Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.

Tad gives us 12 reasons why Webmasters shouldn’t put all dozen of their eggs in Google’s basket..... instead look out for some alternatives? He says, "People, let’s unite for a more social and democratic media. Don’t trust robots, trust humans."
Comments24 Comments  

Comments

Avatar
from sza 2468 Days ago #
Votes: 0

13. Big advertising partners can camouflage Google ads any way they like (see Ask.com’s Adsense ads formatted exactly the same as organic results, against an almost indiscernible light blue background). But if you’re small fish, they’re gonna f. you in the ass for any perceived infraction, without explanation.

Avatar
from VenomousKate 2468 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Google’s determination to establish and maintain a monopoly whilst portraying itself as a benevolent corporation is shocking to everyone but those who use other search engines to discover what Google are really up to.

Avatar
from Gab 2468 Days ago #
Votes: -1

Now if we could get Matt Cutts to not be MIA here, that would be good: http://sphinn.com/story/19758"I liked the point about opening up more communication with webmasters. Does anyone know why Gabriel doesn’t like Google?"- Matt Cutts"[...answering Matt on why I don’t like Google, namely it’s too powerful, censors Chinese dissidents etc. etc. ...] I’d like to hear back from you on this, Matt. Especially if we’re going to increase webmaster communications." - Yours truly.Matt’s Answer: Uhhh, still MIA. Almost a month now. Full thread here: 5 Things for MSN to increase Search Shareedit: Moved my comment on this piece down, so that the Matt part of it could be seen in latest comments. comment was: "Hell yeah! Short, explicit and to the point. Well said, and it sums up my criticisms of the Big Machine."

Avatar
from organicapex 2467 Days ago #
Votes: 0

People never like monopolies and the same applies to Google.They started out creating a notion that they were a bunch of people trying to "help" people on the web.But now, we’ve got to know what they’re "sponsored" plan is.Day by day google is becoming more and more like Microsoft.Time for some one else to take over and google to retire?

Avatar
from JasonFalls 2467 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Maybe it’s just me, but I wasn’t a fan of this post. My retort was Sphunn as well:http://sphinn.com/story/23971

Avatar
from bwelford 2467 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I think Google should be more visible with its true mission now as a publisher with advertising content.  Only the naïve would accept that it is still the librarian for the world’s information.

Avatar
from bwelford 2467 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Sorry about that naïve. It should read naive with an umlaut. My Dragon Naturally Speaking software correctly produced it when I dictated it. However your software couldn’t handle it. :)

Avatar
from smodo 2467 Days ago #
Votes: -1

Reason 7 is hilarious. Great wrap up of why Google sucks so much.

Avatar Administrator
from dannysullivan 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 7

Not to be sounding like a Google fanboy here, but I like balance and perspective. So to run down the list:1) Don’t trust Microsoft and Yahoo, as they censor in China, too.2) A monopoly is when a company has exclusive control over a market. Google at 90% in Germany? And it got that by forcing Germans to use it? Nope. Those Germans (90% probably using computers with the Microsoft operating system), voluntarily chose Google.3) Microsoft and Yahoo both collect personal and private information. At least on Google, you can actually see your search history. You can’t do that with the other two.4) Ain’t going to argue against that! AdSense crud seems to make Google plenty.5) Google doesn’t employ students to toss out spamming sites. They -- like the other major search engines -- have humans that work as an independent relevancy reviewers. Those reviewers don’t get to pull stuff from SERPs. See Google & Human Quality Reviews: Old News Returns to understand this more.6) Google doesn’t manage the knowledge of humanity. They index it. Others compete hard with them to do the same. In terms of not being accountable, they are accountable to the laws of countries they do business in.7) Agree. Matt’s blog is great for spreading news, but Google needs to get stuff out on its official webmaster blog first.8) Google doesn’t own Performics yet. That is an issue, but not until the DoubleClick deal closes. And for the record, Microsoft already owns an SEO firm, so distrust them, too.9) And so will Microsoft and Yahoo, disclose information and records they have in response to the laws of the country they are in. Did you know your phone company will disclose your phone records in response to legal requests? Distrust them, as well.10) Yeah, it’s big -- they’re rich. Won’t argue that.11) Um -- who got laid off? I’ve never, ever heard of Google doing layoffs. Employees on failed projects get moved to other projects. And how do you know the employees had no prior notice those projects were going to be discontinued? Actually, some projects have few employees on them -- and if they wanted to move on, that decision might have killed the projeect.12) Yeah, I’ve never liked the "don’t be evil" [everyone else is] motto.

