Google

Bing now powering Yahoo! results in the US & Canada

Bing Yahoo! Logo
Yahoo! is dead, long live Yahoo!

The “Binghoo” search alliance is finally coming to fruition. After some initial testing Yahoo! and Bing have announced that Yahoo! has completed the Bing transition and its search results are now being powered entirely by Bing.

This initial rollout only covers the US and the English-language version of Yahoo! in Canada, with other countries set to follow. Given the relative maturity of Bing in the UK compared to many other countries we would be surprised if the next rollout didn’t include the UK, although when this will happen is anyone’s guess. Yahoo! has said that the full worldwide rollout may be as late as 2012.

One country that might not be transitioning to Bing-Powered Yahoo! is Japan – the one country in the world where Yahoo! is a market leader. Yahoo! Japan is only partially owned by Yahoo! and has said that it is planning to use Google to power its search results instead of Bing, a move which Microsoft has slammed as anti-competitive.

Tags: , , , , , ,

0 comments Add This

Weekly Social Media Update

Google Acquires Jambool

Google continues to snap up companies that may be useful in its struggle against Facebook: last week it was Slide, this week, it’s social payments company Jambool. The $70m price tag implies Google are willing to invest serious money reinvigorating Google Checkout so it can compete with Facebook Credits.

Official Tweet Buttons

Twitter is launching official Tweet Buttons that will enable article sharing and retweet counting across third party sites. Much like Facebook’s social plugins, this will provide a consistent method of embedding Twitter functions with minimal coding complexity.

New Tweet Buttons

The New Tweet Buttons

Facebook Pages Change Again

Just a minor cosmetic issue, but if you have a bespoke tab on your Facebook fan page, it may need a little tweaking due to new sizing requirements for custom pages. This may cause extra design costs as brands scramble to implement changes before the 23rd of August. The narrower page format fits with a new profile layout, expected in September, that allows more space for wider ad units.

Foursquare Visualization

If you’ve been checking in on Foursquare for a few months now, you might be wondering just how much of your location data the service has stored up: take a look at this visualization to see your movements tracked over time, and compare it with your friends to see which venues you have in common.

WeePlaces.com

See where you have been, and compare with friends

The Twitter Movie

Yes, it’s a spoof of the Facebook movie trailer. Thanks to Ken and the CRM team for passing this on.

JetBlue and Steven Slater

In the aftermath of the Steven Slater story, JetBlue has given us another great example of how not to use Twitter, responding to a tweet from comedian Andy Borowitz with a little sense of humour failure. Have we learned nothing from Nestlé’s Facebook disaster, or @BPglobalPR? You can’t tell people not to make fun of you on a social media channel: it’s like sticking a sign on your own back saying “kick me”.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

0 comments Share

Google manually editing ‘Organic’ search results?

Upon the recent launch of our new LBi.com site we were alarmed to notice that Google was sending visitors to the wrong site!

As you can see below, at the time of writing, a search for [lbi.com] in google.co.uk will display a result for the Leo Baeck Institute in New York, a site about the history and culture of German speaking Jewry hosted on the domain ‘lbi.org’. The ‘sitelinks’ underneath the top result also erroneously refer and link to pages on the lbi.org domain:

Google UK lbi.com search

This is badly wrong. As it happens, this is not a major disaster for LBi, but it could be much different for our natural search clients, who could lose significant revenues as a result of this kind of error.

So why did this happen?

There are no configurations or logical connections between the “lbi.com” site and the “lbi.org” site which could have mislead Google, leaving only two options; an error in Google code, or an error in a manually edited result – the latter of which we believe to be the most likely reason.

This is a very rare occurance that gives us an insight into the world of Google, in particular how some results are so well positioned, despite there being no ‘apparent’ reason for them to be performing so well.

We do see this from time to time, although it should be stressed that the overwhelming majority of sites will never see this kind of manual intervention, and usual best practices still apply.

One reason this result may have been singled out is due to Google’s recent focus on branded search. We suspect that brand results are one of the items currently being identified and prioritised by Google for search quality purposes.

