Human Based Relevance Ranking is Flawed
And Google’s about to do something about it with Human based Relevance Ranking. So the question is:
How many Google employees does it take to rank every page on the Internet?
Well, it appears the worlds largest search engine is upset that people are juicing their Meta Tags in order to get a higher relevance ranking in the index. Now why would anyone want to do that? So upset are they that they have put new rules in place that will penalize web sites that try to juice their Meta Tags, have many copies of the same content, or use any other manner of trickery to elevate their search index ranking level.
On the other side of the equation is a web master that is trying to figure out what Meta Tags to us on a document that contains content they know nothing about. Try as they might, the Meta Tags they use are not truly reflective of the content and the result is that they are not on a Google search results list. Or worse yet they end up at the end of the wrong search results list.
Thus the rise of the all important and mysterious SEO Magician, the individual who uses the Dark Arts of Meta Tag Juicing to fool the indexing bots while they crawl about the Internet. The SEO Magicians ply their dark arts and turn a document about “apples” into “oranges”. And it is the rise of the SEO Magicians Union that has gotten Google in such a state that it is trying to break it. I can see the headline now: “Google busts SEO Magicians Union with Search Lockout”.
Everyone “in the know” knows how Meta Tag Juicing works. Only on the Internet can you search for Apple and get Oranges! Try to Google “failure” and you’ll see what I mean.
Meanwhile, the only one that has not had a chance to speak yet is the document itself and it is probably the most important component of the whole situation. Yet, the current Internet indexing and search paradigm does not allow the document to have any say in what it is all about.
What do you see?
Try this experiment. Give the same document to ten people. Have them read it and write down a list of the major and minor themes with the document. What do you think you will get? Ten different answers! Everyone’s personal bias will come into the equation and expose itself as they write down the themes that jump out at them.
If Google is concerned about people misleading their indexing bots how is having Google employees reviewing the web pages going to remove the human bias factor. It’s not the answer as the above experiment demonstrates. Just like the old story about the automobile that comes of the production line Friday afternoon, what will a Meta Tag review look like at 9am Monday morning!
Let the document speak!
If we want to know what is in a document, why not ask it? What is really needed is a way of allowing the document to independently express itself. The thematic knowledge contained within a blob of unstructured text should be able to reflect itself in a manner that indicates what its major and minor themes are without human bias.
With the document’s own thematic expression available it could be used as an “Independent Thematic Meta Tag” that Google could rely on for non-biased relevance ranking. With such a system in place, Google, or any search engine for that matter, would not have to worry about the mis-tagged or manipulated document Meta Tags.
When a document has its own Thematic Meta Tag © in place it can broadcast itself to the world. Personally, I like information to come to me instead having to chase after it!
www.cirilab.com
Recent Comments