News
Google Vs. Microsoft – The Search War Continues in 2010.
2009 was definitely an interesting year for search engines. We saw in implementation of real time search results, Microsoft unveiling Bing, and Yahoo giving up on search.
But if there is one thing that was made predominately clear in 2009, it’s that Microsoft is serious about competing with Google. After buying up Yahoo, Microsoft is claiming a much larger portion of online search results and ad revenue.
Currently Google takes up about 70% of all online searches, Yahoo claims around 16% and Bing claims about 10% (source HitWise). One thing that is interesting to note is that Bing’s numbers have actually dropped since the their launch buzz wore off – they were initially seeing about 12% of search results (as of June 2009).
Despite the drop in numbers, I think most people would characterize Bing as a success. Google didn’t start out a giant, it grew into its position by innovating search results with a more advanced and refined algorithm than its competitors, they also gained popularity by not focusing on ad-based results (which is definitely not the case now), and a unique look.
Bing doesn’t offer much in the way of an improved algorithm, less of a focus on ad-based results, or looks (Bing definitely used Google as a source of inspiration on all of these). Microsoft’s game plan is to set itself apart by expanding search related services, integrating with social networks, and generally spending lots of money.
In terms of search results, Microsoft really doesn’t offer any improvements from the Google algorithm. The search results are similar but nothing especially different or more useful. I think that Google is a better and more friendly search engine than Bing; I get much more traffic from Google, their business listings are much easier than Bings, and Google’s suite of Webmaster Tools, Analytics, and PPC advertising is top notch.
Microsoft was the first to announce a partnership with Twitter for real-time search results (although Google quickly responded with Twitter search of their own). And with the introduction of real-time Facebook results in searches, it’s clear that both search engines view social networking as a burgeoning frontier. It’s still unclear where and if this integration will effect marketing online, but it’s exciting to see the expanse of social networking.
Things started to heat up when Rupert Murdoch spoke out against Google and their “stealing stories”. Microsoft answered the call and began offering publishers money for search results. With stories like these, it’s easy to tell that the search landscape will continue to change in 2010; for better or worse.
While Microsoft seems intent on pressuring Google to spend money in order to compete, it’s unclear on whether or not this tactic will work. Google hasn’t necessarily been open on whether or not they would pay for search results, but it seems contradictory to their nature. Google is known as a search engine where the best site wins, by opening up search results to large publishers this could effectively phase out smaller news sources (like yours truly) from ever gaining the recognition we currently receive through organic search results.
Overall, the fight continues. Microsoft will no doubt try and reclaim more of the search market in 2010 (they still have plenty of fight and money left before they back down). The big question that remains is if Google will set itself apart from Bing. At this point, they seem to be mirroring each other’s innovations and services and not offering anything unique. I think once the Facebook and Twitter search fizzles out the focus will be on content. Will Google pay for results? Will Microsoft even pay for results? I think this will be the key issue that dominate search engine news for the majority of 2010. If one things clear, Microsoft has an uphill battle in front of them, and they will need to provide something unique from Google to stand out and ultimately succeed.
Facebook ranked as Most Popular Communication Tool
A new survey from Prompt Communications finds that Facebook is the most popular form of communication. Not just social media communication; all online communication:
- Facebook (96%)
- SMS (93%)
- email (91%)
“Yet, people are ambivalent towards the way that technology and social media are impacting society. 60% of people believe that they rely too much on technology, and 71% believe social media is making communication less personal. This indicates that even though they are using social media more, they feel they are having real human interaction less. But they are addicts – over 52% claim they couldn’t last a week without social media.” Says James Gerber.
These results are definitely surprising. Social Media has emerged as a great way to connect and interact with people online but only recently has it become the focus of many large business efforts. But in a world of social media, “people still crave real in-person human interaction.” – says Gerber.
In the past we had predicted Facebook as being the dominant force in social media - clearly beating Twitter in both users and traffic.
Beware of Tiger Woods Accident Information Sources
The Tiger Woods Car Accident has created a frenzy around the web this past weekend. But be careful, as with most popular news stories, some results could lead you to a malicious content (Megan Fox, Michael Jackson, and Google Wave being some recent examples of this type of activity).
