Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google rewrites many page titles

zyppy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 273 posts

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#121

Post by withinboredom »

lelandfe wrote: post #111
pavon wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is the worst reason for them to rewrite titles. If they left the title as-is, then I would be able to see in the search results that it was a spammy site and ignore it. Instead Google is helping to launder their SEO and present it as a more legitimate site. If Google thinks a site is gaming their algorithms they should de-prioritize it, not rewrite it.

"Gaming their algorithm" sounds like a fancy way of saying SEO. If Google can produce for me a more accurate (or concise) title, it should only help me find what I'm looking for. Forcing folks to trudge through inaccurate titles – or hoping people know the tells of a "spammy site" title – does not seem a better alternative.

My favorite is when the title sounds like what you’re looking for only to discover it’s a page full of ads and keywords. The original title doesn’t even match.

That causes me to lose faith in google not a better experience.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#122

Post by indigochill »

shadowgovt wrote: post #37
indigochill wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a pure HTTP perspective, isn't the point of page titles to be how a page is referenced? It would be an error if a library reported the title of "A Tale of Two Cities" as "It Was The Best of Times". > stop using long, verbose titles This is good advice, but if Google wants to penalize bad titles it should dock their rank, not misreport them.

There's lots of "isn't the point of..." in HTML that actual users have broken. Google (and other crawlers and intermediaries) have to adapt their algorithms to account for that.

> Google (and other crawlers and intermediaries) have to adapt their algorithms to account for that.

As I see it, Google's in a prime position to algorithmically reward actual users for better HTML discipline by ranking them above users who can't be bothered.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#123

Post by mdoms »

stickfigure wrote: post #114
travisgriggs wrote: post #107

I totally get this. Back in the day when I was a kid, we went to the local library and read about the world. When the librarians weren’t serving me by “checking out books” to me, they were busily putting new and improved titles on the books in receiving. /s Seriously. Google is starting to feel less like the librarian of the net (we index the world) and more like the Truman show: we craft your reality.

Given how site owners habitually attempt to distort reality with tag stuffing and other bullshit metadata, what do you expect? Reality is not what is printed on the tin.

I'd expect Google to downrank sites that are trying to manipulate the system. Not rewrite them.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#124

Post by LegionMammal978 »

gibspaulding wrote: post #32
phreeza wrote: post #7

It's quite funny to me that people are running these kind of almost scientific experiments on a fully human-generated and in principle knowable system. The reason are understandable of course but it does seem like a waste of human energy.

You see this a lot in gaming too. There are entire sites, devoted to figuring out what various weapon attachments actually do in Call of Duty. If you poke around the Minecraft wiki you'll find the same thing - people working out exactly how fast you can move with different potion effects or how scaling works when leveling up enchantments. Theoretically, all of this information could be found in the source code, but w…

Minecraft at least is effectively open source; however, many of the quantities being measured are indirect consequences of the physics engine which would be difficult to derive from the constants in the code.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#125

Post by travisgriggs »

stickfigure wrote: post #114
travisgriggs wrote: post #107

I totally get this. Back in the day when I was a kid, we went to the local library and read about the world. When the librarians weren’t serving me by “checking out books” to me, they were busily putting new and improved titles on the books in receiving. /s Seriously. Google is starting to feel less like the librarian of the net (we index the world) and more like the Truman show: we craft your reality.

Given how site owners habitually attempt to distort reality with tag stuffing and other bullshit metadata, what do you expect? Reality is not what is printed on the tin.

Should I ask Walmart to kindly start relabeling products on their shelves because what’s on the tin is rarely as good for me as what the maker purports?

Maybe that’s what we need. An FDA metadata label for every website served, kinda like the fav-icon, but useful.

- Readable word count (protein)

- Ad count (fats)

- Image count (carbs)

- Embedded script size (the list of nasty sounding chemicals it contains)

- Average data transmitted (sugars)

- etc

Must be shown in black text on white background with a black border. Sorry dark mode guys.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#126

Post by stickfigure »

pavon wrote: post #68
xg15 wrote: post #29

> Many site owners find that the titles they carefully craft almost all get rewritten. Yeah, I'm with Google on this one. I don't see many reasons why a site owner would spend extraordinary amounts of time to "carefully craft" page titles other than SEO and optimizing for clickbaitness. As a user, I'm fine with Google counteracting this.

I think that is the worst reason for them to rewrite titles. If they left the title as-is, then I would be able to see in the search results that it was a spammy site and ignore it. Instead Google is helping to launder their SEO and present it as a more legitimate site. If Google thinks a site is gaming their algorithms they should de-prioritize it, not rewrite it.

I think you've got this wrong - they should heavily editorialize the titles.

Honest titles of search results:

* Five pages of flowery text and images before two lines of instruction on how to boil rice

* A bunch of tantalizing pictures of exactly what you're looking for but zero further information about it

* Product reviews machine-generated from public review sources with affiliate links. Top-rated product has the best affiliate revenue.

* You won't care about this solution to a problem you don't have.

etc...

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#127

Post by ricardo81 »

TheCowboy wrote: post #105
ricardo81 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't say I agree. Google should be a neutral middle man providing the results as they are found. If they feel the title is not of their version of quality they should rank it lower. I'd prefer the version of title of several hundred million individuals rather than Google's aggregated version. They used to 'borrow' DMOZ titles before DMOZ became defunct. At least in that case it's another point of view on top of thei…

You step away from neutral as soon as you introduce "version of quality". There will always be an introduction of bias and judgement calls that need to be made to get useful results, especially because bad actors on the web are part of the geography that aren't going away. Just like the press trying to force a neutral "view from nowhere" leads to confused and problematic journalism that can be exploited by bad actors…

Indeed, quality/bias/judgement - I wouldn't argue about it wrt 'going away from neutral', I just meant that if a decision is to be made, either de-value it or show it in the top results, either way don't tinker with the information as it was laid out.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#129

Post by stickfigure »

travisgriggs wrote: post #125
stickfigure wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how site owners habitually attempt to distort reality with tag stuffing and other bullshit metadata, what do you expect? Reality is not what is printed on the tin.

Should I ask Walmart to kindly start relabeling products on their shelves because what’s on the tin is rarely as good for me as what the maker purports? Maybe that’s what we need. An FDA metadata label for every website served, kinda like the fav-icon, but useful. - Readable word count (protein) - Ad count (fats) - Image count (carbs) - Embedded script size (the list of nasty sounding chemicals it contains) - Average…

This might actually be the killer app for AR. Reviews of products as you look at them on the shelf.

Re: Google rewrites many page titles

#130

Post by sosuke »

stickfigure wrote: post #126
pavon wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is the worst reason for them to rewrite titles. If they left the title as-is, then I would be able to see in the search results that it was a spammy site and ignore it. Instead Google is helping to launder their SEO and present it as a more legitimate site. If Google thinks a site is gaming their algorithms they should de-prioritize it, not rewrite it.

I think you've got this wrong - they should heavily editorialize the titles. Honest titles of search results: * Five pages of flowery text and images before two lines of instruction on how to boil rice * A bunch of tantalizing pictures of exactly what you're looking for but zero further information about it * Product reviews machine-generated from public review sources with affiliate links. Top-rated product has the…

This sounds like it would make a very entertaining Chrome extension.
Post reply on HN