3 ms·

It certainly seems like Google Search prefers to return ad-ridden monetized sites rather than more usable sites, with the obvious explanation being that they ea

by jl6 3y ago

It certainly seems like Google Search prefers to return ad-ridden monetized sites rather than more usable sites, with the obvious explanation being that they earn more money from sites that show ads. But this feels like too obvious a conspiracy theory and it’s probably not directly designed to act that way - more likely it is an unintended consequence of something else. Unintended, but tolerated all the way to the bank.

brigadier132 3y ago
I guarantee you no experiments that negatively impact revenue but improve the search experience ship
- babyshake 3y ago
  They must have considered some possibility of a "Subscriber Results" option for Google One subscribers or something along these lines? I'm guessing that would be too risky to make their non-subscriber results look like garbage?
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    They serve such a large number of users who would never pay, I cannot imagine they would ever consider admitting that they could serve better results. That would be a disaster. They make money off of users from surveillance and advertising. They would never make enough from subscriptions to offset the losses in perception from all the people they are surveilling for advertisers.
    - bobthepanda 3y ago
      I mean at one point that was an argument against Youtube Premium as well. It kind of depends what the ad value per user is, and then charge X% above that. Though maybe it’s so high that it would be an enterprise price level.
      - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
        There is a huge difference between "Youtube without ads or with ads" and "good google searches or worse google searches". Everyone understands that with premium you can pay to remove ads. But paying for better google searches would upend the entire image of google as the premier search engine.
      - xnx 3y ago
        This is a good analogy, but maybe doesn't put enough emphasis that for search users are often actively seeking information and ads can (not always) even contribute to the usefulness of results. On YouTube the user is more often seeking entertainment and the ads are blocking them from that.
aero142 3y ago
I would guess they monitor tons of metrics for any change to search and any change that reduces ad revenue gets rolled back or reviewed.
ToucanLoucan 3y ago
Probably more like selection bias. Sites that are heavily monetized with Google have relationships with them and can work directly with them to improve their SEO and page rankings. Plus if they have all those ads they almost certainly also use Analytics, which can help them optimize too. But also, if someone claimed to be a Google engineer and told me they purposely rank up pages that have Adsense on them, I wouldn't call them a liar immediately.
twoodfin 3y ago
Unfortunately, the sad truth is likely that Google has hard telemetry evidence that users in aggregate prefer this SEO junk, engage with it, and move on feeling that Google successfully satisfied their query. If Google could drive higher levels of engagement and satisfaction by screening out the dross I think they would, it’s clearly within their abilities. Hopefully AI gets good enough and scales efficiently enough so they can disaggregate this kind of ranking decision.
- Guvante 3y ago
  The recipe problem is literally this: users who go to a site check the recipe, realize it isn't a fit and return to Google are considered failures lowering your result status. By putting fluff and ads you extend the time on the page making your site seem more valuable. It is hard to tell "that didn't answer my question" from "that quickly answered my question wrong" after all. (Note it isn't uncommon to always bounce off a recipe site as you check multiple to make sure the one you found makes sense)
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > hard telemetry evidence that users in aggregate prefer this SEO junk, engage with it, and move on feeling that Google successfully satisfied their query. How in the world can telemetry tell you any of that? The only metrics I've heard from Google that relate to it is whether or not they return to do the same search again within a short window, but I don't think that tells you users prefer SEO junk or that they're satisfied with the search results.
  - asdff 3y ago
    SEO junk page will have a couple share buttons with tracking pixels for the major advertisers like google and meta.
jonas21 3y ago
A more likely explanation is that ad-ridden monetized sites are able to invest more in SEO since a visitor is worth more to them than an ad-free or low-ad site.
- NegativeK 3y ago
  There will never be just one answer.
wetpaws 3y ago
[dead]
janalsncm 3y ago
That wouldn’t explain why Bing has the same problem as Google. Bing isn’t making money off of serving pages with Google ads. If anything, they are handing money to a competitor.
deely3 3y ago
Google can allow us to block sites from search results, but Google don't want to. For example I will easy live without results from pinterest, expert-exchange, medium, and list of other sites..

