Home » Technology » Currently Reading:

“Can You Trust the Internet?”

March 22, 2006 Raymond Salzwedel Technology 1 Comment

InternetA thought-provoking piece was presented by analyst Tony Rattey on Monday 13 March 2006 on SAFM, on the topic of “Can you truct the Internet?” I have some extension that I would like to offer.
Regarding search engine manipulation, I think that it is important to note that not all search engines operate in the same way. Some, such as Yahoo! operate on the basis of simple text search and the word counts. Others, such as Google, work by referring to the number of references to a page in order to determine its relative importance, amongst all other pages that have similar word counts. The question therefore, is whether the search engine manipulation is based on creating fictitious references to pages based on existing pages so that they seem to be unique pointers to the sites that are being targeted for better ratings. This method could be effective if this was the end of the line. However, the way these reverse-reference algorithms work is to not only count the number of references back to a particular page, but to also rank the importance of the page that points to the target site in question. So how are the importance of these pages determined? In the same way as the importance of the end pages. Therefore, if the pages are spuriously created, and in order for them to be unique such that the algorithm does not see them as copies, and thereby ignore them, these spurious pages would themselves have to have many other pages pointing to them. The effort to construct such a chain of references with sufficient weight (bearing in mind that it is essentially an exponential tree) to influence a search engine outcomes is massive, even using automated methods. This is not too say that it is impossible, but difficult. The above practice is known as GoogleBombing.
(An aside regarding GoogleBombing. When the search phrases that constitute GoogleBombs are identified by the internet community, they are essentially invalidated, since specific checks can be built in to prevent these attacks. Whilst this is a manual process, the watchdog has very big eyes, and the system therefore self-regulates.)
The simple case of search engine manipulation by inflating the meta-tags of a page are so unsophisticated, and thus easily countered by search algorithms, that they cannot be effectively used. Indeed, even the commercial use of such methods to ensure that the search results for a particular word combination return a certain company’s site has fallen into disuse. A would-be marketing business model sprang up in the late nineties to manage the meta-tags of an organizations web site to ensure good rankings, but this is almost unheard of a few years down the line.
The second issue regarding Google, is that the results of normal search and paid-for search can be easily distinguished by placing the results on different parts of the screen. The paid-for results of a word combination are auctioned, but the other search results are not.
Mr Ratty then refers to the vested interest of the writers and how hard it is to determine what the specific vested interest is, when consuming content off the internet. Whilst this can often be true, a few notable exceptions exist. The one is Wikipedia, which is an open-source and, more critically, open-content, online encyclopedia. This means that the content is not written by any particular person, but a group, the size of which is as large, diverse and independent as could be imagined for an editorial and authoring community. With few restrictions other than vandalism, the content is largely self-correcting. There are always going to be mistakes, but these appear to be of the same order of magnitude for this encyclopedia as for others such as the Britannica.
So can you trust the information on the internet? No. And yes. The burden of belief still rests with the consumer, but the consumer may have now one or two more tools in the acceptance toolbox before rejecting or accepting. And this is important, because if the only tool that you have is a Hammer, pretty soon everything begins to look like a Nail.

Related posts:

  1. The World of Tomorrow (If The Internet Disappeared Today) This is a great read (look) at what the world...
  2. Which movie does that come from? (Wonder know more!) I picked up a tweet recently which talked of a...
  3. A web war between two countries OK so the title of this post completely over-states what...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Currently there is "1 comment" on this Article:

  1. Dragon says:

    There has been a joke by liberal bloggers in which they have manipulated certain key words. For example, when the word, “failure” is typed into the search engine, the first thing to come up is President Bush’s bio at the White House site. I wrote Google, objecting to their allowing such things to go on, suggesting that Google was, in effect, guilty by allowing this to go on. Their reply:

    Thank you for your note. We apologize for our delayed response. We understand your concern; however, the order and contents of Google search results are completely automated. No one hand picks a particular result for a given search query, nor does Google ever insert jokes or send messages by changing the order of results. Occasionally, when a particular website is the subject of public attention, other sites begin linking to it. This may elevate its importance as gauged by our ranking software, which assigns a PageRank value based in part on who links to a given page. Higher ranking in Google results may lead to more awareness, which may lead to more links and so on.

    One side effect of not using an editorial viewpoint to determine the ranking of results is that anomalies occasionally occur. We view such occasions as opportunities for us to learn more about how the web works and how to improve our algorithms for all searches in the future.

    Regards,
    The Google Team

Comment on this Article:







Subscribe to this blog

Subscribe

Category Drop-Down

Posts about Future Trends

Forget creating customer loyalty and focus on building friendships with customers

March 18, 2010 Dean van Leeuwen

Forget creating customer loyalty and focus on building friendships with customers

I’m not talking about the glib friendships companies try to encourage by inviting their customers to be friends or fans on Facebook, but rather intimate and deep relationships that come from having a vested interest in the people that make their business possible. I recently came across a study by Michael Argyle and Monika Henderson [...]

You’re going to have to change your management style

March 17, 2010 Barrie Bramley

You’re going to have to change your management style

I spend a large part of my year in conversation with managers working hard to try and understand today’s younger workforce. The pain they’re feeling is palpable. The evidence of change is overwhelming. Making the necessary changes, at times, seems impossible. The hope is that the challenges are being interrogated and slowly but surely acted [...]

A Radical Proposal for Executive Pay

March 15, 2010 Graeme Codrington

A Radical Proposal for Executive Pay

Everyone agrees that something must be done about executive pay. One of the major contentious issues emerging out of the financial crisis is the way that senior executives and manager, especially in the financial industries, are remunerated. These days, executive pay often seems to be unrelated to the company’s performance, and in many [...]

The future of money

March 12, 2010 Dean van Leeuwen

The future of money

For years banks and credit card companies have held a strangle hold over the movement of money and charged exorbitant rates for doing so. Now this is changing and fast.
Michale Ivey the founder of Twitpay has devised a system, using code that PayPal made available to him, that allows people to make payments [...]

Recent Comments

  • stace: lazy and sensationalist - I couldn't agree more...
  • Graeme Codrington: Here's another example - a company that developed software t...
  • Graeme Codrington: I agree with you on this point, Barrie. BUT... I just had a...
  • Graeme Codrington: I really wish I could use the main section of this blog site...
  • Mike Saunders: "CEO salaries should be capped at 20 times that of the lowes...

Archives

Tweet Blender

codrington: Thanks for endorsing my speaking work @MarcusIde - http://ow.ly/1nWSA
1 hour ago
codrington: An interesting way to search Twitter - by number of posts per topic - nice way to find people to follow: http://www.tweettrail.com
2 hours ago
barriebramley: What the Happiest & Most Successful Women Do Differently http://ow.ly/1nDsZ (via @codrington @thehrgoddess @beyondstuck)
2 hours ago
barriebramley: @clivesimpkins what a horrible experience. What an unfortunately insufficient response. A reminder to all. http://bit.ly/cmpNCD #sheraton
2 hours ago
DeanvanLeeuwen: Forget creating customer loyalty and focus on building friendships with customers http://ow.ly/1nVfU
2 hours ago
codrington: RT @thehrgoddess @BeyondStuck Fabulous Article: What the Happiest & Most Successful Women Do Differently http://ow.ly/1nDsZ
3 hours ago
tomorrowtodayza: Blog: Forget creating customer loyalty and focus on building friendships with customers http://bit.ly/ajCRp2
3 hours ago
codrington: RT @PopSci: GM Turning Car Windshields into Augmented-Reality Navigation Displays http://bit.ly/bBLce7
3 hours ago