Symantec has reported that some search results for “Woods” have redirected users to malicious domains such as:
- vir-curemypc-now.com
- egafuki.cn
- online-scanner-free.net
“From an IT security point of view, this unfortunate incident is just another fruit ripe for the picking as far as malware writers are concerned,” says Symantec’s Hon Lau. “It comes as no surprise that the creators of rogue antivirus or misleading application software have already jumped on the bandwagon and attempted to poison web search engine results to take advantage of this spike in web search activity.”
Symantec reminds surfers to keep their browsers and computers clean while searching the web. It’s always a good idea to have real-time virus detection software (I personally use BitDefender). When it comes to popular news stories, it’s always better to use trusted sources online, avoid sites you’re not familiar with and make sure your safe out there.
Microsoft might pay for Search Results
A recent article from CNN.com reveals that Microsoft is in talks with NewsCorp to “de-list” its news sites from Google. This is interesting news coming off the recent interview with Rupert Murdoch (NewsCorp chairman) in which he spoke out against Google.
Financial Times has reported that Microsoft has contacted other big name online publishers in hopes of persuading them to “de-list” their websites from Google as well.
“This is all about Microsoft hurting Google’s margins,” said a web publisher familiar with the plan.
Are we about to see a bidding war between Google and Microsoft for content?
This could be good news for the newspaper industry, which has yet to develop an online business model that could support their declining revenues from print and advertising.
Matt Brittin, Google’s UK director, told a Society of Editors conference that Google did not need news content to survive. “Economically it’s not a big part of how we generate revenue.”
After Microsoft’s launch of Bing (which reportedly receives around 10% of search traffic; reported by ComScore) they have been actively trying to steal users from Google. Striking deals with Twitter, Yahoo, and now possibly large news publishers, Microsoft is actively pursuing paying for content in order to gain in users.
Do you think Google, which currently holds about 60% of the total searches online, would suffer from a “de-listing” from large news sources?
More importantly, how would this affect our current search results? Would paid content get priority?
Twitter Traffic Going Unnoticed
Are you gaining traffic to your site from Twitter? Are you measuring your traffic through an Analytics program like Google Analytics or Omniture? Well, according to Stan Pugsley, director of business intelligence for iCrossing, up to 70% of referral traffic from Twitter goes unnoticed by analytics applications.
“The problem is not with the web analytics tools, but with the Twitter applications like Tweetdeck and Twhirl that are not based in an Internet Browser,” says Pugsley. Apparently links within these programs are counted as direct traffic rather than referrals. Pugsley explains, “When a user clicks through a link in a tweet, those applications do not register a referring URL that can be picked up by the destination website. It appears that they are coming directly to the site. According to TweetStats, only 31.7% of tweets originate from twitter.com, and those are the visitors that can be tracked back to tweets.”
Is Twitter providing more quality traffic than we originally thought? Since there is no way to analyze your direct traffic – not that I know of at least – we can’t accurately analyze whether or not these third party applications really are providing any sort of quality traffic. I wonder how popular programs like Tweetdeck and Twhirl really are, and whether or not they provide quality traffic.
Google Might Change Your Page Title
An interesting YouTube video with Google’s Matt Cutts reveals that Google might change your page title in it’s search results. “We’ve been willing to show the titles that are most useful,” says Cutts. “Suppose the title of your page is ‘Untitled’, or if there is no title. If that’s the case we try to show a useful relevant title.” This seems like a good idea, but how often do you see a high ranking page without a title? I don’t think this is something that we will notice much in the serps.
Cutts explains later in the video that repeating meta tags or title tags might also be altered in Google’s results, “we reserve the right to try to figure out what’s a better title, what’s a more descriptive snippet.” Again, this seems like a good move on Google’s part, but how often are well ranked pages using duplicate titles and meta-tags? Anyone familiar with Google’s Webmaster Tools is well aware of the potential serps hit for duplicate titles and tags. This again seems like something we wouldn’t really notice.
Cutts also provides an interesting comment on longer titles, “If you have a title that’s really really long and has a bunch of different words in it, we may still use that in our scoring but when we’re ready to show the snippet to the user we may try to find a better title.” This is interesting news because its long been considered good seo practice to keep page titles under 70 characters. Are Google’s serps taking into account titles longer than 70 characters? It would be interesting to find out if there is any hidden truth behind this comment.
