October 9, 2008

I think it must be extremely challenging to sort out the "cess" from the "pool", especially when there are so many people who are trying to game the system. Giving away the algorithm wouldn't help anyone in the long run.

Schmidt is spot on. I also entirely agree with his assertion you have to get more relevant. If you're making some honest mistakes, then Google gives you lots of tools to help you find them. The cream will float to the top.

Internet = Cesspool

I don't agree... how's this?

Internet = cesspool + reference library + communication tool + ... (I think you get the picture)

Google can't stem the tide of CRAP that is thrown at it everyday. Yahoo and MSN ogranic results are either rigged or worthless.

Google's product while superior has regressed of late. Through no real fault of their own really, its the rapidly increasing universe they can't grapple with.

This comment was reflective of thier internal situation.

The relevancy issue is one that does not require giving up the algorithm so much as explaining how non-branded news content can get better play than branded authority sites.

Reverse engineering what Reuters is doing may help, learning advanced SEO skills or bringing in a major SEM firm are options but a little help in return for helping Google clean the cesspool does not seem much to ask.

Well frankly it has become a cesspool lately, the quality of content has taken a nosedive. I certainly wouldn't expect Eric to talk about this, but I guess it is more expected than Larry and Sergey stepping in.

It's ridiculous that Google's CEO (who is worth $6.6 billion) would make such antagonistic comments which chastise ordinary webmastes who strive to achieve a "brand" yet do not have sufficient funding through investors to ever compete with the rich and powerful.

Yeah, so Schmidt was speakng to a group of magazine executives, maybe he should start thinking about Google's shareholders who have seen a 50% loss in ROI over the last year.

Yes, the Internet is a cesspool. And Google is a big part of the problem. 35% of AdWords advertisers don't even have an identifiable business behind their web site. If Schmidt wants to raise standards, he needs to start at home, in the Google ad sales department.

But he can't do that. It would cut Google's revenue. Google is stuck in a co-dependent relationship with the bottom-feeder AdWords sites.

It's quite possible to solve this problem technically; we do it. But if your business model is ad-based, doing a solid job on vetting advertisers isn't in your own interest. We see this as something that will have to be done in the browser or the firewall, where the software works for the user, not the advertiser.

Interesting angle John - but I agree the PPC area is a good example of the cesspool and one which Google may not be too quick to clean up at their expense.

I can understand what he's saying, but It think the way he phrased it was unprofessional. I see way, way too many webmasters who are just looking for the cheapest thing they can get. They literally don't care what it says or how relevant it is to anything, as long as it has a few keywords in it and it's cheap. That's the mentality that is causing a lot of this.

Maybe Schmidt is just angry about the number of businesses leaving Google because of the fraudulent clicks and bottom feeder ads that Google has a vested interest in maintaining. Shares of Google will continue to dive until some integrity is restored. Schmidts' arrogance is driving responsible small business advertisers away.