|
A Google bomb or Googlewash is Internet slang for a certain kind of attempt to influence the ranking (called PageRank) of a given page in results returned by the Google search engine, often with humorous or political intentions. Because of the way that Google's algorithm works, a page will be ranked higher if the sites that link to that page use consistent anchor text. A Google bomb is created if a large number of sites link to the page in this manner. Google bomb is used both as a verb and a noun. The phrase "Google bombing" was introduced to the New Oxford American Dictionary in May 2005. Google bombing is usually for noncommercial purposes. Spamdexing is the practice of deliberately modifying HTML pages to increase the chance of their being placed close to the beginning of search engine results, or to influence the category to which the page is assigned in a misleading or dishonest manner.
Predecessors Before Google existed, eccentric USENET poster Archimedes Plutonium, upset with the attention he received from users who found him amusing, posted angrily to two science newsgroups. He accused these people of "SearchEnginebombing," an offshoot of e-mail bombing, that was cluttering the web/USENET with negative comments about him, so a search engine would find more of them than his own postings. Unlike "Google Bombing", the term "Search Engine Bombing" didn't immediately catch on, and initially its use has been primarily limited to Archimedes Plutonium and USENET posters who mocked him. History The technique was first discussed on April 6, 2001 in an article by Adam Mathes. In that article, he coined the term "Google bombing" and explained how he discovered that Google used the technique to calculate page rankings. He found that a search for "internet rockstar" returned the website of a Ben Brown as the first result, even though "internet rockstar" did not appear anywhere on Brown's webpage. He reasoned that Google's algorithm returned it as the first result because many fan sites that linked to Brown's website used that phrase on their own pages. Mathes began testing his theory by setting out to make the website of his friend Andy Pressman the number one result for a query of "talentless hack". He gave instructions for creating websites and links to Pressman's website with the text of the link reading "talentless hack". Sure enough, as other webloggers joined in his Google bombing campaign, Pressman's website became the number one result in a Google search for "talentless hack." (By 2004, Mathes's own site was the number one Google result of this search term, and this Wikipedia Article is now the number one result for this search). Nevertheless, the first discovery of the possibility of a Google bomb was probably accidental. Users discovered that the search "more evil than satan himself" would bring Microsoft's home page to the top of the results page, leading many to believe that Google's results could be manipulated intentionally. Life cycle of a bomb Google bombs often end their life by becoming too popular or well known: they typically end up being mentioned in multiple well-regarded web journals, which themselves then knock the bomb off the top spot. It is sometimes commented that Google bombing need not be countered because of this self-disassembly. In addition, all major search engines make use of link analysis and thus can be impacted: a search for "miserable failure" or "failure" on September 29, 2006 brought up the official George W. Bush biography number one on Google, Yahoo! and MSN and number two on Ask.com. On June 2, 2005, Yooter reported that George Bush is now ranked first for the keyword 'miserable', 'failure' and 'miserable failure' in both Google and Yahoo!. And on September 16, 2005, Marissa Mayer wrote on Google Blog about the practice of Google bombing and the word "failure." (See Google's response below). Other large political figures have been targeted for Google bombs: on January 6, 2006, Yooter reported that Tony Blair is now indexed in the U.S. and UK versions of Google for the keyword 'liar'. The BBC, reporting on Google bombs in 2002, actually used the headline "Google Hit By Link Bombers," acknowledging to some degree the idea of "link bombing." In 2004, the Search Engine Watch site suggested that the term should be "link bombing" because of the impact beyond Google, and continues to use that term as it is considered more accurate. Other effects In some cases, the phenomenon has produced competing attempts to use the same search term as a Google bomb. As a result, the first result at any given time varies, but the targeted sites will occupy all the top slots using a normal search instead of "I'm feeling lucky". Notable instances of this include "failure" and "miserable failure". The primary targets have been the Bush biography above, and Michael Moore's website at www.michaelmoore.com. Other search engines use similar techniques to rank results, so Yahoo!, AltaVista, and HotBot are also affected by Google bombs. A search of "miserable failure" or "failure" on the aforementioned search engines produces the biography of George W. Bush listed at the White House site as the first link on the list. Only a few search engines, such as Ask.com, MetaCrawler and ProFusion, do not produce the same first links as the rest of the search engines. MetaCrawler and ProFusion are metasearch engines which use multiple search engines. Googles response Google defends its search algorithm as generally effective and an accurate reflection of opinion on the Internet. They further state that, though some may be offended by the links which appear as the result of Google bombs, that Google has little or no control over the practice and will not individually edit search results due to the fact that a bomb may have occurred. According to Marissa Mayer, Director of Consumer Web Products for Google, in an entry on the official Google Blog: We don't condone the practice of Google bombing, or any other action that seeks to affect the integrity of our search results, but we're also reluctant to alter our results by hand in order to prevent such items from showing up. Pranks like this may be distracting to some, but they don't affect the overall quality of our search