Ok - so a friend of mine forwarded me an article that had, what I thought was a very catchy title “Why Google Must Die” and 30 seconds into the article, I have to say I’m not surprised at John’s column on Google and Search Engine Optimization (SEO).
This article is one of the worse articles I’ve ever come across on a publication, besides the other bullshit article about investing advice from Robert Freeland over at SeekingAlpha.com.
First of all, let me say that Mr. Dvorak, you need to get a clue on what SEO is before coming out with brave, but ignorant-sounding articles on topics you clearly do not 100% understand.
Here’s the first sentence that tells me John Dvorak doesn’t know how to use a search engine, and Google specifically.
And from my experience, the right results in many circumstances are nearly impossible to obtain—and may never be obtainable in the future.
What on earth are you searching for that you don’t think you can find on Google? How are you searching for it? Are you using any search operators to help you find what you are looking for? Granted, Google is not god but for pete’s sake, don’t blame the tool when you can’t figure out how to use it. I’ll throw out a challenge to you (yes, it’s only the beginning of my post). Give me a topic that you think is impossible to find information on - and I’ll find it for you. If I fail then yes, SEO is a bunch of crap. But until you can prove that finding the right results is nearly impossible - this sentence has already lost the credibility for your entire article.
It’s good that he pointed out some problems with search over the years, but perhaps John should also point out how not in-sync he might have been with search?
Ignorance continues…
You’d think that if I were looking for Art Jenkins, and Art Jenkins had a Web site named Artjenkins.com, search engines would list that first, right?
You are absolutely right - UNLESS Artjenkins.com wasn’t owned by someone else that was just sitting on the domain. And you even noted that under your “Parked Sites” section. I’m going out on a limb here and assume (don’t make an ass out of you and me John) that you understand the importance of relevant content to search engines. It returns sites that have the highest authority (subjective, agreed) in the results. So - I took the liberty and went to http://artjenkins.com/ - you’ve got to be freaking kidding me that you’re using an example like that to make a point! If you understand an ounce about SEO and search, you would have known that the site Artjenkins.com WILL NEVER, again, NEVER rank for “Art Jenkins” because it is a parked site - as you mentioned. So why would Google want to list such a site when the content is garbage? Geeze, I hope a light bulb is turning on for you now…
Online shopping is evil
According to John,
There seems to be an underlying belief, especially at Google, that the only reason you go online is to buy something.
And where did that belief come from? Would you mind showing some numbers saying that users don’t use Google for research, analysis or even just information seeking? Yes, there are hundreds of websites promoting products and selling stuff online. I would like to believe this point, but show me the numbers to support this “assumed” believe of yours.
I’m not going to even comment about your “Parked Sites” section - since it is obvious you have no idea about “art jenkins” not ranking for artjenkins.com…
Ultimate Ignorance
Here’s the mother of all SEO ignorance! It tickles me, yet sends a feeling of “WTF” down my spine.
Ever run a search a week later and get completely different results?
A week? Really!? Ever heard of algorithm updates? Yes, it’s true ya know, engines like Google always tweak how they rank websites based on many factors to show the most relevant result. It sounds to me that if the results you see does not make you happy, that means something must be wrong.
And when I think it can’t get any worse, John says something like:
This is compounded by the weird results you get when you are logged in to Google. These are somehow customized for you? In what way?
Ok, for those of you who see where I am going with this, try not to laugh 
not too hard at least. John, John, John…where were you when Google talked about personalized search results? Yes, it’s not great yet, but when you log into your Google account - the whole reason is so you can customize the results you see - you have more control than you think - you too, John, can influence the search results - YES YOU CAN!! (Hrmm…depends who you voted for I suppose)
Now what about the crappy content that comes up in Google
Yes, sometimes spammy sites with lousy content sneak through the cracks. And as John “insightfully” pointed out:
The basis for Google page-ranking is to equate popularity with quality, and once you look at the information developed by SEO experts, you learn that this strategy barely works.
That’s the most ballsy blanket statement I’ve ever read about SEO content. Do you think Google spent hundreds of millions of search quality to make mother nature happy? Yes, I’m actually on Google’s side on this one! Shit happens, and if you’re going to nitpick on corner cases of search results, you’re totally off base with this statement. Yes, I’m seen some nasty content rank in Google, but it’s a work-in-progress, just like your understanding of SEO
Finally I see a glimpse of hope
I suggest rethinking the basic organization of the Web itself, using the Google News concept. In other words, compartmentalize the Web to an extreme. Tagging might help. But you should be able just to search through a subsegment and check a box that eliminates merchants with faux-informational sites.
This can’t be true! Are you seeing Google News is something you actually like and use? If you don’t think Google search results is “tag” at some level in their huge databases, I think you might be stuck in the past. How do you think document relevance is being passed from one page on a site to another on the same or different site?
Final Words
John, if nothing else, I applaud your guts to come out with an article like this about SEO, when clearly you may not truly understand it - and I’m merely expressing my thoughts as you have in your article. I’m sure my verbalized thoughts are not as harsh as some other comments coming your way on this topic…Good luck!
Hope to hear from you soon…
Here’s the article if anyone wants to read it
No Comment