![]() |
Courtesy Image: uncyclopedia.wikia.com |
Google’s
love for brand is not a new thing to cover in my blog. Much has been written
and talked about it but what is not talked about is the declining share of
Wikipedia on Google search results. There was a time when Google would display
Wikipedia on the top of the search result but now the top organic slot is replaced with
big brands like ebay and Amazon.
There
are many SEO experts who always write their opinion on the best practices of
optimizing a website. Does a site like eBay or Amazon follow the so-called SEO advice?
I cease to believe this and one citation would be adequate to prove my belief. Example:
how many of you think -‘http://www.ebay.com/sch/Furniture-/20091/i.html’ is SEO friendly
ULR? And how many of you think
this particular ‘web page’ has followed basic On-Page? Search for ‘antique furniture’ in Google for US location.
Do
you also think that ebay on top of Google has very good title? In webmaster,
Google always shows ‘short title’. What about eBay’s title? Is it so enticing?
Also, see the description and I’ll let you judge the quality of such a dynamic
page from SEO perspective.
The
logic for top SERP for such a store is ‘reputation’ more than following the
so-called Google’s guidelines. Many
experts favor this biased approach of Google that causes a sprawling growth
of such ‘mash up’ ecosystem. I don’t deny the merits of ‘mash up economy’ but I
also see the danger of such economy that tends to produce a monopolistic competition.
Undoubtedly, Google encourages such development for being in ‘that area’.
Another
reason to favor ‘mash up’ by Google is that the search engine is not capable
of developing its own developer community nor does it have the resources to
build all these. Another objective is also very clear that such mash up has
huge MONEY. Most mash ups cash in with
Google's advertising engine on their sites. I and many others too including Aaron Wall must agree with James
Whittaker, who said 'The Google I was
passionate about was a technology company. The Google I left was an advertising
company.' Google made $37.9
billion in 2011. Out of which 96% came from advertising. These ads are typically a few words on the
side of a page of search results or text, and fetch Google anywhere from
pennies to huge bucks.
In
an attempt to bring in smaller business towards the commercial product, Google
in the name of ‘mash up’ economy seems messing up the growth of smaller businesses
that once depend on organic search. As long as Google was a technology focused company,
smaller business had a safe canopy to grow but now a shift in Google’s commercialized
objective is taking a toll to their business, which seems so unfortunate. Truly
said by Karl Marx, capitalism contains the seed of its own destruction’ and I
see its relevance in a company like Google!
0 Comments :
Post a Comment