Why would Google be manually editing search results in 2010?

Manually editing SERPS is more common than you might think. It happens for numerous reasons, from legal requests for removal of content, to handing out “black hat” SEO penalties, to delivering expected results for high volume navigational queries where, for example, a user is searching for a branded website.

Search engines have a conundrum, in that they need websites to be included in their index to attract searchers. If they remove websites for infringing terms and conditions no matter who they are, search engine users would soon get fed up and find another search engine. Likewise, if a search engine doesn’t surface expected results for a query because the site a user seeks is not optimised well enough to naturally be top of the search engine results, search engines reserve the right to manually edit results.

This introduces the potential for human error, which we believe is the case for the erroneous result demonstrated here.

Digging a little deeper:

The cached copy of this page, shown below as indexed on the 7th of August, clearly shows “lbi.com” in the cache URL, but “lbi.org” in the cache description. This is only the case for the homepage, for the phrase [lbi.com]:

Google Cache of lbi.org

The same error is evidenced with a search for [lbi.com] on the google.com site:

google.com lbi.com search

The same is also true for a “site:” operator search, which should only return pages from the “lbi.com” domain:

Site search for lbi.com

A search for [lbi] shows the expected results, including the correct ‘lbi.com’ homepage, so this is definitely included in the index:

Google.com search for lbi

The Leo Baeck Institute website (lbi.org) has no such error, showing that there is not a plain switch of site home pages:

Site search for lbi.org

We’ve dropped Google a line and will post further updates here when we hear any news back from them…

Update: Once we highlighted this, Google’s own John Mueller provided a response in the comments below, and within 24 hours the result for [lbi.com] has now been changed to display the expected results, with an LBi.com title, snippet and sitelinks appearing at the top of the page. We would like to extend our thanks to Google for ensuring a swift resolution.

Upon the recent launch of our new LBi.com site we were alarmed to notice that Google was sending visitors to the wrong site!

As you can see below, at the time of writing, a search for [lbi.com] in google.co.uk will display a result for the Leo Baeck Institute in New York, a site about the history and culture of German speaking Jewry hosted at the domain ‘lbi.org’:

Tags: , , ,

10 comments Share

Weekly Social Media Update

Twitter Suggestions

Twitter is slowly rolling out a new tool that recommends users you might like to follow. “Suggestions for You” will hopefully address one of the most common problems faced by new users: “Who do I follow?” Not all accounts have this function enabled yet, but if yours has, give it a try: I’ve found it pretty useful so far.

Facebook Users’ Union

Facebook makes its money from the personal data we provide, so why shouldn’t we have a say in what they spend that money on? That’s the idea behind the Facebook Users’ Union. If we could encourage them to donate a percentage of annual revenue to charity, Facebook could become a powerful force for good. Not a bad idea.

Google Kills Wave

This makes me sad. Google has pulled the plug on Wave, due to disappointing user adoption. So why did the most hyped new technology of 2009 fail to take off? I think it was mainly the fault of poor launch strategy and lack of integration with existing Google products. Rumour has it the best bits of the technology will be incorporated into Google’s next attempt at a social network: let’s hope they make a better job of it second time around.

Social Media Strategy

Inspired by this rather marvellous dining decision engine, Mike Phillips and Stedmeister have created a gloriously simple social media strategy solution. I’m pretty sure I’ve used most of them already…

Social Media Strategy made easy

Making it up so you don't have to.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

0 comments Share

Social may be the key to innovation as competition in search heats up

As reported around this time last year Yahoo and Microsoft have signed a $700 million deal which meant that Bing would provide Yahoo’s search results leaving our friends in Sunnyvale to run what will effectively be a content based web portal, one far more popular in the US than here or the rest of Europe. Clearly, this is all part of Microsoft’s offensive against Google, which has also included taking a stake in Facebook, thus leading a conglomerate of brands against Larry Page and Sergey Brin’s search giant. But now the competitive scramble for users in the search space seems to involve almost every trendy brand in digital.