Avatar
from MattCutts 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Gab, it struck me more as shooting for controversial linkbait. In China for example, Google shows a disclosure notice when we need to remove a result for legal reasons. I believe that gives more background/context to users (more so than any other search engine in China).Just to pick a couple other random ones: "Google does not communicate it’s most controversial policy officially but via the private blog of a cat lover" . That link goes to a "why not to read Matt Cutts’ blog" post that the author also did. I’d say two things: 1) we absolutely have communicated on controversial (and non-controversial) policies on the official webmaster blog, and 2) if you don’t want to read my blog, don’t read it. :)It goes on like that. Danny already looked at a few of the claims (e.g. Google doesn’t own DoubleClick’s SEO right now), so I didn’t feel the need to do a point by point rebuttal.

Avatar
from MattCutts 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 0

P.S. My favorite part of Jason Falls’ post: http://www.socialmediaexplorer.com/2008/01/19/google-conspiracy-theory-new-search-marketer-tactic/was this: "And to offer disclosure, I competed against Matt Cutts in high school speech tournaments, but don’t know him."Jason, fill in more details--where did you go to high school? :)

Avatar
from onreact 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Hello Danny and Matt, appreciate you both taking the time to clear this up a bit. The post was a quick shot and at first intended for my SEO 2.0 blog which is well known not to shy away from controversy. So sadly I did not have the time to link all these claims. Also I assumed the points are well known facts by now, which apparently they are not. I’m in online publishing for ten years now, and I was always controversial even before becoming full time SEO 3 and half years ago. So you may argue that I am a natural born link baiter but then I was link baiting 6, 7 years before the term was introduced. I also work as a journalist for some German publications from time to time so i basically know how to tell a story to engage people. Whereas in the US most people are used to democracy, they never really experienced anything else, although you might argue that "Bush stole the election" I come from a different background where I had to leave my home country as a kid because it was a dictatorship with wiretaps and tanks on the streets. The same type of russian tanks that the Chinese used to kill thousands of students. So that’s why I get a little touchy when it comes to democracy. Now here we have Google claiming for over a year practicing a "nice kind of censorship". Philip of Google Blogoscoped has written extensively on it so I won’t in a short comment. Danny: Yahoo has even a worse human rights record and nobody trusts Microsoft anyways so that’s why this post was about Google. I did not say anything new, I just compiled a list of well known issues. I even spared out most of the issues webmasters have (like not earning any money anymore because they were forced to quit Text Link Ads and Pay Par Post, two of Google’s competitors). If search engines operate with terms like trustrank or trust I wanted to pick up the term and write from my perspective. I do not trust Google, I use it out of convenience. Now Google should face this problem as more people feel like that. I’m just more outspoken and have gained a voice here due to my active contributions of the recent months. Many people won’t even install Google Analytics because they assume Google spies on them. I’m quite careless about that. Matt, I never met you, you are probably a nice guy, but you should stick to helping webmasters instead of bullying them. Let do the lawyers do the dirty work and stick to the positive aspects of your blog. Then I might read it again, I did when I was still a SEO beginner/intermediate. The introduction of "nofollow" was a huge mistake that basically undermines the foundation of hypertext, the link itself and now forcing everybody to use it for all types of links is breaking the Net even more. You could try at least microformats rev="vote abstain" or something. Danny, I won’t argue with you on each point, I probably add some links to the post these days. Matt, the post you refer to is really poor taste, I won’t comment on that. I poked fun at you, so you might feel a little embarrassed, but you’re a celebrity so it’s like saying "Britney Spears is silly", nobody cares, on the net you’re an idol, not a real person. In this case above this guy comes short of slander though. So I am surprised that a professional like you supports such modes of communication. I just recommend my post: http://seo2.0.onreact.com/15-ways-of-disagreeing-with-style Whereas I commented on issues this guy attacks me personally on a level beyond the threshold of being taken seriously. He probably bought too many GOOG stocks when they were at 750$ Sincerely, Tad

Avatar
from Gamermk 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Okay no offense onreact, but I think your response would have been better as a blog post or a personal email to Danny and/or Matt. (or at the very least leave the "this is my life story" stuff out of it)I’m sure that more than a few people hit this comment and basically typed in their head tldr;

Avatar Administrator
from dannysullivan 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Tad, I appreciate your concerns, but yeah -- I have never seen an excuse for poking at just Google. If you think the others are bad on an issue, then you should poke at the others as well, not let them off the hook.In terms of claims, several of them aren’t well known by now -- they are just often wrongly assumed (Google owns Perfomics; human reviewers edit results). On some of the others like collecting personal info -- like I said, find me a company you do business with that does not collect some personal info. That, in and of itself, isn’t a reason to condemn a business as untrustworthy. How they treat that info is (and Google arguably has a good track record on this front, especially in the face of all the criticism it takes).Personally, if you want to take them on with some slams, I’d encourage you to do so where you have documented all your facts or in places where they are hypocritical. The "don’t be evil" motto compared to the "evil scale" they compiled is an example for China.