Below is the full video:
Yahoo Gets Serious About News
Yahoo has decided to place it’s news service in the hands of a human editor, Anthony Moor. Moor currently works as the deputy managing editor for interactive news at the Dallas Morning News. He has been responsible for increasing the web traffic of DallasNews.com by 186% and was given the Edward R. Murrow Award for best non-broadcast affiliated website in 2008.
It’s clear Yahoo is making some big changes. Their homepage re-design has been a success, they’ve pretty much given their search results to Bing (read about it here), and now they’ve decided to get serious about their news presentation.
I think this is a great decision by Yahoo. The one gripe I’ve had with their news service in the past is the fluctuations in the quality of articles. Some are very well written, while others are riddled with typographical errors and poor insight. Placing the news in the hands of a capable editor seems like just the way to fix this problem.
YouTube to Support 1080p Video
Over on the YouTube Blog, Billy Biggs broke the news that YouTube will be supporting 1080p Videos:
“We’re excited to say that support for watching 1080p HD videos in full resolution is on its way.” Starting this week, “YouTube’s HD mode will add support for viewing videos in 720p or 1080p, depending on the resolution of the original source, up from our maximum output of 720p today.”
YouTube is by far the largest video site on the web and their transition to full 1080p HD will likely expand their reach even further. As reported by Internet News Google has been pursuing deals with various entertainment companies to bring their content to YouTube and place ads within the videos; similar to Hulu.
But what about videos already uploaded to YouTube in 1080p?
“Those of you who have already uploaded in 1080p, don’t worry. We’re in the process of re-encoding your videos so we can show them the way you intended.” says Billy.
As long as the ads stick to commercial content only, this is good news. It’s great to see entertainment companies streaming content online, its proven to be a great platform for gaining new viewers.
What do you think? Do you like the idea of YouTube becoming a giant DVR?
Rupert Murdoch doesn’t like Google
Rupert Murdoch, no stranger to controversy, is coming out against Google and other search engine giants:
“We’d rather have fewer people coming to our website, but paying.” In reference to “search people,” he next added, “They don’t suddenly become loyal readers of our content.” (source WebProNews)
Murdoch’s position makes sense. He establishes all his media outlets with profits in mind. He has taken Fox News Network to the top of Cable news by creating more entertaining (I’m not so sure about “fair and balanced” part though) content then his competitors and providing a point of view that was previously unheard on cable TV. He has also lifted the New York Post from near bankruptcy to a succesful right-wing newspaper through creative content.
Even more suprising, or not so considering his background, when asked about why NewsCorp. Doesn’t block search engines he stated, “Well, I think we will…”
While the posibility of NewsCorp. removing all their articles from search engines would be a dream come true for small news outlets, I’m not sure this will be the case. In the interview Murdoch does cite the Wall Street Journal’s online approach; which is offering samples in search results and offering the full article as part of a subscription service. This seems the more likely path for Murdoch and NewsCorps; why deny copious ammounts of traffic?
What do you think Murdoch and NewsCorps. will do?
Here is the video of the full interview with Sky News:
Page Speed might affect Google Rankings in 2010
I recently read an article over at WebProNews that Google might be using the speed of your webpage as a factor that will affect search results. They haven’t made any changes yet, but an interview by WebProNews with Google’s Matt Cutts reveals their plans might change in 2010.
“Historically, we haven’t had to use it in our search rankings, but a lot of people within Google think that the web should be fast,” says Cutts. “It should be a good experience, and so it’s sort of fair to say that if you’re a fast site, maybe you should get a little bit of a bonus. If you really have an awfully slow site, then maybe users don’t want that as much.” Cutts says. “I think a lot of people in 2010 are going to be thinking more about ‘how do I have my site be fast,’ how do I have it be rich without writing a bunch of custom javascript?’”
This is nothing but good news, I think sites that load quickly should be rewarded in the SERPS. Good hosting and programming provide a better experience to visitors. It’s becoming increasingly clear that seo and website design are becoming the same industry. If you’re not building a website with seo in mind you’re not building it right.
Even though Google hasn’t changed anything yet, they have already created a Google code resource center aimed at making the web “faster”. This seems to be a clear indication that speed will be a bigger issue in seo in the next year.
What are your thoughts?
Resources
Get a FREE ESTIMATE
News
Google Vs. Microsoft – The Search War Continues in 2010.
Currently Google takes up about 70% of all online searches, Yahoo claims around 16% and Bing claims about 10%
