Categories
octaneinteractive
Octane667
octaneinteractive
ForbesBingley
Tag Cloud
social networking
« Pownce: micro-blogging made easy — Social Media to monetize the masses? »
Google doesn’t get Social Media
Thursday, 6 September 2007 — by Wayne Smallman
There’s understanding Social Media and Social Networks and then there’s offering support for such things. For me, this is where I see the search engines just not quite understanding Social Media and Social Networks…
I still don’t think the recent Google Universal update amounts to anything meaningful for the vast majority of businesses out there. Most of which have zero interest in Social Media — video clips, Podcasts et cetera:
“What about SEO for small businesses, not related to, or in any way connected with new media stuff like movies, games, music et cetera? Not all businesses or every market niche benefits from video, podcasts and the like.
So as an example, that just doesn’t reflect the real world, or the very least, the lower tier of search which is dominated by the regular common-or-garden variety businesses that sell the mundane stuff, most of which are run by people who know nothing of video clips, podcasts, viral games, music promos, and would probably not benefit from such things, either.”
When I look at Google’s recent update, I see something that panders more to the music labels and movie studios than anyone else.
All of which looks just like a vague attempt to wash out search listings for illegal media.
“Recently an article over on Search Engine Journal by Loren Baker discusses how Social Media has a direct influence on search engine ranking:
Comments are playing a very important factor in the ranking of these videos, as are views. User generated comments, essentially reviews of the media, have a direct impact on Google first page rankings.”
All of which seems to make the assumption that the comments are all positive.
But what if the article in question is a wash-out and all 11k comments are flames?
How does that search result serve me in terms of relevance?
A case in point would be a search for a politician or a film star. If on the first page of the search results you see an article served up from Digg that’s chock full of nasty comments, what value in that is there for you if you’re looking for their campaign agenda, or their recent film credits?
Nice idea, but just not thought through properly. More search engine social faux pas than Social Media…
Recommended reading
« Pownce: micro-blogging made easy — Social Media to monetize the masses? »
)
I thought I’d add in a related question I’ve just posted on Pownce:
“Given the perceived weight being given to Social Media and Social Networks, what would the value be in submitting a Pownce thread to Digg, StumbleUpon, del.icio.us et cetera?
Would the question weigh more than the dialogue? Or are both of equal value?
And, would anyone else be interested?”