However, regarding the specific Yahoo/Bing deal, things just started to get a little more real. Last week an update was sent to advertisers stating that Yahoo would being serving natural search results from Bing from “August or September onwards”. Moreover Yahoo will integrate its PPC ads to Microsoft’s AdCenter by the beginning of the ‘holiday season’ (that’s Christmas to us limeys) but may delay that until 2011 if it decides that would “improve the overall experience” for both advertisers and users. “If organic search results are an important source of referrals to your website, you’ll want to make sure that you’re prepared for this change,” so the email said. Well sure, 80% of internet journeys start with search and these two new found friends are important to the search market, though Google is still leading by far, more so in the UK than most places.

According to ComScore’s latest figures from last month, Google have 91.7% of the UK search market with Bing and Yahoo on 2.98% and 2.55% respectively, figures largely unchanged from the last quarter. In the US it’s a different ball game with Google on “just” 63.70%, Yahoo on 18.30% and Bing on 12.10%, with slight rises from the last two against Google over the last quarter.

So many hope that this deal will have a positive effect on search in terms of innovation. For a start, Google will have to try harder, especially in the States, something which will have a knock on affect to the rest of the world. The biggest reason for this is that the merger obviously means increased market share to around a third for Bing/Yahoo. Such an enlarged competitor means more advertisers who may have previously only used Google may experiment with AdCenter, meaning that Google will have to try harder to keep users using their brand, something they have managed quite well in the past from free applications such as Maps and Gmail, to paid for models like the mobile operating system Android and even a rumoured hardware rival to Apple’s iPad.

As SEO industry guru Danny Sullivan said last year, “If Microsoft can adopt a passion for innovation and push the envelope, Google will have to respond in kind. The search experience will evolve more rapidly, hopefully kicked out of the revenue obsessed stasis that it’s currently in. Stagnation benefits no one except the analysts and bean counters who insist that quarter over quarter performance is the only metric that matters. We’re way too early in the game to be that cautious and boring.”

In what form might this innovation come? Well, social could be the key to that. For over a year now it has been speculated that Google use more than PageRank to determine the rankings of web pages. Many search analysts believe that inbuilt into the algorithm are signals from offline media and social networks, even those, such as Twitter and Facebook, that have their links set to ‘nofollow’ (so no link equity is passed on). These links would not carry as much weight as a “regular link” but evidence has been recorded of increased natural search ranking even when no links have been involved. Most famous of these is the recent Magners example from eConsultancy.

Personally, I think it’s fair to say that nothing is certain at this stage, so little is with Google’s algorithm, but there is definitely more emphasis being put on social activity, mainly because since October last year Twitter’s main revenue stream has come from sharing data with Google and Bing, a process that began when Tweets started to show up in natural search results as the engines clambered over themselves to show more ‘real time’ information to the user.

Also, as blogged about by my colleague Johnny Gedye, location based social networking site Foursquare are in talks with Google and Microsoft for a similar deal to Twitter’s:

‘Speaking to the Telegraph, [Foursquare co-founder] Crowley said Foursquare was discussing partnerships with “everyone” – which would include search kings Google, Microsoft and Yahoo! – to “enrich” their search engines with trends generated by the location-based data.

“We can anonymise data and use it to show venues which are trending at that moment,” Crowley explained, voicing the example of Twitter, “Twitter helped the world and the search engines know what people are talking about,” he continued. “Foursquare would allow people to search for the types of place people are going to – and where is trending – not what.”’

And this isn’t the only area where location based networks are springing up. Last month Twitter itself launched Twitter Places whereby users are able to tag tweets to specific places (such as venues) and clicking on those location names will bring up recent tweets from those places. Whether this will become part of the data fed to Google and Microsoft remains to be seen but there is certainly a scramble to make location an integral part of the search experience. Facebook is also rumoured to be developing a similar offering, not to mention anything that may be being thrashed out with Gowalla.

No one knows who will come out on top of this but one thing is for sure, search is only going to become a richer channel over the next year and it looks likely that the brands that make best use of the social space will be the ones that benefit the most.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

1 comments Share