It may be that the web has rotted in the way described, so that it takes longer for users to find what they want. But I would argue this dynamic actually benefi

It may be that the web has rotted in the way described, so that it takes longer for users to find what they want. But I would argue this dynamic actually benefits Google: searching takes longer, so users spend more time using Google's services. So there's this perverse incentive to make search as crappy as possible, right up to the limit where users switch to another search engine. And the great thing about this "web rot" (from Google's perspective) is that it affects all search engines, so users won't switch. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Google is intentionally pursuing this "crapification" strategy, but they may not worry about the web rot as much as the author thinks, at least in the short term. But while decreasing search result relevance may be neutral or even beneficial, increasing ad relevance is a big benefit for Google. And that is where social comes in: it allows for more targeted ads.