Mind Control, Censorship, and Search Engines - Part Two
The very fact that operators of search
engines will not reveal the algorithms
governing the functioning of their search
engines is, actually, proof positive that
the operation of search engines is rooted
in considerations such as formatting,
tags, coding, and so on, which become
the primary, if not sole, focus, rather
than matters of content quality and
utility. In other words, if search engines
actually ranked Sites according to
quality of content or practical utility, the
proprietors of search engines would not
only say as much, but they would list the
criteria being used to assess the content
quality and practical value of any given
Web Site, and let people set about trying
to put together a Web Site that exhibited
such qualitative criteria.
These issues of quality and utility are not
discussed by the proprietors of search
engines because the latter do not
consider the former to be relevant to
effective search engine functioning.
Moreover, the actual formal rules, or
algorithms, which do form the heart and
soul of search engine functioning, are not
discussed because the owners of search
engines wish to keep their coquettish
dance alive - a dance of moving veils that
seeks to keep users, advertisers, Site
owners, and placement specialists
guessing in an alluring atmosphere of
unrequited promise and mystery.
As long as this algorithmic logic is kept
secret, search engines can bask in the
illusion, and seek to induce others to do
so as well, that search results using such
'robots' mean something more (which
they don't) than the locating of Sites
which have been formatted in a way that
will permit these Web Sites to be
recognized and highly ranked by the
various protocols inherent in the
software program that constitutes the
search engine. As long as the underlying
algorithmic structure is rendered opaque
to 'outsiders', then, the operators of
these programs can pretend to be
offering a service which they are not -
namely, search results that produce the
best quality which the Web has to offer.
Search engines proprietors are shy about
revealing the rules on which their search
engines are based for this would,
indubitably, provide clear evidence that
the emperor was not wearing clothes of
quality but was, rather, somewhat naked
with a mere loin cloth of formatting
techniques to substitute for quality attire.
As a result, search engines owners seek
to redirect people's attention away from
issues of quality through the use of
purely structural formatting and coding
issues - as if the latter, automatically,
could serve in the place of genuine
quality, when there is no justification for
making such an assumption.
The logic of search engines is a little like
the story of an obviously inebriated
individual who was observed groping
about on his hands and knees beneath a
lonely, isolated street light. When asked
if he was looking for something, the
intoxicated person said: "Yes, I've lost
my house keys." When further asked if
he had lost his keys near where he was
searching, the intoxicated individual said:
"No, but this is the only place with some
light."
Search engines provide some light with
which to look for things. The only
problem is that the quality of information
for which many of us are seeking is often
not found within the spot light of visibility
(i.e. ranking) which is supplied by a
search engine.
A second logical flaw in the idea that
criteria such as link popularity can serve
as a meaningful and reliable index of
quality, useful information is the fact
there may be many different reasons for
why someone links to another Site, and
one cannot suppose the motivations for
linking are all - if at all - a function of the
quality of such a Site. Many people link
to other Sites for purely commercial
reasons and not because they believe the
Site in question has great, quality content
to offer, and, therefore, one cannot,
necessarily, equate hopes of commercial
gain concerning a Site with the actual
qualitative value of the latter Page.
Moreover, different people may all place
a link on their Web Page to the same
Site, but do so for very different reasons
and none of these reasons may have
much to do with content quality, per se.
For instance, visitors might like the
graphics on a Page, or the effects
generated by the use of certain scripts,
or the freebies being offered, or some
commercial package being sold, or an
affiliate program being developed, and,
yet, none of this, necessarily, is an
indication that the Site has either quality
content or even practical value, but,
nonetheless, links to such Sites often are
placed on Web Pages because of some
dimension of experience that may be
quite unrelated to matters of content
quality.
Some people post links on their Site in
the fashion of a travel log that, in effect,
states: 'Been there, done that'. And, if
people do not, generally, search below
the 25th-30th ranked Web Site in any
given category, then, one should not be
surprised that the same Sites keep
showing up in many of these link lists -
namely, the ones which possess the right
algorithmic chemistry which has made
them 'photogenic' to the sorting and
ranking rules of search engines ... rules
which, themselves, have nothing to do
with finding or identifying quality content.
If the people posting these links
somehow became aware that there may
be hundreds of other Sites buried deep in
the recesses of a search engine (as a
result of poor algorithm chemistry) that
were far superior to the Site to which
such individuals are posting a link, then,
maybe, the character of these link lists
would be very different from what they
often are. However, people go with what
they know, and because the organizing
and ranking structure of search engines
is not all that conducive to facilitating
people's introduction to quality web
Sites, link popularity is, quite frequently,
more a reflection of the biases and limits
of search engine technology, than they
are an indication of the presence of
quality - although, sometimes, quite by
chance, the two (i.e., quality and
formatting techniques) coincide in a
happy instance of serendipity.
When a person does a search using
keywords, that individual is, in effect,
asking the search engine to provide the
ranking scheme employed by the
algorithms to which the search engine
gives expression. What 90% of the
people who use search engines often
don't realize is that the matches they get
back have, virtually, nothing to do with
the content quality of the proffered Pages.
Consequently, whether knowingly or
unknowingly, search engines use
algorithms to inhibit people's access to
content quality. In addition, search
engines use algorithms to, effectively,
censor many Sites because a Web Page
which - due to the absence of various
arbitrary codes - has no, or little,
visibility in search engine rankings, will
never be heard - not because the Page
has nothing useful to offer, but because it
committed one of the cardinal sins of the
Internet ... it did not bow down to the
golden calf - namely, search engine
algorithms.
Not only do search engines interfere with
access to quality content and, effectively,
censor people, they also are tending to
control what people think about as a
result of the formal rules, or algorithms,
which are used to determine what does,
and does not, get Internet visibility.
People are being conditioned to accept
what search engines offer, and what
search engines offer is the use of formal
rules to determine what people get to see
and think about since there are very few
individuals who are willing to check out
possibilities that appear below the
25th-30th ranked Web Site.
Search engines present all Web owners
with a stark choice: conform to my
whims, or be lost in oblivion. And, thus,
the future is upon us, but it is not science
fiction.
| Part 1 | Next |Return to Internet Menu |
|
