Sunday, February 27, 2011

Online Search Quality- Changes in google web ranking algorithm

A step to correct Google search result, bits further has been taken. For some time, there have been criticism on the way Google search engine has been providing search result. Still, some set of Google users think that search result provided by Google Search Engine is biased to certain extent; attributed to the market maker i.e. the advertisers.

Last week Google fellow - Amit Singhal & Matt Cutts announced changes in its ranking algorithm which provides web search result & that it has impact on 11.8% of queries. The changes in consideration have been done to rectify those website which do not bring value to user.

Now these low-value-websites are loosely defined. Google considers them based on the extent of copying of content done from from other websites & few other things. The real valued/good quality sites are those which holds original contents, research materials, in-depth & thorough analysis, etc.

But isn't it something, which was expected in default from search engine?

Let's say there is a pharma company which has published research papers, in depth analysis, etc share on its websites. But the normal users of search engine may not want to see these complex or complicated research. Rather they would look for somebody's website (Say JeeV), who in turn would have inherited contents from this pharma company website (of course, I expect it to be done with proper references) but he would have published the same data but in a easy-to-understand way. I wouldn't wonder if JeeV's website gets higher ranks through search algorithm.

In such case, (given search keyword match) I would expect that the pharma company to get listed at the top of the search result but next ranked result would be by those who would have made it simpler & appealing.

Reading further in the google announcement, I sensed google has done 'pat self on the back' with the concurrence of results obtained from Personal Blocklist Chrome extension.

No comments:

Post a Comment