3 ms·
No worries. Going back to the original earnings transcripts is nice because then it's official Google statements, not something I'm claiming. I'd been meaning
by Matt_Cutts 15y ago
No worries. Going back to the original earnings transcripts is nice because then it's official Google statements, not something I'm claiming.
I'd been meaning to find those quotes anyway; back in January, a few skeptical people wondered whether Google "has a disincentive to algorithmically weed out the kind of drivel that exists for no other reason than to make its publisher money via AdSense" -- that's a quote from http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2127937 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2127937 .
What the last two earnings calls show is that Google is willing to accept an impact in our revenue to improve our search quality. So it was a helpful exercise for me to track down the relevant bits from the earnings transcripts.
- teflonhook 15y agoYes but I think Google possibly are being disingenuous here. Yes its negatively impacted by some search quality improvements, but is it NETT negatively impacted, or is it also positively impacted as well. After all, you are displaying ads that someone has paid for, so if someone isn't clicking on them, then maybe the content is no good for the ads (ie poor quality). Likewise you can tell by how much someone will bid on the keyword how valuable the content is.