How is the information relevancy to Google consumers calculated when a Google search is performed? Google would have you believe that an automated algorithm computes all these variables to ensure search results are tabulated perfectly during every Google search -- and consistent relevancy is key based on specific words, word combinations and actual phonetics of the way each search if performed.
All these searches result in a quantity that boggles the mind -- it's to the tune of hundreds of millions of searches per day in many different languages, with each result appearing in an uncannily sub-second speed in many cases.
So, who or what determines the programming that allows Google search results to be as relevant and useful to the Google searcher? Who tweaks the programming constantly so that relevancy is fair for all against those who would want to appear everywhere they can on the Google network, regardless of relevancy? Apparently, this effort is headed by Google employee Matt Cutts (which seems odd that only one person is in charge of anything at Google).
This web post points out that Cutts' extended vacation has shown itself in reduced relevancy of Google search results, although without specific examples and a statistically-significant sample, this is all just hearsay. Google insiders -- is there is kernel of truth to this alleged issue? Customers and investors want to know.
Is Google's search relevancy job tied to one person?
Posted Jun 21st 2006 1:52PM by Brian White
Filed under: Bad news, Rumors, Products and services, Insiders, Consumer experience, Blogs, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG)
Nuclear power is on the comeback trail
Apple backs AT&T in continuing spat with Verizon
Closing Bell: The recession is still over, still... do you feel it?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-21-2006 @ 5:38PM
DotsMedia said...
People should have the power to decide what they want. Now with Web 2.0 technology, Google should take people's opinion into account. This is for the exact reason why I use http://www.oozm.com and other similar tag based services to find relevant results.
If you really go through search engine forums and blogs, you would see how frustrated the webmasters are. They can't get a proper site listed fast enough at these engines. How do you then expect people to find relevant information quickly? This is why people or the tech guys love the service like http://www.digg.com, which rates news to the top faster than any search engine.
6-22-2006 @ 10:30PM
Matt Cutts said...
Hi, this is Matt Cutts. I'll gently correct the misconception that I'm unique or indispensable. :)
I'm flattered that Barry would ask whether relevancy or webspam depends on me, but it really doesn't. I'm the head of the webspam group at Google, but webspam is only one small piece of overall quality at Google. There's a large and talented group of people who work on quality at Google, and if I got hit by a bus one day it wouldn't cause any significant problem for the company. Both the webspam group and the larger quality group are doing fine while I'm on vacation. I'm sure I'll have a good time talking about it when I get back from vacation in a week or so. :)
6-26-2006 @ 12:20AM
Robert G. Medford said...
Matt, you have been sorely missed.