Comment by graeme

Comment by graeme 13 hours ago

13 replies

Very good article. Not clear to me why Google has let parasite SEO become so successful. Possibly they are starved of human generated content kept to a certain quality level. But it's very strange to see sites leveraging a legacy brand to expand far beyond their expertise. Forbes is the most prominent example.

miohtama 10 hours ago

On why Google allows bad quality results nowadays:

https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-men-who-killed-google/

Also discussed on HN earlier

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40133976

  • nick3443 6 hours ago

    One of the commenters on wheresyoured seemed insightful: "wonder if organic search results being worse generates more ad clicks, as the ads are more likely to be more useful than the actual search results".

    • morkalork 5 hours ago

      Someone once described the state of mobile gaming on Android like this. Games that are good make less money. Games that are just good enough to get you to open them but are also just shitty enough that when you hit an ad in-game, you click on it and leave, make more money.

      • bee_rider 2 hours ago

        It is astonishing to me that people click ads in general, but especially ads in a game. At least ads on websites, you were probably just mindlessly scrolling…

  • fillskills 5 hours ago

    Google team has long given up its user’s needs for incremental revenue goals. See the 10 ads that come before any result

scottyah 6 hours ago

Nobody has come up with a scalable metric for determining quality that can't be appropriated by SEO. Pagerank was one of the best for awhile (number sites that link to your site, weighted by their rank). Whether it be clicks, time on page, percentage of people who clicked onto the page then ended the session, etc it all gets gamed.

Like it or not, it's what the people want. The "trashy" movies, books, music, etc. all sell like wildfire, why do most people on hn think that the internet should be any different?

thrance 11 hours ago

Since there is no competition and people will keep using Google whatever happens, might as well push the ad-filled garbage site than the ad-free handwritten blogpost. The former probably makes them more money, everything else humanity holds dear be damned.

thmsths 11 hours ago

Complacency? Google has such a dominance in search that their name is used as a verb. Combine that with their culture of automating everything to an extreme degree. And the end result seems to be: search that is just good enough that people keep using it and requires little human fine tuning/curation making it cheap at scale.

  • fakedang 11 hours ago

    Not to mention how flawed the current search tool really is. If you search for something, page 1 shows results from page 7 to some infinite number. But click on that large number, and you find out that the last page was page 3.

paulpauper 5 hours ago

It has to do with these old brands exploiting domain authority, plus buying tons of backlinks. Investopedia.com is another example of this. Google assigns too much weight to authority domains. Google doesn't actually penalize paid backlinks for old domains, I think.

ilrwbwrkhv 8 hours ago

Because Google makes money through all this. These move ads. That's all they care about at this stage. I had stated a few years back Google is dying. It will take a while and it's going to be painful but we will get over this soon. 20 years is a good run.

  • paulpauper 5 hours ago

    google search result can be shit and they will still make tons of money from 3rd party/publisher ads and youtube, cloud, gmail, atc.