Showing posts with label SiteProNews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SiteProNews. Show all posts

Monday, November 26, 2012

Is Google a Monopoly and Does It Matter?






Is Google a Monopoly and Does It Matter?

avatar



Break out your history books, folks. It’s time to take a look at monopolies and how the definition may apply to Google’s dominance of the Web in recent years. Sound like dry subject matter to you? It’s not really, if you consider the obscene implications the past may have in relation to the future of the Internet.

A Brief History of US Trusts and Monopolies
Is the history lesson really necessary? Well, yes, if you want to truly understand how to answer the question posed by this article. Never fear – I’ll keep things seriously brief.
A monopoly is essentially capitalism on steroids. The hallmark of a monopoly is a virtual lack of competition. This lack of competition typically leads the monopoly in question to set higher prices, given that there’s no market forces to keep it in check. Inferior products can also result from the lack of competition – and the public will still purchase them if for no other reason than a lack of options.
Here’s the idea of an old school trust: it’s an arrangement between several investors who hold stock in different companies. The stockholders transfer their shares to one combined set of trustees. The reward for their contribution comes in the form of a certificate entitling them to a specified share of the jointly managed companies’ consolidated earnings. Since trusts dominated many of the biggest US industries in the late 1800s, they were effectively monopolies in each of their respective economic areas.
After the Standard Oil Trust formed in 1882, the company and its affiliates had control of greater than 90% of oil refining and marketing in the United States. Needless to say, this did not sit well with the American people. That’s why Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890. The measure effectively destroyed trusts and monopolies that hampered international and interstate trade. From that point on, the US government had the power to bust open companies that had too much power and break them into smaller pieces.
Fast forward to recent history. Microsoft was the first large-scale tech company to be accused of industry monopolization in the US. In a historic 1998 court case, plaintiffs alleged that Microsoft held an abusive monopolistic power on the personal computer industry.
How?
Well, the issue was centered upon the company’s practice of bundling Internet Explorer with its Windows-based operating system. Plaintiffs accused Microsoft of holding a monopoly on Internet browsers since most consumers used the Internet Explorer software prepackaged with their PCs. The case ended with a settlement and a slap on the wrist for Microsoft.
What’s really interesting here is that Nobel economist Milton Friedman, who has since passed away, commented on the case’s outcome by speculating that the Microsoft decision set what he called a “dangerous precedent” which would lead to greater government regulation of tech – and he thought that would impede progress.
Then along came Google.
Google’s Rise to Power
Google really began taking shape as the company we know it today back in 2000. During that year, the company celebrated a sequence of pivotal events: it announced that it had indexed over one billion pages, it teamed up with Yahoo, and it rolled out its search platform in 15 different languages.
Of course, everything began to snowball from there. Google went onto acquire a large number of companies, and it introduced its AdWords program to generate revenue to sustain its growth. Sustain it did – in fact, by 2011, over 96% of the company’s profits came from AdWords… to the tune of $32.2 billion dollars!
However, Google has had its share of hardships over the past couple of years. Despite record profits, it’s dealt with patent suits numbering in the thousands from competing technology companies. It has battled lawsuits from governments and individuals around the world. It’s had trouble getting Google+ to catch on. It had a leaked earnings report to contend with last month. Nevertheless, Big G has held strong as the most powerful tech company in the world – and it’s growing stronger every day.
Google’s Chokehold: Stifling Innovation?
The strategy for Google’s growth seems to be multifaceted, but the main features include the nurturing and expansion of its AdWords program (its bread and butter) and the acquisition of companies to flesh out its ever-growing patent portfolio (its suit of armor).
Take, for example, the mobile industry. Apple and Google are in a cutthroat battle to the death to snap up as many patents as possible. They’re doing this to protect themselves from lawsuits as they blindly feel their way through the ever-evolving landscape of mobile development. A total of $20 billion in patent purchases and patent litigation fees was spent across the board if you include all the heavy hitters in the industry.
Why?
The more patents a company has, the more protection it gains for the new intellectual property it creates. Google is always coming out with new products, so it needs all the protection it can get. Defending against lawsuits is one thing, but acquiring companies and patents like gangbusters is quite another. For many, the patent and company acquisition strategies alone are enough of a basis to accuse Google of monopolizing the tech industry – and stifling innovation in the process.
FTC Sets Sights on Google
This is an unprecedented time for governments around the globe. Google is facing pressure from a variety of countries, a possible backlash against the fear that Big G’s monopoly is – quite frankly – taking over the world.
For example, a settlement was finally reached in a recent group of French lawsuits. The suit took issue with Google’s digitization of French books, and the litigation had stretched on for six long years. In the UK this month, the government will begin investigating Google’s alleged tax avoidance. There are many other suits out there – you can find a detailed list of some of the bigger ones here. Google is even being sued by, um, the world, in one case. Guess unchecked global domination makes you one heck of a tasty target.
In the US, Google hasn’t had it much easier. U.S. Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jonathan Leibowitz is pressuring Google to make some major concessions in the agency’s antitrust investigation. If it doesn’t take action soon, the company will face an antitrust lawsuit of unprecedented proportions. Here’s the skinny from TheNextWeb:
Image:
So, is Google a monoply?
The FTC lawsuit means that the US government certainly seems to think so. The outcome of the suit will really begin to solidify the argument. Regardless, here’s what is certain: Google is a worldwide, globally dominating force. Many governments are beginning to try to check that power into submission. But Google’s reach is far and its pockets deep. My take? Google can sidestep government intervention all it wants. Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, and pals will continue to be the thorn in G’s side – and, quite possibly, the silver bullet of competition that will protect our global, digital society from totalitarian dominance.

