Is Google Experimenting With Full Page Previews?

[engine]

According to reports [businessinsider.com], Google is experimenting with full page previews in the SERPs.

Anyone else spotted them?

[tristanperry]

the problem started with bing and people were praising them and now google thinks that they can do the same thing...

To be fair though, what Bing do is covered under Fair Use. They copy an excerpt from the page and attribute the source (by allowing you to visit the website, that is)

Google will be attributing the source, yes. But they'll be taking much more content than Fair Use allows.

[indyank]

To be fair though, what Bing do is covered under Fair Use. They copy an excerpt from the page and attribute the source (by allowing you to visit the website, that is)

I am not sure how or where it is covered under fair use.What is the need to copy an excerpt.Search engines already display a title and a description to every page.What is the need for an extra excerpt?

In the name of these being useful for users, you cannot ditch the webmasters.I am not even sure whose bandwidth is wasted while displaying those previews or excerpts.

If they (search engines) are fair enough, then let them make this feature an opt-in by choice rather than it being the default.Webmasters should be given the opportunity to opt in or out of this feature.

Webmasters too care about user just like google or bing cares about them.Hence, they will be the best to decide whether to allow or disallow those previews or excerpts, as it is their content.

[indyank]

They could introduce a meta robots tag to let the webmaster decide on whether to allow or disallow a preview. "preview" or nopreview"
This could operate similar to "cache" or "nocache" meta robots tag.

[leadegroot]

I would have thought that any large trial or pushing live of this would bring a large number of DMCAs from American webmasters (thats a hint guys ;))
There is a world of difference between supplying a snippet of a site and supplying a full copy.
I can't see webmasters with the power of the DMCA behind them putting up with it.
'You are using my copyrighted content at google.com?q=a+b+c. Cease immediately.'
No?

(I'm having the giggles thinking about sending an infringement notice to "Google's Host" ;))

[onepointone]

They could allow webmasters to 'opt out'.

They could also push down the 'opt out's' in the SERPS.
They could say it was all for the 'useful-ness' of the users. But they wouldn't really need to explain anyway...

[indyank]

They could also push down the 'opt out's' in the SERPS.

I don't think they will go to that extreme, even if they decide to roll in this feature with an "opt out" option.If they do it, then it is no longer an organic search engine and it will surely be the end of an era, as Spencer had pointed out in another thread.

[londrum]

They could allow webmasters to 'opt out'.

thats one of the problems. webmasters have been duped into thinking that 'opt-out' is fair.
we shouldn't have to ask them to do stuff they're not supposed to do. it's like opting out of having your house burgled.

but the genie is out of the bottle anyway. because they've already been to court and got permission to cache our pages. there is no real difference between what they do with caching and what they want to do with previews.

[johnser]

< moved from another location >

Am getting more terrified by the search....

Searching with Google Chrome in private mode, I see a little magnifying glass beside each organic result.

Queries it's appearing for incl "doors" on Google.ie

When I hover over the result, a "preview of the result" appears. When I click, I get taken to the site.

I think I like it - will speed up searching for sure.

But guys in the Plex, slow it down a bit would ye? You did the Places thing yest. Maybe keep it to 1 shock a week for us poor folks who have waste hours to keep explaining your "cool" tweaks to YOUR customers?

[edited by: tedster at 3:07 pm (utc) on Oct 28, 2010]

[indyank]

Johnser, do you work for google?

[backdraft7]

@Johnser - it's not just the "shock", it's the financial ruin that Google is placing upon us with all these tweaks. Each one seems to upset the applecart for days and the trickle down of lost income is going to be immense. It seems Google thinks this is all just a game for funsies. Thanks to the fact that there are no more manufacturing jobs in the states, some of us rely on the web to survive. Yeah, I know, boo hoo.

[johnser]

@indyank - No but the staff in Dublin are super friendly!

Seriously though, I think this is a good move for the web industry incl SEO's but especially designers. Basically, things have just got more complicated. The more complication there is for clients, the more work I have.

As a publisher however where my content is being robbed under the guise of "fair use" - no, this is terrible. But if I don't want traffic from Google and have moral objections to them "caching" my text, then I can stop trying to have my cake and eat it by blocking them via robots. Easy. (Yes I know I shouldn't HAVE to but that's how it works. Deal with it)

Of course as a pub'r, my designer is going to very happy as she knows that she's guaranteed lots more work as the value of web design just sky-rocketed.

@Backdraft - I concur. I live in Ireland and this place is screwed for the next decade. As a web person, the only thing you can do is treat Google as a stepping stone to allow diversification of your business interests. Depend on it for 1 second and you're finished.

[tedster]

If you lived in a city that changed their building code once a week, there would be a protest. Online changes come a lot faster than physical world changes, but the feeling can be like having building codes change weekly.

There really are only two choices - stay up to speed or get out of the Google race.

There are other online business models - but finding them, gaining expertise and shifting over can be a challenge all its own. I have one client who made the shift 7 years ago and today they don't even check rankings or traffic. Their income is no longer correlated with search traffic.

[johnser]

Smart client - what do they do? roughly ;)

[tedster]

They sell pricey software ($14,000 for the top package) for B2B as well as for students preparing for a career in that niche.

[backdraft7]

@tedster & johnser - you both are absolutely right! You can't (and should not) depend on Google. What is rather amazing is that I see what appears to be only a few dozen webmasters who post regularly and show enough concern to share their experiences and try to untangle this whole mess. These changes have got to be affecting thousands if not millions of other sites, but their owners must not care. That or they've always been on page 2 or worse and just don't notice. Props to all those who do participate in these discussions and to our loyal moderators (RC & tedster). :^D

[tshirtdeal]

"If you lived in a city that changed their building code once a week, there would be a protest."

Which brings into question does Google need to be regulated?

Staying up to speed is not really the main problem, keeping up with competition in a fair environment with the rules placed is one thing... The problem is not that the playing field is much faster the problem is there is no playing field, well there is, it is Google's playing field but the players do not know what it is...

also in any other form of business there are rules and regulations in place for protection... If all the world industries worked like G the world would be a total mess with riots, disorder and anarchy...

I personally do see a point coming where Google gets cut up by the government and they "try" at the very least to regulate them, maybe not for webmasters benefit but for someones...