.

2.0 I and others speak up regularly and have for over a decade - however, rather than whinge I have recommended that folks (as I, myself, have done consistently) wean themselves from Google services/products as there is, generally, no actual legal recourse available against Google behaviours within the US itself. Those that disagree with that are quite free to take action.
Note: most/all web platforms are not actually monopolies in the traditional and legally recognised sense; rather they are corporate oligarchies and unless in collusion, such as with Adobe, Apple, Google, and Intel's wage fixing 'scandal', that will require both legal and political changes if they are to be constrained.

2.1 I and others, outside of the US, have made complaints/submissions, over the years to respective Privacy Commissioners, etc. and, on occasion, certain practices have been publicised and/or curtailed. Not that Google doesn't wield a great deal of power outside the US, it most definitely does, however the laws, regulations, expectations, traditions of other countries do sometimes catch Google by surprise, and Google doesn't always 'win' those encounters.

2.2 I never attend PubCon or similar conferences (they tend to be (1) not on the cutting edge of webdev (for about a decade) and (2) far too G-focussed). And those are likely reasons why the usual suspects aren't speaking up; they largely aren't either, their products/services being largely Google-centric.

Sooo...
Let's flog the dead horse once again...
In face of Google search monopoly, what can individuals do?
1. suffer until gone out of business.
2. find alternatives.
---Yes, they exist; yes, it is hard; yes, it takes time.
---Google owes you little to nothing, get over it; you are not in a partnership with Google: you are either their customer (advertiser) or their product (publisher); in neither case are you irreplaceable.
3. be fortunate; I know a few who are, and who still take primarily (90%+) Google traffic and Google revenue to the bank while it lasts; here's hoping you sell out or retire before the music stops.

Audacter calumniare, semper aliquid haeret

[cnvi]

“--Google owes you little to nothing, get over it; ”

They owe every website the ability to obtain traffic from other websites through link exchange. They penalize those who do which is illegal restraint of trade.

[StupidIntelligent]

“--Google owes you little to nothing, get over it; ”

Utter nonsense. They are basically the world's largest scrapper. If anything they should be sued for compiling information on other properties on their own pages for profit.

The reason why survived is because they passed on the traffic to them, but now they are smartly blocking it but still keeping the scrapped content. This is illegal, but since they are doing that at a tad slow speed, they're getting away with it.

[tangor]

Utter nonsense. They are basically the world's largest scrapper.

Scratching head over this. One can easily deny g (or other SEs) "scraping" their site contents. Wonder why that never happens?

I have tried having cake and eat it, too, but one or the other ends up in epic fail. (cake deteriorates, or is consumed and one has neither in either event).

I will grant that when g introduced advertising (and the appearance of "free money") that webmasters lost all caution and jumped on board like tuna on a cannery boat. That boat sailed a LONG time ago ...

The webmaster these days needs to operate as an independent (think vanity publishing in print, or indie films in Hollowood (sic)). More work, but can be more lucrative than the increasingly closed systems of the big SEs.

[StoneSolid]

Scratching head over this. One can easily deny g (or other SEs) "scraping" their site contents. Wonder why that never happens?

Do tell me please..
If I "deny G" and block everything G related on my sites..

Will G do the same?
Will they make sure my texts, images or whatever else, does NOT end up on anywhere on their index (shown on my site or any other site)?

I know that google can't control other sites and webmasters, but they sure can control google.com and their subpages.

Or am I expected to "deny G" and keep policing for my own content on google.com?

That doesn't sound right.

[tangor]

When you block, you generally have NOINDEX NOCACHE involved. Never give up your stuff. That cake and eat it, too kind of thing becomes a problem when demanding g send "you" traffic and then complain about them having your content to deliver same. The reality is the genie is out of the bottle and carping about it these years later is a futile exercise.

[StoneSolid]

I don't think you understood me.
I'm talking about other sites stealing my content (from before and in the future), and how google WILL SHOW MY STOLEN CONTENT ON GOOGLE.COM
In short, after I "deny G", my future content would be floating across google serps, one way or another - illegally and without my permission, ON GOOGLE.COM.

Usually, when my content is illegally and repeatedly published, I DMCA host and domain provider and the site gets taken down.

Will I be able to take down google.com if they repeatedly infringe on my copyright?

[tangor]

Utter nonsense. They (g) are basically the world's largest scrapper. If anything they should be sued for compiling information on other properties on their own pages for profit.

You're correct. I didn't see the above as a comment about others scraping a website.

[StoneSolid]

I'm not commenting any other post.
I wrote you two very easy to understand questions in my last 2 posts.