Web Design ArticlesBlog
Home arrow Articles arrow Promotion Articles arrow More Irrelevant Google Search Results

More Irrelevant Google Search Results

Print E-mail

A little less than a month ago I posted an article describing how the new Google algorithm had filled the results page for a search of my name "Troy Philis" with irrelevant results . Here is a screenshot of what I was talking about:

Image

The first listing is of my portfolio site. So far, so good. The second, however, is entitiled "Troy Philips Photography." This result is completely irrelevant because the word "Philis" is nowhere on the website. In addition, the page contains pictures of half-naked men in thong bathing suits. Not something I want to be associated with (not that there's anything wrong with that).

Take another search I entered today - for C & T Recycling. In Google, the term C & T Recycling does not appear on page one of the SERP:

Image

I really wanted to find information on C & T Recycling though, so I decided to try Yahoo. The term shows up near the top of page 1:

Image

Search Yahoo for my name, and it's all me:

Image

So why would the biggest search engine serve up bad, irrelevant search results, when they are in the business of serving up good, relevant search results. To answer that question, I'll need to define the two most important variables in ordering search results: 1) Keyword Relevance and 2) Link Authority - or PageRank.

Keyword relevance is what we've been talking about, and is what Google is now lacking in its searches. How closely do the search results displayed match the search terms you typed in to the search box? How many times do those terms appear on different parts of the page? Do links pointing to that page include the search terms?

Link authority is determined by counting the links pointing to a particular page. Huge corporations have websites with many, many pages, all linked together through the navigation. Their websites are generally linked to by many other individuals, associates and companies. A small company's website may have relatively few pages, and even fewer pages from other websites linked to it. Link authority tells the seach engine if your website is a big fish or a little fish. 

It is possible to roughly check link authority, or PageRank, as Google calls it, using the Google Toolbar. In checking the examples of irrelevant search results described above, I found that the intruding irrelevant result always had a higher link authority than the relevant results that it pushed down the results page. 

Conclusion: Google appears to have made a decision to let link authority trump relevance under certain circumstances. If you are like me, and would like to see results related to the search terms you typed in the box, rather than results Google is telling you are more important, than you will switch to Yahoo for your search needs too!

What does this mean to a small business trying to get some free advertising on Google? It's going to b e more difficult - get your website established as early as possible, work consistently on search engine promotion and optimization, and don't count on quick and easy results.

UPDATE: Another factor in the appearance of irrelevant search results could be a result of Google's apparent attempt to push searchers to more "popular" SERPS where more expensive Adwords advertisements are displayed.

Comments
Add NewSearchRSS
Ghost Writer.... - Medical Assistant Net     | 151.203.161.xxx | 2008-10-06 21:25:27
Troy, I have made the exact same observations... more so recently! Google search results have become skewed and somewhat gone array. For example, if you searched for "medical assistant" today, you would find a "small fish" PR2 website that seems to be using keyword stuffing and purchased links to circumvent Google webmaster rules, and bypass other highly relevant websites on the first SERPS. You will easily find double listings, Wikipedia, and secondary listings, as well as gray-hat websites right on the first page. I am switching to Yahoo, and/or MSN Search. If I search there for "medical assistant" their results are well organized, and relevant.
ajs - Phantom pain   | 81.156.177.xxx | 2009-01-08 20:49:34
I've had a similar annoyance with google, namely the failure of the search engine to recognise punctuation. An admittedly flippant search for Private Eye's favourite law firm Carter-Ruck's nickname, "Carter-Fuck" (the search included the quotes, just to make sure) came up with sentence fragments such as "Jimmy Carter. Fuck Your ...". Results like this are not only unwanted, but also potentially frustrating, since fully-matched results occur both before AND AFTER it. Why it pops up, I don't know, but i've definitely noticed poor results like this creeping in with greater frequency. For search terms which could be considered reasonable obscure, results are of generally poor quality. Google's mainstream/commercial shift is becoming more and more apparent. They've even ditched their original, famous motto.
Anonymous   | 12.13.125.xxx | 2009-05-28 15:10:59
Google is Dead. I never get search results that have any remote relevance to my search criteria.
Ron - Google results   | 68.40.103.xxx | 2009-06-18 11:23:54
I've been getting poor results too. A search for king tut's ark results in listings for king tut's park. This is getting pretty ridiculous for Google. I don't know if Yahoo is the answer though, but Google's definitely been going downhill.
Anon. - Irrelevant Results   | 81.105.171.xxx | 2009-07-14 07:54:57
I do a lot of technical searches, and have experienced many irrelevant results coming up, including, but not restricted to, pornography.

