Framing the conversation in the context of ranking always bothered me, a search engine is a question answerer not a traffic pump.
Google has different verticals to handle different query types, geographical, financial, etc. After sending a query you are presented with the results on the Google SERP from one or more of these verticals, that is the whole concept behind the ‘universal search box’.
Google’s obligation is to user experience not to to self-proclaimed ‘competitors’, it should provide answers not send users sifting through another set of results or to conduct searches elsewhere.
And what if in the future search engines evolves beyond the ranking of blue links will the EU force Google not to change anything? And what about personalized search?
Traffic is a consequence of a question being answered, the EU here is investigating whether there should be another step for getting that answer which is mind-boggling.
That's what the address bar is for, type the address of any 'alternative' and you'll get there.
As a bonus you can also google the name of that 'alternative', click the link and you're there, and it won't cost you a thing.
Well, I think that's a slightly disingenuous response when you consider that most people discover new sites through a search engine - and Google is one of the most commonly used search engines on the planet :)
Search is only but one avenue for discovery, look at the rise of social and social media. Also they do have the right to an editorial process, you can't really expect Google to cripple their application so that a useless linkfarm can get preferable exposure because they are claiming to be a competitor.
Comments
Framing the conversation in the context of ranking always bothered me, a search engine is a question answerer not a traffic pump. Google has different verticals to handle different query types, geographical, financial, etc. After sending a query you are presented with the results on the Google SERP from one or more of these verticals, that is the whole concept behind the ‘universal search box’.
Google’s obligation is to user experience not to to self-proclaimed ‘competitors’, it should provide answers not send users sifting through another set of results or to conduct searches elsewhere.
And what if in the future search engines evolves beyond the ranking of blue links will the EU force Google not to change anything? And what about personalized search?
This is all quite ridiculous.
A search engine is a question answerer and a traffic pump.
Traffic is a consequence of a question being answered, the EU here is investigating whether there should be another step for getting that answer which is mind-boggling.
Not another step; the possibility of an alternative step.
That's what the address bar is for, type the address of any 'alternative' and you'll get there. As a bonus you can also google the name of that 'alternative', click the link and you're there, and it won't cost you a thing.
Well, I think that's a slightly disingenuous response when you consider that most people discover new sites through a search engine - and Google is one of the most commonly used search engines on the planet :)
Search is only but one avenue for discovery, look at the rise of social and social media. Also they do have the right to an editorial process, you can't really expect Google to cripple their application so that a useless linkfarm can get preferable exposure because they are claiming to be a competitor.
I see what you're saying, but I think we'll have a to agree to disagree. I think maybe it's a difference of politics more than anything else.