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

Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

sparktoro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 531 posts

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#81

Post by Wowfunhappy »

bduerst wrote: post #67
oceanstone wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, it's opt in for publishers. For users, the only way to opt out currently is to view in desktop mode.

Users can use encrypted.google.com to search on mobile, but yeah, there should be a search setting for them.

I've heard of this strategy before, but it has never worked for me. Encrypted.google.com just redirects to google.com, and I still get AMP.

I now use https://github.com/bentasker/RemoveAMP, but that's only possible because I'm lucky enough to have a Jailbroken iPhone. :/

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#82

Post by tamersalama »

SilasX wrote: post #52
puranjay wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your stand, but what Google did with its featured snippets is essentially a form of bait and switch. It encouraged entrepreneurs and creators to create content that could answer specific queries with the promise that Google will drive traffic to their sites. Now Google is using the same content and depriving them of the traffic. That's pretty scummy in my opinion.

Hm, I think there's scumminess on both sides, since (as GP noted) even simple sites (e.g. for lyrics) are bloated and unusable. Before: User: Hey Google, what's the monthly payment on a 20-year mortgage with 3.9% APR? Google: Oh, MortgateSite would know, go there. MortgageSite: Here's your calculator. User: Okay, let me put in the numbers ... awesome, thanks! Oh, neat, they can hook me up with lenders. Let me take a…

Funny thing that usually "BUY THIS PRODUCT" is also a Google Product (Ad)

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#83

Post by wongarsu »

whatshisface wrote: post #75
cletus wrote: post #15

So a common trope in the startup world is the difference between a feature and a company, the idea being that lots of features are masquerading as companies. This inevitably leads to them being shocked--SHOCKED--when some bigger player adds that feature, eating their lunch. I feel the same way about a lot of outbound sites on Google. There are a bunch of things I just don't want to go to another site for. Off the top…

> the difference between a feature and a company If the right investments were made, every software company's product could be a feature of Microsoft Windows, and Microsoft Windows could be a feature of Intel CPUs.

Microsoft tried that with Internet Explorer and another time with Bing, it didn't work out so well.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#84

Post by criddell »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #77
richardwhiuk wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did that site get the sports schedule? Did they just copy it from somewhere else?

And that's part of the question: If Google's getting all it's data from first party sources, say, scraping it from the team's website, it may not have harmed anyone there. But if it's scraping it from a site which aggregated and normalized the information into an easily parse-able format (hence, providing value, of which Google took advantage), then they must be compensated for it.

Presumably the site being scraped is getting some value from being included in Google's index. If they aren't, they can always opt out.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#86

Post by cyrusshepard »

I think what folks are missing is that a lot of these "zero-click" searches happen as a result of Google scraping your website, and displaying the results as a "featured snippet."

Yes, they link to you below the featured snippet.

No, more people don't click, because they've taken the answer from your website and displayed it right in their search results.

For example: If I'm searching for "best nail for cedar wood" Google gives me the answer: STAINLESS STEEL - and I never had to click through to the website that gave the answer: https://bit.ly/2MdovdP

• Yes, this is good for users (it would also be good for users if Netflix gave away movies free)

• Overall, the publishers who "rank" for this query receive fewer clicks

• Google earns more ad revenue as users stick around on Google longer

Ironically, Google has a policy against scraping their results, but their whole business model is predicated off scraping other sites and making money off the content - in many cases never sending traffic (or significantly reduced traffic) to the publisher of the content.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#87

Post by bryanrasmussen »

I think another decreasing search type, going by my own example, is the programming syntax/method name search.

If I can't remember exactly the syntax I can often construct a query precise enough that the first result shows enough of the syntax in stackoverflow's accepted answer that I can just proceed from there without clicking through.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#88

Post by C1sc0cat »

cletus wrote: post #15

So a common trope in the startup world is the difference between a feature and a company, the idea being that lots of features are masquerading as companies. This inevitably leads to them being shocked--SHOCKED--when some bigger player adds that feature, eating their lunch. I feel the same way about a lot of outbound sites on Google. There are a bunch of things I just don't want to go to another site for. Off the top…

Song lyrics really ought be from a rights holders site and not j random site with questionable translations - I have seen some lyrics sites that totally mangle the meaning of basic English words.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#89

Post by ignu »

treis wrote: post #80
bduerst wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>with seemingly no opt out (on the consumer or publisher side) I though AMP was opt-in for publishers? As in you have to write the front-end spec and pick a CDN to cache with.

>I though AMP was opt-in for publishers? It is but Google will only put you in the carousel at the top of the search if you use AMP. That's a significant enough driver of traffic where publishers can't afford to lose it.

it's not just the carousel. it's organic rankings too.

we had an emergency AMP project after our traffic dropped 35% due to a smaller competitor implementing AMP and google rewarding them by boosting them in the search results.

Post reply on HN