Last month, Google caused a stir when it changed its algorithm to push down low-quality sites in search results. Now Blekko, a new search engine, is going much further by banning 1.1 million Web sites from its search engine.
Blekko had previously banned 20 Web sites that users complained about most, including eHow and Answerbag, both owned by Demand Media. But the new change will affect hundreds of millions of Web pages that Blekko said have very thin content and many ads.
“Google didn’t actually take anyone out, they just reshuffled the deck,” said Rich Skrenta, chief executive of Blekko. “Instead of demoting these sites to No. 5 or No. 7, we’re just throwing them out.”
Google’s and Blekko’s changes are in response to increasing criticism of sites that game search results by including keywords and phrases that people often search for in order to appear higher in search results and, in turn, make money on ads when people click on those sites.
But solving that problem is tricky, because a Web site’s quality is so subjective. EHow, for instance, has taken a lot of heat for publishing articles like “How to Make Friends” (the No. 1 piece of advice: “Smile. It’s contagious!”) but it can be useful for queries like “How to Right-Click on a Mac.”
The main thing that Blekko considered was whether the sites use online ad networks.
“If you make a machine to print money” — an ad network, in Mr. Skrenta’s opinion — “people will exploit it,” he said. “All you have to do is put some words on your page, do some link building and get listed on search engines. Then traffic will come and checks will come, and lo and behold, most of the people who did that are not substantive sites.”
Of course, most legitimate sites that publish news and articles also run ads. Blekko also considers whether a site publishes pieces on one topic, like a cooking blog, or on an endless variety of topics, like eHow. And it looks at how long and in-depth articles are, how trustworthy they are among users and whether the writers are professionals or amateurs.
Though it seems like many legitimate sites could be considered spam under this algorithm — newspapers cover a wide variety of topics, for instance, and many bloggers may be amateur writers but are experts in their fields — Mr. Skrenta said that when he combed through thousands of sites that the algorithm banned, he found only two false positives.
Examples of the sites Blekko now bans: cheap-refrigerators.net, best-weddinggifts and Boston.diningguide.com.
Search engines take different approaches to determine which sites are high-quality. Google does it algorithmically, though it tests algorithms with users. Blekko uses more human intervention, showing only results that Blekko or its users have deemed worthy.
“Slashtags define eligible sites that are allowed to compete for that top 10 position and also say there’s a set of people who aren’t eligible to appear in any category,” Mr. Skrenta said.
Blekko had previously banned 20 Web sites that users complained about most, including eHow and Answerbag, both owned by Demand Media. But the new change will affect hundreds of millions of Web pages that Blekko said have very thin content and many ads.
“Google didn’t actually take anyone out, they just reshuffled the deck,” said Rich Skrenta, chief executive of Blekko. “Instead of demoting these sites to No. 5 or No. 7, we’re just throwing them out.”
Google’s and Blekko’s changes are in response to increasing criticism of sites that game search results by including keywords and phrases that people often search for in order to appear higher in search results and, in turn, make money on ads when people click on those sites.
But solving that problem is tricky, because a Web site’s quality is so subjective. EHow, for instance, has taken a lot of heat for publishing articles like “How to Make Friends” (the No. 1 piece of advice: “Smile. It’s contagious!”) but it can be useful for queries like “How to Right-Click on a Mac.”
The main thing that Blekko considered was whether the sites use online ad networks.
“If you make a machine to print money” — an ad network, in Mr. Skrenta’s opinion — “people will exploit it,” he said. “All you have to do is put some words on your page, do some link building and get listed on search engines. Then traffic will come and checks will come, and lo and behold, most of the people who did that are not substantive sites.”
Of course, most legitimate sites that publish news and articles also run ads. Blekko also considers whether a site publishes pieces on one topic, like a cooking blog, or on an endless variety of topics, like eHow. And it looks at how long and in-depth articles are, how trustworthy they are among users and whether the writers are professionals or amateurs.
Though it seems like many legitimate sites could be considered spam under this algorithm — newspapers cover a wide variety of topics, for instance, and many bloggers may be amateur writers but are experts in their fields — Mr. Skrenta said that when he combed through thousands of sites that the algorithm banned, he found only two false positives.
Examples of the sites Blekko now bans: cheap-refrigerators.net, best-weddinggifts and Boston.diningguide.com.
Search engines take different approaches to determine which sites are high-quality. Google does it algorithmically, though it tests algorithms with users. Blekko uses more human intervention, showing only results that Blekko or its users have deemed worthy.
“Slashtags define eligible sites that are allowed to compete for that top 10 position and also say there’s a set of people who aren’t eligible to appear in any category,” Mr. Skrenta said.
0 comentarii:
Trimiteți un comentariu