Google PageRank - neither democracy nor corporate muscle

It seems that across the web and business community there is a bit of a backlash against Google 's market dominance. And their search results are not always as topical or context-sensitive as they could be.

However, am I the only person getting tired of webmasters bleating about how Google is doing them down? A case in point is this article "Google PageRank - Democracy or Corporate Muscle?" by Tony Bury from last week.

In an essay that is so user-focussed it interrupts you with pop-up ads, he claims:

"Small companies and small Websites find it hard to gain PageRank, and therefore, top rankings in the search results, no matter how relevant their sites may be."

Yet, i have already seen pages from currybetdotnet ranked #1 for relevant queries within 3 weeks of the site's launch. Not because I have some magic formula for gaining Google ranking, but because I have search engine friendly templates, and have written original copy about a subject. And it isn't as if I have written the entries for this site in order to specifically get high rankings. Google ranks content, not search engine optimisation techniques.

Tony attempts to make the point that PageRank is fallible by pointing out that there are lots of reasons why site "a" would link to site "b":

• The owner of page A wants to promote page B because it is part of his own Website
• The owner of page A wants to promote page B because it is another Website that he owns
• The owner of page B pays for an ad on page A
• The owners exchange reciprocal links specifically to boost PageRank
• The owner of page A is an affiliate of page B and receives commission on sales
• Page A is a news story (good or bad) about page B's Website

But it is being mischievous to suggest that Google is unable to distinguish between these practices. In one part of the article he claims this is a weakness of PageRank, yet in the second part cites the "dreaded PageRank0" as evidence of google's über-power. Of course, PageRank0 is Google's way of dealing with exactly the kind of issue that Tony is highlighting in terms of link-farms and serial-spammers. And for the end user that is surely a good thing?

I've said before and I'm happy to say again - if your business model is dependent on getting nearly all your traffic from Google, and you have no formal contractual relationship with Google as to how you will get that traffic (i.e. AdWords) then you need a different business model. End of story. And anything Google does to its search results page is their business, not yours.

It seems to me that a lot of this is about the fact that the SEO industry has lost the ability to manipulate Google on its own terms - I see a lot of webmasters unhappy with Google, but I don't see users complaining. And for me, that is what counts.

FYI, Tony owns an expired domain name reselling agency website that provides you with a free pop-up advert when you leave his site.

Posted by Martin Belam, January 24, 2003    
Read the latest posts on currybetdotnet about: Google
The views expressed on currybetdotnet are my own, and do not reflect the views of my current or former employers.

 Get free updates via RSS       Get free updates by email       Follow Martin Belam on Twitter