Nell Terry is a tech news junkie, fledgling Internet marketer and staff writer for SiteProNews, one of the Web’s foremost webmaster and tech news blogs. She thrives on social media, web design, and uncovering the truth about all the newest marketing fads that pop up all over the ‘net. Find out more about Nell by visiting her online portfolio at Content by Nell.

Join WEB WORLD MANIA! on Twitter:

Monday, November 12, 2012

Do Google’s Quality Raters Really Matter?



SiteProNews

By  in Featured


avatar
Hold onto your virtual horses,Internet. Google’s finally voiced anopinion about its secret army ofquality raters, delivered to you courtesy of Matt Cutts himself. Good news: according to a new Webmaster Help video uploaded to YouTube, their recommendations do not directly affect your website.


Supposedly.
Google’s been mightily “hush-hush” about the role of quality raters and how their opinions affect website positions in the SERPs. That’s why this new video infuses a, much-needed breath of fresh air into an otherwise murky aspect of G’s inner workings.
Oh yeah, and a little leaked info from the quality raters themselves doesn’t hurt, either.
Understanding Google’s Quality Rater
There are thousands of Google raters floating around out there. Too many to count. That’s why Google outsources the hiring and management of these employees to independent firms such as Lionbridge and Leapforce. The raters don’t work directly for Google per se, and things stay much cleaner that way. I’m also assuming that keeping these raters at arm’s length does a good job of protecting G’s trade secrets as well.
If you want to know about pay and working conditions, you can head over to the Google rater section of the WAHM forum. Employees discuss the ins and outs of the program and dish about all the juicy details that the work entails. For example, raters must pass a highly detailed exam before acceptance into the program. They also receive a fair hourly wage, but (this is the important part) they must keep up with a rigorous workload of fast-paced search page analysis.
Upon acceptance into the program, raters are given one of two tasks. In the new video, Cutts goes into detail about the first kind of rater assignment. Raters are typically given two sets of search result pages (a traditional list of ten results) to compare in a side-by-side analysis. Google instructs the raters to indicate whether they prefer the left-hand side of the search results or the right-hand side. Sounds simple, right? Maybe so, but try doing it in volume.
The second task for raters is all about keywords. This assignment falls on the more tedious end of the spectrum. Raters are furnished with a keyword and a URL. They’re charged with assessing the relevance of the given term in relation to the URL’s destination. Keep in mind for this task – they do have the option of marking a specific URL as spam. Remember that – it’ll be important later on.

How Rater Feedback is Weighted
Cutts’ video also clears up some widely held misconceptions about quality raters that have been floating around the ‘net for quite some time now. Cutts first points out that Google instructs evaluation raters (“quality raters”) to judge page quality and rate navigation, among other things.
However, warns Cutts, “Those people don’t influence the algorithm in any direct sense.”
When raters are given the above-mentioned side-by-side analysis task, their opinions do not directly affect the websites in the samples. This is precisely where many people get confused into thinking raters are somehow “penalizing” their websites. It’s simply not so.
When a quality rater indicates he or she doesn’t care for a particular website, that opinion doesn’t cause site to tank. Instead, the aggregate of raters’ opinions becomes data Google uses to tweak the algorithms themselves and not individual websites – see the distinction? With billions upon billions of websites on the ‘net, it makes more sense to use the data to tweak things on a macro level.
And, for those of you who still have doubts, all this lines up perfectly with a 2009 interview between John Paczowski and Scott Huffman (the Engineering Director at Google).
Here’s a snippet from the exchange:
Image1:
Takeaways
Google has a super-secret book of guidelines for its raters to use while they work. In an act of incredible Internet espionage, some savvy marketers got a hold of the leaked manual and posted the info all over the Web. Unfortunately, Google acted fast to remove the offending material via a series of uber threatening emails. All this scandal makes Cutts’ remark at the end of his video ridiculously exciting – he says that Google may release the coveted rater guidelines to the public at some point in the near future.
One of the most important aspects of the job that raters are talking about in the forum is the speed with which they must complete their assignments. Most remark that reading the rich text snippets listed below each page (as opposed to visiting each website) when comparing search result pages side-by-side is the only way to realistically get through the work volume and keep the gig.
For you, this means that the snippet listed with every one of your ranked pages must be relevant to the query for which you rank. Also, it must be grammatically flawless and highly interesting. Keeping things spam-free will work in your favor as well.
Bottom line: Google raters’ answers won’t directly affect your website’s placement in the SERPs – unless enough of them mark your site as spam.
All this info means, essentially, that Google raters do matter – their macro-level data affects the way algorithms are constructed and altered. On a micro level, however, if your website is not spam, you really have nothing fear. Save all that pent-up anxiety for the next big algo update instead.

Nell Terry is a tech news junkie, fledgling Internet marketer and staff writer for SiteProNews, one of the Web’s foremost webmaster and tech news blogs. She thrives on social media, web design, and uncovering the truth about all the newest marketing fads that pop up all over the ‘net. Find out more about Nell by visiting her online portfolio at Content by Nell.




Join WEB WORLD MANIA! on Twitter: