6 Reasons Why SearchWiki was launched and it’s mistakes

So, SearchWiki came, died, and rose from the dead. But whether you like it, is irrelevant. Why would Google launch this new product with no beta first? We had Google Suggest for a few months and then it was live for all to use and see. But Google SearchWiki becomes live within a few weeks of even hearing about it (Although SearchWiki was in beta for a year it was a very sloppy rollout and partly why there is a large outrage). I have 6 reasons why I think Google did this.

1. IE has about 75% browser market share

Google obviously believes user data (via a browser) is important or they wouldn’t have launched Google Chrome. Google has only 1-3% of browser market share, depending on what stats you read. This is significantly lower than Microsoft and based on what Bill Gates (or Ballmer?) said a while back “We have cutting-edge technology that will jump us 2-3 years ahead of the search-competition, with or without the buyout of Yahoo, although that would help, it’s not necessary” (paraphrase; no citation, cause it’s hard to find the link). So, obviously this browser data is important if Gates (or Ballmer) says this will get them 2-3 years ahead of Google/Yahoo.

BrowseRank will be innovative because it will look at what the users are actually doing instead of a link scale. If you want to search pages based on popularity, user data is key, and the closer you get to the user, the better (from links, to actual browser data).

2. Google needs user data (something is better than nothing)
Google knows the lack of browser data, so they compensate for it with SearchWiki. Although the data isn’t ideal, it’s something and it creates a culture of Googlers. The votes help share which results are better than others and which results that should be lowered, now this can be abused it’s data and I’m sure Google can come up with an algorithm that takes this data as a grain of salt.

Also, the more people ‘vote’ and ‘comment’ on a search result, the more interaction occurs between users and Google.com, this creates a culture of Googlers. The more I interact with something, the more I’m willing to stay loyal to it, unless it fails me in a big way (like Google removing PageRank in their algo..and going back to Yahoo days) but this won’t happen, technology doesn’t go back, it presses forward.

3. Yahoo/MSN deal is scary for Google
Do I really need to describe this? I mean seriously. This can be a very serious threat to Google, with Yahoo! & MSN merging together (even if it’s a search merger) that is 30% of the search market. All Yahoo! & MSN have to do, is double their market share with their collective engineering and Yahoo/MSN and Google have swapped places. Two heads are better than one. 

4. Cause they can and pappa knows best (just for Michael Gray) :)

Although I don’t completely agree with Michael because there are plenty of other restaurants out there, even though they don’t serve the ‘best’, their are 2nd best and third best. Michael just doesn’t like how the top restaurant serves food. Not a big deal, change search engines! You don’t have to eat the best. Nor do you have to use Google. Although it is the best, whatever, it’s not the end of the world.

Google could ban every website just because they don’t use adsense. You can moan and groan all you want but Google doesn’t care about your best interest. Their desire is to stay afloat. ;) It’s in a resturant’s best interest to change the menu how they see fit, when they want to.

For example, if the restaurant makes mac and cheese with velveta but they decide to use some of their own cheese from cows that they bought (when they used to buy it from another company). That change and wether you like it or not, whether they tell you or not, is up to them. (Umm…note here, I’m not sure if that is an entirely true statement but……when was the last time you got a disclaimer on ‘ingredient changes’???; never, the last time i checked) And Google has done that, (changes without asking you).

Plus Google suggest, Google Images, what if I want to opt-out? As Matt Cutts said “We’d be supporting a bunch of legacy code”…..sorry Danny and Michael but your not a worker of Google, so you have no say and I doubt the employees of Google have merit to say something. It’s the management like Eric, Larry, and Sergey (and large stock holders) who would make that decision. So, don’t try to help Google out ;) Let them screw up their company. :) As Rae Hoffman said “SEO is not an internet marketing plan – it is one facet of… and it isn’t the marketing facet” (Rae, this is props to you, no pun or nothing :) )

I think too many people in the search marketing industry are too search marketing heavy and are lopsided in their internet marketing campaigns. If Google makes a bad decision, so, move on, have a holistic campaign.