Avatar
from MattCutts 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 1

Tad, I’ve built up a pretty thick skin over the years, so I didn’t mind the post where you poked fun at me--I thought several of the points were pretty funny.I’m not sure I agree with the idea behind "Yahoo has even a worse human rights record and nobody trusts Microsoft anyways so that’s why this post was about Google." It seems like holding other search engines’ feet to the fire is a good way to help ensure that Y!/Live/whoever improves their services, which makes search more competitive and better for everyone.

Avatar
from JasonFalls 2466 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Matt -- You beat me for the broadcasting title in 1989. I returned the favor in 1990 and repeated in 1991. I was the pink blazer guy from Pikeville.

Avatar
from JasonFalls 2466 Days ago #
Votes: -1

Oh, I just caught Tad’s comment that my post was in poor taste. Sorry he thinks so. I went to his post on how to disagree with class and noted only one area I failed to meet his standards on, which was disagreeing where the post took place. He’s right. I didn’t comment on Collective-Thoughts and should have. My apologies. I went there and the comments are closed. That’s a little strange just a couple days after the post went live.I appreciate Danny’s run down of the points and arguements therein. He’s much more qualified to answer each than I.The only question I have for Tad is why he thinks my post is in poor taste when my major point of emphasis was that attacking someone personally (something he recommends you don’t do) deteriorates your credibility and that of the community blog on which you post. So offering up a discussion of his personal critiques of Matt Cutts is in good taste and my post isn’t? Not sure I understand the thought there.Still, I’m happy there has been ample discussion. I’ve learned a bit about Google and had some interesting discussions on- and off-line about the topic. For that, Tad, I thank you.

Avatar
from weboptimist 2465 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Fabulous! Any post that pulls in Danny Sullivan AND Matt Cutts gets my Sphinn!Nice disussion. The truth is, we need to be concerned with all of the search engines in regards to privacy issues. Google just gets the most attention because it’s the biggest. I really don’t care for any of them tracking my movements across the web. Of course, I KNOW that they are doing it once I sign in. The vast majority of web surfers don’t have a clue what happens when they sign in to use all of those freebies the engines offer.That’s the part I consider evil.

Avatar
from Aussiewebmaster 2465 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Oh... we have to have a revival of the debate at one of the upcoming conferences.... closed door - pay to get in and give the money to charity.... hell I would pay a grand for the experience!

Avatar
from Aussiewebmaster 2465 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Funny I completely got the wrong idea of who JasonFalls was.... thought some oblique reference and the comments were from Tad (though he is Polish so would have been a long stretch).... and had this whole Superman Lex Luther thing worked out....So still want to see a high school debate rivalry relived... but will only pay $100 a ticket now!

Avatar
from WhizzKid 2465 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Just leave a comment on Matt Cutts blog disagreeing with what he says. Now, what he could do:1. Note your IP2. Get what Google services this IP is using / has used such as Gmail, Orkut, Analytics, Adsense, AdWords etc.3. Did I forget Google Toolbar? Wow! He knows you searched for "kid porn" last Saturday!4. He knows everything about YOU!Just speculation. And dont tell me IP changes everytime you connect to the internet with dialup etc! The big G has a lot to spy on any person that depends on their services. :D

Avatar
from MattCutts 2464 Days ago #
Votes: 1

Aussiewebmaster, I tried to visit the SEW post and it’s not there anymore? Thank goodness it’s still in my Google Reader feed. :) Yup, Jason Falls and I competed in high school speech stuff a bit. I’ve never met Tad in person as far as I know.Jason, nice to (virtually) meet you again after all these years--it’s pretty wild to cross paths once more. I thought it was funny that Tad was happy to dish it out, but was a little sensitive about your post. By the way, I thought your response (in the comments of your post) was pretty awesome. I understand Tim Nash’s point, but your response was spot on. It’s one thing to do a post that attracts attention, but it’s possible to go too far and affect the way that people look at you. And if you’re doing a group blog, that can affect how someone looks at the other people in the group as well. I thought you communicated that in a very finesseful way.

Avatar
from JasonFalls 2464 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Thanks Matt. I appreciate the props. I’m not sure why this became the celebrity grudge match debate thing, and I assume they mean you and Tad not me and you, but I’d pay to see either! Heh.

Avatar
from Gab 2453 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Matt, thanks for clarifying about China. That sounded ’official line’y though - not how you personally think about it. That said, I can imagine legal might not be thrilled about you venting publicly there,so I can understand, but I hope you consider it food for thought. And fyi, I NEVER flamebait - I see that as a brandkiller. That said, I’ve found a flaw in your algo which you’ll hopefully be seeing here on Sphinn in the next day or two. On a related note, you didn’t address any of the other questions or points there. I’m sure you’re a busy man, but you might want to address those too :).

Upcoming Conferences

Search Marketing ExpoSearch Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.



Join us at an upcoming SMX event: