no merging for me, as these are two completely different things. it’s one adorable hacker going through all the industry and making his mark.

can you refer explain shortly how can details be changed in a verified listing, or at least refer me to a post about it?

i am very curious as to how it is done and why Google hasn’t figured out yet how to deal with it.

Again, if one Search Engine is providing customer support and one isn’t…there is no defense for the latter. Secondly if one search engine dominates the market…and similarly is receiving endless complaints about either mistakes in its algos or outright hijackings…and others aren’t…it leads one to contemplate that one Search Engine has a sort of monopolistic control over the business fate of millions. It also has an impact on possible presentation of misinformation to the public.

I think Google should look very hard at Yahoo’s model. Frankly, I assume that both engines have similar quantities of data with regard to local businesses. Both probably present the information in similar ways. If Google is subject to massive spam and hijackings and not reacting to it in an open way…I’d tend to search for local services in Yahoo and tell those I know to do the same. If I find errors with regard to Yahoo’s information (sure there is plenty as with Google) and I know they’ll take a shot at correcting…I’d rather use and suggest Yahoo.

I think the above is a very enlightening article. Frankly, the 10 pacs and 3 pacs of both engines and that of MSN need lots of refinement. I’d suggest people work and spread the word about the one that works at fixing things the best.

@earlpearl
Google and other directories are liable for what they do, or do not do. Federal law and in California (my state) laws are in place, they just need people to report the lack of oversight, and ask for enforcement from their State Attorney General, their district attorney or the US Attorneys. You may not get a response, but you surely won’t get a response if you don’t report.

I am jut one of those wacky locksmiths, who reported what was happening, and got at least phone calls from all, and face to face meetings with the local US Attorney and the local District Attorney.

Will they take on Google? Not likely, in these tight government budget times, but all it takes is one that is not afraid or wants to make a name. It can happen. The State of Missouri’s Attorney General is taking on Yellowpages.com. Small fish in search, but a major player none the less.

We have to do our part and let people out side of this blog know what Google is not doing, and ask them to help.

Last thought;
If you really want to make sure you get a reply from Google write to: legal.support@google.com. For some reason that is one place I can get a response. If everyone does it, the effectiveness goes down, but it’s worth a shot!

Thanks for explaining about the business name. I was really curious about that.

He kept the same name. He was really unawares of the on-line reputation issue and since he grew up in Bradford felt very connected with the place and name. I convinced him to create a slightly modified on-line presence by changing his name to “The Option House Restaurant” from “Option House”. This will allow us to better track the reputation as it moves thru the local ecosystem and gives on line readers a better sense of what he does.

ps I took the liberty of adding your very relevant link. Pls let me know if it is right.

@Dave
There certainly is the bigger issue of Google’s market dominance and non communicative strategy. Thanks for putting this in that bigger context. I was in such a good mood after writing about Sam that I couldn’t spoil it with negativity.

As for the review process, from your description, I wasn’t quite clear whether you were saying that Sam kept the name of the old restaurant as his new business name. Are users associating old experiences with the restaurant because it has the same name as it used to, or simply because it’s in the same building? I’m curious about that.

This is something I wrote about a couple of years ago…when businesses change hands they inherit the reputation of the previous owners. This happens frequently in the hospitality industry, wherein, for example, a hotelier wants to benefit from the already established reputation of The Quiet Pines Inn. These days, with rep. management having become such a big deal online, I would advise business’ to really think twice before keeping an old name on a new business, unless the old business had a totally sterling reputation.

Really enjoyed this post, Mike.

Excellent article. The contrast between Google’s utter and complete lack of customer service and this example offered by Yahoo is striking. Just two days ago in this post on local records being hijacked still again you gave us examples with business people complaining about this phenomena…and the striking thing is that Google often, more often that not, does not respond at all. Doesn’t respond at all.

That is astonishing. On the one hand you have a search engine that provide an automated response and a time frame to actually look at the problem and deal with it. On the other hand you have a search engine that takes complaints and often doesn’t respond at all.

Its doubly frustrating to submit problems into a black hole of inconsistent responses and see some commentators get responses and others that don’t.

I personnally would like to submit a query, complaint, or question and either get a response that turns me down, or says something like…”we need an extra 48 hours on top of the initial 48 hours”; frankly anything that leads me to believe my request may get a response…than no answer at all.

Of further importance, as significant as correcting and updating reviews are…more serious problems exist. Outright hijackings of business listings is akin to theft and to misinforming (lying) to potential customers. The examples with locksmiths…and the incredible responses from those locksmiths who believe their business is being stolen is testimony to this problem.

The big issue is that Google dominates search. Any webmaster, site owner, business and site owner realizes this every day. Searchers choose Google over other engines.

The complaints within google groups for business owners define that. Your various posts and examples amplify this issue.

Google is a de facto source of information to the public. If not already, Google’s dominance of search approaches monopoly status.

Imagine if your brick and mortar business sees most of its new traffic from search engines. Suddenly your record is hijacked in Google Maps. Its going to a competitor, an affiliate, or who knows where. You contact Google about this phenomena…..and you don’t get an answer.

Someone is stealing your business, misdirecting potential customers….and the only single entity that is causing this theft is Google Maps…..and maybe they’ll respond…maybe they won’t and nobody understands why that is. That is corporate arrogance.

Its theft…and Google can’t respond. Meanwhile Yahoo can promise a response in 48 hours. Its outrageous.

Currently, thanks to you, a wider community of people, including webmasters and business people are aware of some egregious examples of this e.g. the locksmith case.

I can only suspect that hijackings of local records in Google Maps will expand into more visible and higher profile industries and businesses. When that occurs the attorneys will come into play. Some smart attorneys are going to convince judges and courts that there is a connection between google’s source of income, directed ads, and its relationships with businesses through the local business record. Those same attorneys are going to see that one search engine responds to problems and complaints and the other doesn’t. One acts responsibly in a common sense way and one doesn’t.

I want to follow that.

Earlpearl