4 ms·

This is a classic example of TechCrunch trolling. 1) They search for places in NYC and seem very surprised that the place information is associated with the se

This is a classic example of TechCrunch trolling. 1) They search for places in NYC and seem very surprised that the place information is associated with the search results. 2) They claim that locations and phone numbers are not useful. I think most users would disagree. 3) They suggest that the fact that place information is associated with a search result implies that somebody had to pay. This is false, information about most places is imported automatically from yellow pages (although owners can claim them). 4) They imply that Google is unfair with sites like Yelp and Citysearch, but the screenshot posted with the article clearly shows that place results are linked to external sites.

greyman 16y ago
But they also imply, and that I find a bit worrying, that the organic local search results might not be sorted primarily by relevance, as Google always claimed to be so. Ok, it might be just a coincidence, that the 7 most relevant results for "NY Chiropractors" are the websites which registered with Google service called Places, and all the others ranked below #7 just happen to not registered on Places. But what is the probability this being the case? It just looks like the websites who registered with Places got preferential treatment in search results, and that was the main point of the article (which you didn't mention in your comment). And this I don't find to be trolling, but a legitimate concern.
- tytso 16y ago
  If you look closely at the Places results, you'll see that many of them have not yet been claimed by their owners. It was automatically generated from public information such as Yellow Pages. What it means is that Chiropractors who don't have a web presence can still have information about them (i.e., address and phone information) returned via a search result. Isn't that a good thing for the Chiropractors?

greyman 16y ago

But they also imply, and that I find a bit worrying, that the organic local search results might not be sorted primarily by relevance, as Google always claimed to be so. Ok, it might be just a coincidence, that the 7 most relevant results for "NY Chiropractors" are the websites which registered with Google service called Places, and all the others ranked below #7 just happen to not registered on Places. But what is the probability this being the case? It just looks like the websites who registered with Places got preferential treatment in search results, and that was the main point of the article (which you didn't mention in your comment). And this I don't find to be trolling, but a legitimate concern.

tytso 16y ago
If you look closely at the Places results, you'll see that many of them have not yet been claimed by their owners. It was automatically generated from public information such as Yellow Pages. What it means is that Chiropractors who don't have a web presence can still have information about them (i.e., address and phone information) returned via a search result. Isn't that a good thing for the Chiropractors?