Google, doing what it does best, not

Updated: July 6, 2013

This will be a very short article, I promise. Lo and behold, two days back, I uploaded my super honest review of the Windows 8.1 beta version, titled Still stupendously stupid. The day after, I did some rudimentary checks to see how my article was faring on the net.

Lo and behold some more, I tried searching using the lovely terms 'windows 8.1 review' and 'windows 8.1 review stupid' as they kind of should have revealed the extent of my success with my beautiful rant. Guess what, does Dedoimedo show up anywhere in the searches? Guess what, do other sites linking to my original work show up instead? Google's brave new algorithm at work, do take a look.

The result - Google algorithm is broken

I don't need a PhD in informatics and statistics to tell crap when I see it. As the two screenshots taken on Friday illustrate, my article shows up a lot. Quite a lot. However, not once with an organic link to the original. It goes through news sites, forums and other sources, which is absolutely fine. Do not get me wrong. I have no complaint about sites linking to my work. On the contrary, it's quite alright. I like most of the sites shown there. However, that's irrelevant.

What I expect is for Google to be able to trace the original, too. For example, while searching for the review, without the word stupid, it gives reference in the fourth, respectable place. That article redirects to Yup. When you add the word stupid, the first page on Google is crammed with links to my original work. And what matters is that not once does Dedoimedo show in the query results.

Google's algorithm is bad 1

Google's algorith is bad 2

Two hours later!

Next, I went into Google's official forums and posted my observation, and the thread quickly sidetracked into shoot-the-messenger style of argument rather than discussing the topic at hand, which would be the horrendous search results. But then, how can anyone really argue, because my observation is spot on.

Then, I also sent an email to the company's founder. Now, let's be clear. I am not deluded in my ability to make Santa Claus style changes in a multi-billion-dollar company's decision making just by sending a beautifully worded message to the founder. I do not have any expectations the mail will ever have been read, but the deed itself had its quantum effect on the search wavefunction. Magically, two hours later, the two new screenshots below illustrate what Google's organic search returns now.

Two hours later 1

Two hours later 2

Please do not tell me it's the matter of caching and crawling, because I checked that my article was present, available and accounted for using a variety of Google's tools before posting this. Plus it showed up in searches with the full title or the URL.

Please do not tell the Internet is breathing, changing and all that, either, because there is absolutely no reason for Google to display half a dozen links to an original article, and not the article itself. This is their fabulous algorithm at work, and it decides what counts for good content and what does not, in this silly modern world. Imagine Leonardo da Vinci having to compete in such a reality. Where do you think his work would feature?


There you go, Year 2011 repeated once more. Need I say more? Well, yes. As you can see, this is the new and optimized algorithm that leads to so-called improved Web searches and whatnot. Dear Google, just because I see no point in adding stupid Google Plus buttons to my site does not mean my work is not original, you pseudo-social vampires.

Keep this up, one day the Internet will bite back. Yes it will. As to my readers, please feel free to share this most beautiful article with your friends. This is the best way to enlighten the audiences about the quality and sincerity, or rather lack thereof, which permeates the heart of Google's business, the information. Can you trust them with your queries?