Perhaps one of the worst is when Google respells a search term for you and returns results for the respelled search term - then you'll usually get nothing BUT irrelevant results as a general rule.

However, I have found that wrapping your search terms up in double quotes, even if individual words, can sometimes improve the relevance of the results returned.

There is also a number of sites out there that seem to somehow 'grab' Google search terms, plug them into their own search boxes, and then add them into the site's Meta tags. The result is thet you end up on a rubbishy site with your search terms pre-prompted on a page that says "Sorry - your search returned no results".

I think those sites ought to be reported to Google as spam.
Troy - Quotes     | 76.254.22.xxx | 2009-07-14 08:19:10
I've also found the need to use quotes around even single words to get close to what I'm looking for. A couple of weeks ago I searched for a 3 word term (no quotes) and after reviewing the irrelevant results, noticed that google had placed a link on the bottom of the SERPS stating that the results only contained the first two terms, and I could include the third term by clicking the link. Well, I took the time to type the third term in the box in the first place, so why would I need to take the additional step to see my search as typed?
Anon - Quotes and Irrelevant Results   | 78.150.21.xxx | 2009-07-15 01:43:13
I just now entered "tut's ark" (without the quotes), and sure enough, as Ron says above, you get irrelevant results for Tut's Park as well as others. Well over 2.5 million results are returned ... if the first few are irrelevant, then the rest probably are as well.

If you enter the same search WITH the quotes, then the top result is this article! However, all the results (8 at this time) do at least appear to be relevant.
Richard Frawn - google vs yahoo     | 213.156.111.xxx | 2009-07-29 03:58:45
Google spider always worked the way that would many people drive mad. There is no big surprise here that again some of the searching rules have changed and now some of the search answers look different. But nevertheless I tried Yahoo few times and I must say that Google always gave me better links. I don't know what changes have been lately inducted to Google search engine but from my experience looks like they are just trying to show pages that fit the answer the most (in their opinion of course).
Troy - Long tail vs. big head     | 99.184.204.xxx | 2009-07-29 07:44:54
It's true that there are some people at Google who's work is aimed at showing the most relevant results. There are also people, probably with more power, whose job it is to increase revenue. Pushing people towards more common search terms that display more expensive Adwords ads is one way to do that.

In my opinion showing good results for long tail queries was one of the things that set Google apart from the rest in the past. Now they are losing that.
Dave - Ahhhhh   | 71.117.100.xxx | 2009-10-01 11:02:35
You all are like a hot shower on a cold winter day. I LOATH google these days. Even trying to find a site dedicated to how bad google is at finding relevant results took me half an hour! I'm glad I found people who concur. If any ambitious programmers are listening, the door is wide open to dethrone google.
Internet Spielautomaten     | 122.173.71.xxx | 2009-11-04 05:07:53
There is also a number of sites out there that seem to somehow 'grab' Google search terms, plug them into their own search boxes, and then add them into the site's Meta tags. The result is thet you end up on a rubbishy site with your search terms pre-prompted on a page that says "Sorry - your search returned no results".
Pattaya Gilrs - shouldn't content be all that     | 216.66.59.xxx | 2010-04-20 04:34:24
shouldn't content be all that matters ? site age and PR should be the secondary factors, users don't care about a site's age and if anything would prefer the latest newest info/result.
Bay Area Web Design - Domain age only matters to SEs     | 76.254.16.xxx | 2010-04-20 07:55:43
Domain age and PR are only tools used by search engines to combat spam. Google isn't smart enough to be able to filter out all robotext and scraper garbage based on relevance or quality alone.

Site (domain) age just refers to age of the site overall, not individual posts. Google does look at how fresh content is, but doesn't always do a great job of serving up new quality content over stale, "trusted" information.
HArdik - Seems kinda unfair     | 203.197.2.xxx | 2010-04-24 02:24:03
Google's quality might have slipped from time to time, but consider how many SEO's and developers must be trying to hijack google's system. Facing occasional slips, but providing optimum results over-all is pretty acceptable and i totally support Googlefor that..

You Rock Google ...

- Hardik
Write comment
Name:
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 
 
 
Security Image
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.

 
< Prev   Next >

Bookmark Us

 
 

Social Bookmarks

Add to: Digg Add to: Del.icoi.us Add to: Reddit Add to: StumbleUpon Add to: Furl Add to: Yahoo Add to: Blogmarks Add to: Technorati Add to: Blinkbits Add to: Ma.Gnolia Add to: Spurl Add to: Google Add to: Blinklist

Good Stuff

Can not find what you are looking for?
Loading