by jl6 3y ago

brigadier132 3y ago

I guarantee you no experiments that negatively impact revenue but improve the search experience ship

babyshake 3y ago
They must have considered some possibility of a "Subscriber Results" option for Google One subscribers or something along these lines? I'm guessing that would be too risky to make their non-subscriber results look like garbage?
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  They serve such a large number of users who would never pay, I cannot imagine they would ever consider admitting that they could serve better results. That would be a disaster. They make money off of users from surveillance and advertising. They would never make enough from subscriptions to offset the losses in perception from all the people they are surveilling for advertisers.
  - bobthepanda 3y ago
    I mean at one point that was an argument against Youtube Premium as well. It kind of depends what the ad value per user is, and then charge X% above that. Though maybe it’s so high that it would be an enterprise price level.
    - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
      There is a huge difference between "Youtube without ads or with ads" and "good google searches or worse google searches". Everyone understands that with premium you can pay to remove ads. But paying for better google searches would upend the entire image of google as the premier search engine.
    - xnx 3y ago
      This is a good analogy, but maybe doesn't put enough emphasis that for search users are often actively seeking information and ads can (not always) even contribute to the usefulness of results. On YouTube the user is more often seeking entertainment and the ads are blocking them from that.

aero142 3y ago

I would guess they monitor tons of metrics for any change to search and any change that reduces ad revenue gets rolled back or reviewed.

ToucanLoucan 3y ago

Probably more like selection bias. Sites that are heavily monetized with Google have relationships with them and can work directly with them to improve their SEO and page rankings. Plus if they have all those ads they almost certainly also use Analytics, which can help them optimize too. But also, if someone claimed to be a Google engineer and told me they purposely rank up pages that have Adsense on them, I wouldn't call them a liar immediately.

twoodfin 3y ago

Unfortunately, the sad truth is likely that Google has hard telemetry evidence that users in aggregate prefer this SEO junk, engage with it, and move on feeling that Google successfully satisfied their query. If Google could drive higher levels of engagement and satisfaction by screening out the dross I think they would, it’s clearly within their abilities. Hopefully AI gets good enough and scales efficiently enough so they can disaggregate this kind of ranking decision.

Guvante 3y ago
The recipe problem is literally this: users who go to a site check the recipe, realize it isn't a fit and return to Google are considered failures lowering your result status. By putting fluff and ads you extend the time on the page making your site seem more valuable. It is hard to tell "that didn't answer my question" from "that quickly answered my question wrong" after all. (Note it isn't uncommon to always bounce off a recipe site as you check multiple to make sure the one you found makes sense)
JohnFen 3y ago
> hard telemetry evidence that users in aggregate prefer this SEO junk, engage with it, and move on feeling that Google successfully satisfied their query. How in the world can telemetry tell you any of that? The only metrics I've heard from Google that relate to it is whether or not they return to do the same search again within a short window, but I don't think that tells you users prefer SEO junk or that they're satisfied with the search results.
- asdff 3y ago
  SEO junk page will have a couple share buttons with tracking pixels for the major advertisers like google and meta.

jonas21 3y ago

A more likely explanation is that ad-ridden monetized sites are able to invest more in SEO since a visitor is worth more to them than an ad-free or low-ad site.

NegativeK 3y ago
There will never be just one answer.

wetpaws 3y ago

[dead]

janalsncm 3y ago

That wouldn’t explain why Bing has the same problem as Google. Bing isn’t making money off of serving pages with Google ads. If anything, they are handing money to a competitor.

deely3 3y ago

Google can allow us to block sites from search results, but Google don't want to. For example I will easy live without results from pinterest, expert-exchange, medium, and list of other sites..