Re: Search engine promotions

From: Mike Golby <mikeg_at_laragh.co.za>
Date: Wed 21 Feb 2001 12:14:03 -0600

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:

>Paying for placement, in my view, opens the doors for
>fraud and imbalance. There's nothing to prevent
>ranking from becoming a "who can pay most for top
>placement", which means anyone can buy their way to
>the top.

>If you extend that scenario, it's only a matter of time
>until the big money buys whatever they can, rendering
>the entire search engine useless and ultimately, a
>failure.

LINDA ROCCO <GUMMYLUMP_at_aol.com> ALSO WROTE:

>When you look for and find any company in the
>Yellow Pages, who says that they are the one best
>suited to your needs? They pay for that Yellow Pages ad
>when others cannot afford it, haven't thought of it,
>or just don't feel like it. Maybe anothe company that
>isn't in the Yellow Pages would be best for you.

Once the static domain of content providers sharing
information of limited commercial value, the Web is
becoming a dynamic medium dominated by businesses
selling hard and soft value-added goods for profit. In
other words, its much-loved culture is changing. As
dotcoms fail and e-commerce begins its ascent, we see
money playing a larger role in determining how and
what we are able to access. This is the reality, not an
endorsement of big business. It will continue to be like
this for a while. For what it's worth, though, reality need
not be a Bad Thing. The Yellow Pages analogy, however,
is flawed. The Web is not an electronic Yellow Pages and
search engines are designed to prevent it becoming a
digitized print publication.

At the moment, though, Search is in a state of flux as
it recovers from its disastrous flirtation with the notion
of making a quick buck through portals financed with
ludicrously easy-to-get investment capital. In other words,
presently it is neither one thing nor the other.

The good news for Rob and Linda is that different, more
viable business and technological models using techniques
influencing both the nature and scope of search will be
developed in the medium to long term. Most rational
commentators would agree that those pay-for-placement
engines and directories hoping for an upturn in conventional
adspend are unlikely to last. As with the real world (and
now that the bubble has burst), those serious about
survival will put more money into R&D. With the utilization
of emerging technologies, we are likely to see radically
different search methodologies developing over the next
couple of years.

For example, the incorporation of the Invisible Web and every
form of file format into search, i.e. the ability to access
more of the between 300 and 800 billion (!) Web pages
available to us, will have a profound impact on how we search.
As with most of our endeavors, it will force rather than
encourage the development of search technologies that work
to the benefit of those who make most use of the Web. And
that includes small business.

For now, much as we do not like to admit it, we cannot begin
to imagine the practical aspects of search as it will be in
2003. If we can accept that we are not all Vernes, Clarkes,
Sagans, or Asimovs, we will more readily 'play the game' by
the rules applicable to the here and now. We will also then
begin to discover that the picture is not as bleak as we tend
to paint it. Despite operating in a very competitve field, I have
yet to pay for placement. Yet, on six wide-ranging keyword
phrases, my small site scores 61 top twenties (out of a possible
132) on the top 22 engines and directories. 45 of the 61 fall
into the top ten.

If I can achieve this without significant outlay, there is still a
great deal of hope for the 'little guy' out there.

Mike Golby
Laragh Courseware
http://www.laragh.com
"e-Learning Matters"



Received on Wed Feb 21 2001 - 12:14:03 CST