Google Search Has Gotten Bad — And is Ripe for Innovation

At one time, Google Search was clearly the best available. It provided everything you needed instantly and seemingly had the most relevant information at the top. Likewise, their ads allowed businesses to skip the queue and get to the front page.

It continued to get better. They added maps and reviews for local business search. They added news and various filter capabilities. They allow you to translate pages in their Chrome browser. And their algorithm kept getting updated for the latest trends and social proof.

Right now, however, Google Search is pretty bad. It took me starting a business to realize this. Here’s the problem. While their search algorithm is complex, the main factor is social proof. If people link to your page (especially other high ranking “authorities”), you go to the top of their results. This worked great in the internet’s early days when there were a small number of relevant websites for each topic. Nowadays, however, the quantity of pages has multiplied at a rapid rate. And Google’s algorithm doesn’t reflect the newest content, even when it’s the best.

Let’s give an example…

Say you are searching for something like “Improve Vegetable Garden”. When you search that, you’re get results from various sites. But on the top page, you have an article from 4 years ago! Why is that relevant? Wouldn’t there be better, more modern methods of gardening over the past few years? Maybe that’s not the best example because gardening doesn’t change much. But when you type in various technology subjects, the same thing happens.

Now to be fair, Google’s algorithm clearly prioritizes more modern content. But not if the content is from a high traffic website (with many links to it).

What happens if someone comes out with a revolutionary new way of vegetable gardening (or any other topic)? They might have the best content on the internet. But Google will have them way down on page 50 of their rankings because they are new and don’t have years of social proof yet. Nobody will ever find them. But the website that has been around for 10 years will always be on page 1 regardless of whether their new content is good or old content is still relevant.

So to summarize, Google has trouble with recognizing relevancy. Sometimes, they link old articles. They definitely can’t determine relevancy of new content, even when it’s clearly the best. That’s not good search anymore.

My Experience…

At Reverse Tide, I created one of the most relevant skill-learning and career websites on the internet. Yet I can’t rank very highly for any search keywords. When it comes to learning, the thousands of education institutions always win out. I may have a modern learning path for Data Science but they’ll prioritize a 2014 MIT syllabus page over me. It’s a higher authority and more linked pages than my new startup.

Likewise, I help people create innovative resumes, cover letters, portfolios, and other job application materials. However, they will prioritize a random ‘Forbes Top 10 Resume Tips’ page over the many resume pages I offer. Mine has more depth, quality, and prioritization on the topic of “resumes” than Forbes does. But Forbes has high readership (even though they usually publish low-quality, clickbait content). So they win every time. The person searching for quality resume help will get these silly resume lists that provide no help at all. Google ensures they won’t ever find my website.

Now obviously this isn’t ideal for my business. It’s super hard to create a new online business these days because there are millions of other websites. 10 years ago, you could get to the top of search rankings. Nowadays, it’s incredibly difficult for a new business to gain traction.

But it’s more than just an online business owner complaint. It’s not providing the best search results for its users. Forbes, Business Insider, Huffington Post, and other clickbait websites may get traffic and links because they built their business around such tactics. But they are DEFINITELY not the best content for each search subject. Neither are websites that were created years ago and accumulated traffic and links due to their longevity.

What’s the Alternative?

It’s a tricky question because Google has nearly monopolized search and you would need something great to supplant them. Most people probably don’t realize that their algorithm’s quality has deteriorated with time. Most people probably don’t realize they aren’t getting the most relevant results but rather the most popular ones over the past few years.

And it’s also a tall task to create an alternative algorithm that better assesses relevancy on EVERY topic possible. How do they know if newly created content is great or terrible? A machine probably doesn’t and may never be capable. Which is why Google’s original algorithm allowing the searchers to assess quality for them (via clicks, links, etc) was so genius in the first place.

But there are definitely areas of opportunity. A few thoughts:

• AI startups ought to focus on this problem. Might they come up with something superior? I would assume so. And since search is such a valuable business, there’s definitely a business case to tackle the problem.
• In the travel industry, you have websites like Expedia that compare results from all hotels or airlines (routes, prices, etc). Then you have sites like Skyscanner that compare rates from Expedia and other competitor aggregators like Priceline and Tripsta. Why not do the same with search? Have side-by-side results using different algorithms. The social proof Google model, an AI relevancy estimator, one filtered for recency, and others. Let the consumer decide what search is best for their needs.
• Can Google ever modify their algorithm? It would be a bold move. They regularly tweak aspects of it but haven’t really changed the core philosophy of it. But they are heavily involved with AI and might find a better way. I hope they do it. There is an entire industry of SEO experts trying to manipulate their algorithm to get pages ranked higher. While that’s fine, I hope Google’s priority is the most relevant pages for their customers rather than profit-focused rankings.
• VR/AR might force the change itself. I believe the virtual reality world will completely change websites forever. We won’t be viewing text on a small screen in 5–10 years but will be immersed in new virtual worlds. If screens and traditional websites are outright replaced like I predict, Google’s search algorithm won’t work. If the world migrates to virtual reality, we might see a new dominant search company capable of searching VR’s experiences, simulations, rooms, worlds, and other features.

It will be interesting to see what happens. This article isn’t meant to bash Google. They are still the best in my opinion. I use them for 100% of my searches even knowing their weaknesses. But their algorithm’s strength from the past 15 years is creating a large flaw. I have confidence they’ll address it as the technology dictates and customers demand it.

___________________________________________________________________

Reverse Tide is the leader in learning and career enhancement. By examining modern trends and future perspective simultaneously, we provide resources for people to improve and accomplish their goals.

Our learning paths provide high quality opportunities to learn technology, marketing, and business skills. Our career resources help people get experience, submit winning job applications (resumes, portfolios, and more), upskill toward better career prospects, start businesses, and freelance successfully.

More to come but visit us today!