The Register Complaining That Google Doesn't Like Them
from the seems-a-bit-paranoid dept
Andrew Orlowski at the Register really has it in for Google this week. It seems like every one of his articles is targeted at Google – and each time he seems to think that whatever they’re doing is personally directed at him. His latest all-too-smug piece complains that a Google search on the term “Googlewashed” (which he claims to have invented) doesn’t make it easy to turn up the original article. Orlowski immediately blames people at Google for taking it out directly on him – when Google has always been clear that their ranks are based on algorithms. If they made a mistake, it isn’t some big conspiracy. It just means the algorithms don’t work perfectly – something that shouldn’t surprise anyone. However, Orlowski uses the opportunity to make it sound as though Google is purposely trying to make his article disappear. He could just contact Google and suggest an improvement – but instead goes public with his argument that Google is out to get him.
Comments on “The Register Complaining That Google Doesn't Like Them”
Google only updates their pagerank algorithm about once a month. At other times, they might update their cache (so the article would appear) but they don’t rerank them. Since this page is new, I think Google’s search results are neither surprising nor insidious.
Monthly? Disinformation. Besides they spider daily or constantly. The point was valid, Google plays up this ‘it is only the computer’ myth, when it can be human engineered. Press Releases as News, not identified always, that a ‘bug’ too? Always “clear that their ranks are based on algorithms”? Of course that’s subject to change, based on sponsorship, conflicts of interest, “bugs” in the software, the fiddling of such and the governments we are dealing with (China or whatever totalitarian state Google decides to play games with).
The overall thrusts of The Reg’s stories are great. I don’t understand why this isn’t getting more play. You can’t trust any sources, not even ones the the ‘power to the people’ utopians decide to worship as God. I think blind faith in a Search Engine is more on the level of paranoia. Attacking, the Blogger/Google Cult is a good thing. What makes Google so sacred? It’s only the computer? Yeah yeah sure. The power to change word-meanings and block others, hey it’s only the algorithm. We get upset when governments are careless with information, why should it be any different with a Search Engine?
Re: Re: But...
Dude, you’re confusing two different stories. One Orlowski rant was because a press release wasn’t labeled as a press release in Google News. Google thanked him for pointing it out and fixed it. Orlowski keeps harping about it and claiming that there’s payola involved. Okay, whatever..
The Orlowski rant that Mike wrote about was a claim that Google deliberately censored his original “googlewash” story. Orlowski said that a search for “googlewash” put his story 11 pages deep or something. You only have to do a google search yourself to prove him wrong: I found the story on the second page. So the single fact the Orlowski relied on to form his conspiracy theory is obviously wrong.
It’s very bizarre. I checked on all the other search engines I normally go to, and Google not only had more results for googlewash, but *Google was the only search engine that had Orlowski’s story at all*. That’s right: every other search engine blows large chunks for “googlewash,” but somehow Orlowski decides that the one engine that returns his story is the one that’s censoring him. Okay, whatever..
I get upset when governments are careless with information, but I get more upset when “reporters” are careless or outright wrong.
Re: Re: Re: But...
(I was replying to Steve Anderson, not to Mike)
Re: Re: But...
But he seems to think this is actively done against him… as if it’s some sort of vendetta. He’s not just pointing out problems with the system (which Google ACTIVELY requests from people). He makes it out as if Google is trying to get stuff by people, when they’re clearly not.
Not saying Google is infallable. Just that this series of stories from The Register is ridiculous in what “motives” they try to pin on Google.
Re: Re: But...
Google updates pagerank about once a month. It spiders constantly. Those are two entirely different things. The information gets there quickly, but the scoring involves big calculations over billions of pages.
Plus, who cares? Google has the right to do anything they want with their search engine.
Strange thing. When I search on the letter “a”:
it says there are about 14 million results. That can’t possibly be true!