5 ms·
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
by 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 agoIf 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?