service, whose objectivity, as always, remains the core of our mission. Competitions In May 2004, the websites Dark Blue and SearchGuild teamed up to create what they termed the "SEO Challenge" to Google bomb the phrase "nigritude ultramarine". The contest sparked controversy around the Internet, as some groups worried that search engine optimization (SEO) companies would abuse the techniques used in the competition to alter queries more relevant to the average user. This fear was offset by the belief that Google would alter their algorithm based on the methods used by the Google bombers. In September 2004, another SEO contest was created. This time, the objective was to get the top result for the phrase "seraphim proudleduck". A large sum of money was offered to the winner, but the competition turned out to be a hoax. In .net magazine, Issue 134, March 2005, a contest was created among five professional web site developers to make their site the number one listed site for the made-up phrase "crystalline incandescence". Political activism Some of the most famous Google bombs are also expressions of political opinion (e.g. "liar" leading to Tony Blair or "miserable failure", or even simply "failure" leading to the White House's biography of George W. Bush.) In general, one of the keys to Google's popularity has been its ability to capture what ordinary web citizens believe to be important via the information provided in webpage links. However, Google is reluctant to stop organized or commercial exploitation of their algorithms. One extremely successful, long-lasting and widespread link bomb has been the linking of the term "Scientology" to Operation Clambake. In this case, the index rating clearly emerges from both the individual decisions of pagewriters and reporters and an organized effort led by Operation Clambake itself. The Church of Scientology has also sometimes been accused of an attempt at Google bombing for making a large number of websites linking terms "Scientology" and "L. Ron Hubbard" to each other. In 2004, Jewish writer and activist Daniel Sieradski urged visitors to his blog to link to the Wikipedia article for "Jew" in response to findings that a search for "Jew" returned the anti-Semitic website Jew Watch at the top of the results. The campaign met with mixed success, temporarily displacing the site from the top result but not removing it from the top rankings altogether. Another campaign was organized by columnist Dan Savage after US Senator Rick Santorum made several controversial statements regarding homosexuals. The Google bombing was part of Savage's campaign to associate the word "santorum" with a graphic sexual term, and propelled the website created for that purpose to a high result for "santorum". In France, groups opposing the DADVSI copyright bill, proposed by minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, mounted a Google bombing campaign linking ministre blanchisseur ("laundering minister") to an article recalling Donnedieu de Vabres' conviction for money laundering. The campaign was so efficient that, as of 2006, merely searching for ministre ("minister") or blanchisseur ("launderer") brings up a news report of his conviction as one of the first results. Commercial bombing Some website operators have adapted Google bombing techniques to do spamdexing. This activity is commonly thought to be unscrupulous among internet users. This includes, among other techniques, posting of links to a site in an Internet forum along with phrases the promoter hopes to associate with the site (see Spam in blogs). Unlike conventional message board spam, the object is not to attract readers to the site directly, but to increase the site's ranking under those search terms. Promoters using this technique frequently target forums with low reader traffic, in hopes that it will fly under the moderators' radar. Wikis in particular are often the target of this kind of page rank vandalism, as all of the pages are freely editable. Another technique is for the owner of an Internet domain name to set up the domain's DNS entry so that all subdomains are directed to the same server. The operator then sets up the server so that page requests generate a page full of desired Google search terms, each linking to a subdomain of the same site, with the same title as the subdomain in the requested URL. Frequently the subdomain matches the linked phrase, with spaces replaced by underscores or hyphens. Since Google treats subdomains as distinct sites, the effect of a large number of subdomains linking to each other is a boost to the PageRank of those subdomains and of any other site they link to. As of 2 February 2005, many have noticed changes in the Google algorithm that largely affects, among other things, Google bombs. As evidence of this, ponder that only roughly 10% of the Google bombs listed below work as of 15 February 2005. This is largely due to Google refactoring its valuation of PageRank. Quixtars bomb In 2005, Quixtar began a Web initiative to Google bomb search engine rankings for positive pages on the corporation. This was accomplished through traditional Google bombing methods such as the use of link farms. Eric Janssen, the husband of a Quixtar franchisee ("IBO", or "independent business owner") who wrote a blog critical of the firm's business practices, was likely the first to point out this practice. After beginning his blog, his wife was pressured to quit unless he agreed to shut his blog down. He has to date refused to do so. He soon discovered a methodical practice of Quixtar's known as the "Web Initiative" designed to methodically manipulate search results. While Quixtar does not specifically deny the existence of such an initiative, company spokesman Robin Luymes states that Quixtar's practices are industry standards and do not knowingly violate any rule or regulation of the search engines. However, an anonymous Quixtar source reports hearing at a Quixtar meeting that Google bombing techniques are employed deliberately and methodically. Some sites critical of Quixtar have also engaged in Google bombing. Many do so openly and make no effort to deny or hide the practice. . See also News articles | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
 |
|
| |