Knowing Why Google Embraced Social Will Help You Understand How It Works

Orkut

For the last 7 years, I’ve been watching Google very closely. Sure, they are in the news all the time so it’s not something that’s exactly hard. What has been more challenging is keeping up with their long-standing obsession with social media and understanding why it’s so.

They have some big wins (YouTube, Google+) as well as dozens of losses (Orkut and just about everything else that they’ve touched that smells social). They looked at Facebook before Microsoft jumped on first. They took a long, hard look at Digg during the social news site’s heyday, then suddenly bailed out the moment they opened the books and saw the duct tape coding underlying the site.

Google knows two things very well about social media:

  1. If they have any chance of truly transcending beyond technology to gain a true understanding of intent and desires, they need to get a ton of social data.
  2. They haven’t been able to crack into the type of data that Facebook has about people.

Google+ is similar to people, but does not hold the attention of its users. It will get there. It has to. It’s Google’s last, best hope for getting this data.

The reason they want it so badly is because just about everything they rely upon (search, advertising dollars, fulfilling the hopes and expectations of their customers, just to name a few) as a company would be exponentially improved by understanding true sentiment. They have all of the data that people want. They just don’t have an easy way to perfect the delivery and usage of this data.

With this understanding, it’s much easier to anticipate what Google will do with their advertising platform as well as their search engine. They are close to perfecting the latter, believe it or not. Most will point to the rapid pace in which Google makes changes to their search algorithm, but that’s not an accurate characterization. They made major changes with Panda and Penguin. They made a minor (and completely overblown) change with their recent Hummingbird update. What we see now is close to the end game. Now, all they need to do is tweak it and wait for the next breakthrough.

They have achieved at plateau. Rather than major algorithm changes, they are now in the mode of perfecting the results by turning knobs rather than making the major changes that have hit every year since 2007. The holistic view of Google search that allows optimization to be broken down into the three major components (content, inbound links, and social signals) will not change until the reach a tipping point of understanding social data.

What’s the point of all this? That part is harder to explain. For years, I’ve been reading and experimenting the best ways to market on Google. Now that they’ve reached a plateau, the anticipation game has changed. Those of us who try to stay on top of current algorithm trends while looking ahead to the changes can sit back for a while. What we see is what we’re going to get for a while. It’s all about the three components. However, there is one thing that hasn’t manifested itself yet that technically changes everything.

The primary reason that Google wants to understand social data and personal sentiment is because they are on a quest for quality beyond the empirical data itself. The data is as good as it’s going to get through pure technology. They cannot advance the understanding of sentiment any further until a breakthrough.  Today, the great search marketer will be doing two things:

  1. Put out quality content with the proper mix of high-quality inbound links and social signals to improve rankings today.
  2. Put out quality content with the proper mix of high-quality inbound links and social signals with the understanding that once they achieve their goal of understanding sentiment, the quality component will make the search rankings soar.

As you can see, it’s an approach that will kill two birds with one stone. There are challenges with the data that Google cannot reconcile today. For example, if someone wants to find a phone number for a business, they might search, click through to a website, find the number, and leave. This takes seconds and technically from Google’s current perspective this wasn’t a successful endeavor, especially if the searcher then clicks back to the search results and goes to a different site. Even though the mission was accomplished by the searcher, Google will count this as a bounce and a short time on site.

On the other hand, someone might be looking for something in particular, land on a page from a Google search, click around trying to find what they wanted, get frustrated when they can’t find it, and leave. From Google’s perspective, this was a good visit. From the searcher’s perspective, it was an utter failure.

This is the type of sentiment that Google wants to understand. They want to know if you like what they presented to you. They want to know if their information was useful to you. They want to know if a website they “recommended” by having it listed first in the search engine helped you achieve a goal. Today, they can only guess. Tomorrow, they may be able to find out with a near certainty. At that point, we’ll see the next major upgrade in search. One might even call it “quantum search” since it would probably take a quantum computer for them to make sense of all that data.

Thankfully for them, they’re building a quantum computer right now.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Read More

Rockefeller. Carnegie. Google? How Will the FTC Outcome Impact the SEO Game?

John D Rockefeller

Back in America’s early beginnings, during the Industrial Revolution, men like Carnegie and Rockefeller were titans among the masses. These men single handedly changed the world. While their visions made our world what it is today, they did not provide us with oil fields and railways out of pure kindness; money was made and it made men like Carnegie and Rockefeller very wealthy.

(more…)

Read More

Microsoft Buying Facebook would be like Exxon Buying Greenpeace

Facebook MicrosoftI’m late on chiming in on this one, but with a reason. I had to pinch myself first, then wait to see if I was getting punk’d.

As many blogs have stated, the rumor that Microsoft is pursuing Facebook is, well, just a rumor. Still, things like these don’t just pop up randomly (very often) without some credibility, especially when it makes sense as a ploy to pressure Yahoo. With that said, I still feel the need to point out why this won’t work. Call it abuse of the hypothetical, but blogs are made to explore the possibilities.

Many, perhaps most, Facebook users do not want Microsoft. They were a little upset when they purchased under 3% of the company. If that becomes 50+%, we will likely see a large-scale exodus. Sadly, it would happen right after Facebook passed MySpace on Alexa. (more…)

Read More

Name that Nerd

Everyone knows a nerd or two.  Do you know the top nerds in the world, and by top, I mean the people who took visionary nerdiness, elbow grease, and luck and translated it all into billion dollar companies?  Below, you will find 15 faces (nine singles, 3 doubles).  Most readers will be able to name 3 or 4.  Real techies can name 5-10.  If you can name more, you are a true guru.  All 15?  Well, there’s a special place for you. (more…)

Read More

Job post by Microsoft prompts Flickr, YouTube Speculation (mashable)

A recent job posting by Microsoft is fueling speculation that they are positioning themselves to create a photo and video sharing platform to compete with the likes of Flickr and YouTube. The posting, which is available for viewing on the link to the story, is rather compelling evidence that we are beyond the idea stage and onto development.

You don’t put out job posts unless you are serious about making it happen, unless it’s a big fat smokescreen as they position themselves to buy out some other platform. Doubt that, but you never know. Microsoft has done wackier things over the years.

read more | digg story

Read More