This morning the Guardian UK published a scathing analysis of Google, SEO and the launch of Cuil. In his article, Chris Williams claimed that the greatest threat to Google is spam. No argument there.
But Williams takes the argument one step further and states:
Plenty of digital ink has been needlessly spilt this week over the launch of the suicidally-monikered new search engine Cuil.com. But the only threat to Google is itself and, in a roundabout way, the legion of spammers and “search engine optimisation” (SEO) consultants that buttress its dominance.
It’s clear that Williams is crying over “spilt ink.” He’s right in saying that Web sites have adapted their design and structure to accommodate Google.
But Williams would like to think that all companies – including competing search engines – are in the business of “reverse engineering” Google.
The people at the vanguard of reverse-engineering Google are not its jealous search rivals. They’re the spammers and SEO consultants. They have driven an ever-closer relationship between the quirks and whims of Google’s algorithms and policies, and the structure and content of the web. It’s a feedback loop that was unavoidable once Google’s early rivals proved unable to respond to its better search results and presentation.
He feels that techniques such as “adding needless internal links, creating PageRank-friendly URLs and distorting normal grammar” are all widely deployed with varying degrees of dastardliness.
While grammar may be distorted, the fault doesn’t lie with SEOs but with writers lacking sufficient command of the English language.
Somehow Williams connects Google’s share of searches with SEO efforts, rather than user preference. If that’s the case, then SEO must be producing superior SERPs.
Williams writes, “Thanks to the mutualistic process driven by spammers and SEO consultants, that dominance is only going to increase, and it’s the only ‘Google Killer’ on the horizon.”
Williams envisions a future “when the favours spammers and SEO consultants have been doing for Larry and Sergey will become dangerous, anti-trust style.” He believes regulatory intervention now seems the only bar to a complete Google autocracy over the Web economy.
Related reading
How did the Gillette video impact search traffic?
Gillette's “The Best a Man Can Be” ad sparked lots of coverage. The real question is, "What impact did that video have on search traffic?" The trends since.
What will the SERP of tomorrow look like? Four changes to prepare for today
Four predictions on the SERP of tomorrow from the VP of Industry Insights at Yext. What we can expect, and what to do today to prepare.
3 lead generation tips for ecommerce businesses
For 3 out of 5 marketers, generating traffic and leads is the toughest challenge. Here are our top three tips for lead generation for ecommerce businesses.
How did the 2018 SERP changes impact organic search?
How did the 2018 SERP changes impact organic listings? More importantly, how should you react? The year of updates in review, and tips to respond to each.