Ah! and don’t use ‘father telling son’ something as an analogy, Google is your search engine by choice, not because ‘you have to’. I can’t choose my parents, but I can choose my search engine.

Now, I’m for voicing your opinion (I’m voicing mine :)) but please remember your place (I’m there too!!), your not the owner of Google. You don’t own the restaurant, you just go there. :) So, enjoy the cobra heart.

Side note: I do agree with the horrible implications for public comments and children seeing them (see the mistakes below). I also agree with the stupidity of the launch, it was messy and launched in an ‘un-Google’ like fashion.

5. Cuil, the Google Killer, Kumo.

Kumo is a japanese word that means ’spider’ or ‘cloud’. It’s reported to be MSN’s new search name. Hopefully this time they FULLY brand the name and not keep ‘MSN search’ nor ‘Live search’ and just have KUMO. If Yahoo! merges with MSN this would be a great fit, since Yahoo! has a 70% market share in Japan.

6. They wanted to buy Digg but found out it was ‘easy’

I don’t know if you guys remember but Google wanted to buy Digg, the cost? Around 200 million. They ended up saying No Deal but Google has now implemented SearchWiki which is best described as a ‘digg-like’ feature.

Somewhere (can’t find the link!!!) I read and watched a few Googler’s say they backed out of the deal because the technology was ‘easy’ to replicate. 

This feature only took 3-4 months to launch after the deal wasn’t made between Google and Digg. I’m sure within the next few months we will see more interaction between users in the ‘voting process’ basically more Digg-like features. Lawsuit?….

Now the other side of the story

I think most Marketers would agree that the launch of SearchWiki was surrounded by mistakes (other’s might argue it was the mistake…although I think the 6 reasons above state why I think Google thinks it was the right choice; trying to step into Google’s shoes here) So, here are a list of mistakes that I’ve seen so far. Feel free to add yours in the comments below!

Mistakes (I’m sure there are hundreds more)

1. No real spam filters

2. Horrible for companies reputations that earned their visibility in Google. (For example: Someone can go and post why they think SEObook sucks and that person has no merit and no experience to back it up; I think this is WRONG, having direct responses to results is wrong. At least Amazon shows other comments by a user but with Google everyone is on a level-playing field; Kind of contrary to the entire PageRank system (no link is the same…why are the comments given the same weight?)!)

3. I can ‘up’ vote more than once!

4. Comments can be lied about (You can be “Matt Cutts”…try it)

5. Comments are given merit (by association) which, they shouldn’t have any merit because SPAM-A-POLUZA.

6. Did I mention little spam filters?

7. The quick sloppy roll out of SearchWiki (too messy and a sloppy move on Google; YOU SHOULD”VE PREPARED US MORE FOR IT, just like when you rolled out Google Suggest on the homepage; oh and FYI, not everyone uses social sites!!! SO A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE CRAZY CONFUSED; Good job Google, freaking people out!!!

Hmm…I’m sure people have lost some trust in you now…which in turn will make them more open to thinking about a new search engine..)

8. Relying on 3rd parties for an ‘opt out’ method.

In Conclusion, Google is threatened, very threatened and they are making mistakes and running around like a chicken with their head cut off. SearchWiki? I call it SearchIKY! Although I can see why they did this, I think they should’ve had a more professional launch of this feature taking their time with it instead of acting very desperate with it. Good luck Google, I look forward to Kumo (Yahoo + MSN). :)

Guest Post: Joshua Sciarrino is the Owner of Refuge Design. We are currently hosting a FREE Webinar on Dec. 15th @ 2pm, called (Crash Course in SEO) and we will be giving away an iPhone, iPod Touch, Music Tickets, or 250$, SIGN UP!! and tweet it up!! :D, and follow me on Twitter @joshuaseo

If you enjoyed this post please share and subscribe to our feed via RSS or Email. Thanks!

• December 2nd, 2008
• Posted in SEO