Is Google Search Deteriorating? Measuring Google's Search Quality in 2022

Post by gruez » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:46 PM UTC

mcv wrote: post #383

gruez wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can work around that by using javascript (checking for tab losing focus) and checking how quickly the links are being clicked. If you middle-click a bunch of links, then don't click any more links, then it can be inferred that one of the links that you clicked was "good".

How can that be inferred? Maybe the results were all bad and I'm refining my search query. Or trying a different search engine.

Post by AlbertCory » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:57 PM UTC

KarlKemp wrote: post #77

danielrpa wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CEO and upper management might simply not care about the long-term viability of the company. Cashing out in the short-term sounds more like what these executives generally do.

> Cashing out in the short-term sounds more like what these executives generally do. It only sounds like what they do because you only ever read stuff written by people who believe that without any evidence. Sundar Pichai has been with Google since 2004.

Post by defaultprimate » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 5:16 PM UTC

remus wrote: post #239

kebman wrote: post #90

If you search for anything political on Google, you'll notice that the results are clearly slanted in one direction, towards the opinion of a handful of pre-approved news outlets. This leads me to seek alternatives whenever I need neutral sources, for instance Yahoo search.

I find these responses fascinating as the "clearly slanted" results tend to change direction depending on the political affiliation of the person making the claim! Having said that, I'd love to be proved wrong if you have any evidence to show a particular bias one way or the other?

Post by prewett » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 5:24 PM UTC

fdgsdfogijq wrote: post #44

whakim wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, it seems crazy that a company would actively try to self-sabotage their bread-and-butter product in search of a bit of extra revenue when they're already making record profits. Not to mention that, as the author of the article points out, Google published a well-known quantitative paper on why that's a bad tradeoff.

It happens all the time though. Look at amazon, they flood their marketplace with cheap knockoff products that hurt the credibility of their ecommerce offerings, but the money generated is too much to shut off. So in the short run, amazon makes more money for a worse reputation, and in the long run ??? its unclear

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 5:34 PM UTC

dcminter wrote: post #390

ouid wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's customers want access to the product, this would be denying them that access.

So I assume by customer you mean advertisers and by product you mean the users carrying out searches. For their commercial search results I'll grant you that there's an incentive. But for their non-commercial search results why would they care? That's how it used to work, you couldn't delete a domain from the paid results, but you could make it disappear from the unpaid ones.