Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
The difficult thing is that everyone believes the whole world will soon be social--that we will do nothing without our friends instantly knowing (and judging) our latest foray to, say, the bowling alley or the mall restroom.
So, yelps and alerts have now emerged that Page has posted nothing to Google+ for a month. At least, nothing publicly.
He might also have heard the words of Martin Sorrell, the perfectly formed and perfectly informed CEO of ad group WPP, who posited only yesterday that making money from social networks might not have quite the ease of peas that many in polo shirts had imagined.
But equally, even in the last month, the Google CEO might suddenly have begun to consider that there is a place, a space, beyond social--a new, new nirvana where money can be made.
Social is a fad. Like all fads it will die, perhaps a lot sooner than we expect, and be replaced by something equally "permanent".
Social is a fad. Like all fads it will die, perhaps a lot sooner than we expect
Once the buzz decreases...
It's positive discrimination, use it /help Google+ gain share and rank high, don't use it and adios!
Are you saying that Google intends to give higher rankings to the websites of people that use Google+ ? That would be totally unethical. It would be like bribery. If they actually tried to do this, there would be a huge uproar of protest, and it would backfire in their face.
But therein lies the rub. If Google’s search results become heavily dependent on social signals from Google+, then there’s going to be heavy pressure on the net’s websites to embed the Google+ button.Unethical, bribery or whatever, never stopped Google from trying. Are people happy with instant search? Local etc? Google likes to push its luck and it feels confident about its brand so it thinks nothing bad will stick. Plus they'll get their 'engineers' to do a video and say that their data shows that people love it, and it's all about the users and the only ones complaining are bad sites that are not +1-ed. Watcha gonna say?
And depending on where you work — say, Facebook or the Justice Department — that could look like Google is unfairly using its search engine might to boost its Facebook alternative.
That might explain why Forbes killed a story by Kashmir Hill entitled “Stick Google Plus Buttons On Your Pages, Or Your Search Traffic Suffers” which was seemingly based on information from a meeting with Google ad representatives. On August 18, Hill wrote, “the message in this meeting was clear: “Put a Plus One button on your pages or your search traffic will suffer.”
Hill followed up with Google’s press team. which gave Hill the same carefully couched answer it gave Wired.
But the story quickly disappeared from Forbes’ website and from the Google cache, though it was noticed and saved by the Raven Tools SEO blog.
[edited by: walkman at 8:46 pm (utc) on Sep 19, 2011]
And if it did, there would be a huge protest against that too, and millions of site owners like me would refuse to go along with it, which would force Google to back down..
Anyway, it makes no sense to use the +1 button as a ranking factor. It isn't an indication of quality or relevance.
We just called out a laundry list of senior Googlers for not using Google+.
Among them was Sergey Brin, whose last update was on August 29, sharing a picture of a blimp sailing over San Francisco.
20 minutes after our post today, Brin is back on Google+ to share the mysterious picture you see to the right.