{"id":7055,"date":"2010-09-10T12:40:50","date_gmt":"2010-09-10T16:40:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/?p=7055"},"modified":"2010-09-10T12:51:33","modified_gmt":"2010-09-10T16:51:33","slug":"things-google-knows-to-be-true","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/2010\/09\/10\/things-google-knows-to-be-true\/","title":{"rendered":"Things Google Knows to Be True"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Update 9\/10<\/strong>: Matt Mcgee <a href=\"http:\/\/searchengineland.com\/googles-new-philosophy-were-a-portal-50216\">reports<\/a> on Searchengineland that Google has returned the philosophy page back to its original wording and disagrees with the assessment that they are a portal. I would note that regardless of the content of their philosophy page or any denials, if it walks like a duck&#8230;.. etc. etc. etc., it is still a duck and while they may or may not be a portal, they are in fact directly a great deal of traffic internally.<\/p>\n<p>Eric Goldman <a href=\"http:\/\/blog.ericgoldman.org\/\">highlights<\/a> a recent and interesting &#8220;philisopical change&#8221; on the part of Google. One that confirms recent history and codifies their new(ish) behavior:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Google maintains a page entitled &#8220;Our Philosophy: Ten Things We Know to Be True.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">On June 3, 2004 (per\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20040603020634\/http:\/\/www.google.com\/corporate\/tenthings.html\">archive.org<\/a>), the page said &#8220;Google may be the only company in the world whose stated goal is to have users leave\u00a0<strong>its website<\/strong> as quickly as possible.&#8221; (emphasis added)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">On September 6, 2010, that same line\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.google.com\/corporate\/tenthings.html\">now reads<\/a> &#8220;We may be the only people in the world who can say our goal is to have people leave\u00a0<strong>our homepage<\/strong> as quickly as possible.&#8221; (emphasis added)<\/p>\n<p>Since the separation of business listings from Maps into a stand alone Places pages, Google has steadily and regularly added new &#8220;features&#8221; that direct users laterally back into Google rather than to a business&#8217;s website. Nearly every recent Maps\/Local development (Buzz, Nearby Places, Tags, OneBox Enhancement) have all, in one way or another kept traffic inside of Maps instead of sending it to another website. <\/p>\n<p>Google has always contended that their <a href=\"http:\/\/www.google.com\/corporate\/tenthings.html\">#1 guiding principal<\/a> is to &#8220;<strong>focus on end user<\/strong>&#8220;.<\/p>\n<p>I would contend though, that Google, in that focus, is not immune from the immutable laws of capital accumulation. Google, like all companies, either needs to accumulate capital at a greater rate than other companies or capital will move away from them.<\/p>\n<p>Google&#8217;s main (and very successful historical) way to accumulate this capital has been to show ever more ads. Obviously there are a limited number of ways to show more ads. In the past, Google has relied on increasing numbers of users. If this can&#8217;t be accomplished with more unique traffic than it needs to be accomplished with more page views.<\/p>\n<p>I think going forward, virtually every change you will see to Maps\/Places will continue this recent trend of driving more pageviews to Google itself.<\/p>\n<p>Does this make Google evil? No, it makes Google a capitalist. That being said, perhaps truth in advertising should require them to change their &#8220;focus on the user&#8221; mantra to read &#8220;focus on the user AND do what is good for Google&#8221;. <\/p>\n<p>Google has acknowledged their intent to keep folks at Google. Now they need to acknowledge &#8220;the rest of the story&#8221;.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Update 9\/10: Matt Mcgee reports on Searchengineland that Google has returned the philosophy page back to its original wording and disagrees with the assessment that they are a portal. I would note that regardless of the content of their philosophy page or any denials, if it walks like a duck&#8230;.. etc. etc. etc., it is &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":262,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7055","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-google-maps-google-local"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7055","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7055"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7055\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7279,"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7055\/revisions\/7279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7055"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7055"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blumenthals.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7055"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}