This Boring Headline is Written for Google
prostoalex writes "The New York Times is running an article on how newspapers around the country find their Web sites more dependent on search engines than before. The unexpected effect? Witty double entendres, allusions and sarcastic remarks are rewritten into boring straight-to-the-point headlines that rank higher on search engines and news-specific search engines. From the article: 'About a year ago, The Sacramento Bee changed online section titles. "Real Estate" became "Homes," "Scene" turned into "Lifestyle," and dining information found in newsprint under "Taste," is online under "Taste/Food."'"
Witty or sensational headlines don't just deceive search engines.
Human readers can get fooled just as easily. Heres an example:
I was doing research to show that Kryder's Law (a kind of super Moore's Law for hard disks that says bit densities have increased factor of 1000 in 10.5 years meaning a doubling every 13 months) is no longer being achieved by hard drive manufacturers. Instead I discovered that Kryders Law was just a creation of Wikipedia's overenthusiastic editors that misinterpreted a single Scientific American headline. Wikipedia editors accidentally invented the "law", and it isn't even correct.
You can read about it at my site here: http://www.mattscomputertrends.com/Kryder's.html
The search engines are dong us all a favor getting rid of this problem.
I find the Economist's headlines, subheads, and captions often to be laugh-out-loud funny. The editors there seem to be fond of dry wit and black humo(u)r. I can't be alone in appreciating their work.
Cripple fight!
That's in essence what happened to BMW.
Google doesn't like you presenting different data to their search engine than the user would find if they visited. And I can easily see why. Sites would abuse the heck out of it.
See this link amongst many.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4685750.stm
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
(notice my to-the-point headline)
Really, not only is it good for search engines, it's good for my brain's relevance filter for trying to see if I care about the story the headline points to.
Start Running Better Polls
That won't ever happen (or more precisely, if it ever happens, it will fail). The problem is that we've done that before with the meta tags you mentioned. See what the SEO world has to say about them (summary: they're nearly useless now). Here's the deal. Any time you create a system for someone to deliver one thing to search engines and another thing to humans, what happens is a small group of opportunists will create massively spammy porn pages for human viewing, while making the search-engine content about every popular topic under the sun. You'll see a headline-made-for-Google which reads, "Britney Spears on Will and Grace" but when you click it, the headline-for-humans reads, "3 lesbian midgets have a pee party!"
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &
Would it be that hard to develop a standard (perhaps much like meta-tagging), giving one set of data easily digestible by the bots (and not displayed to the human reader), while retaining an entertaining writing style for human consumption?
Like the keyword meta? It was a tag designed specifically so content authors could assist the search engines to classify the information easily, without poluting the readable canvas. Very useful in theory.
Search engines stopped using the keyword data as search engine optimisers (vile opportunistic scum that they are) abused the mechanism with words that weren't relevant to the page. Selfish human behaviour destroys another opportunity to make life better for everybody else. Personally I'd like to see them tacked on the anti-spam legislation.
On the Internet, my blog can be read as quickly or as widely as any newspaper, all it takes is a few good links on well read websites. This is why it's relavent to the discussion. Without proper tagging or headlining, it's entirely possible for a professional organization to end up with next to no readerhip.
Oh You POS
If you're saying that you don't like Inverted Pyramid style, I'd have to disagree with you. Even more than in print, online I just want them to get to the point of the article. They can put their quotes from an eyewitness' brother's second cousin at the end of the story.
It is possible to write an inverted pyramid story that still flows.
As far as SEO, inverted pyramid style helps that too. The closer your keywords are to the start of the page, the better they'll work.
Nor do I believe it's an 100% positive change for the profession I am in in as it forces publications to pick up on wire service releases to please the advertisers; not the man in the street. While that may bring home the bacon for one and all it certainly stifles investigative journalism
Ah, then I owe you an apology. On that point, we agree - Entirely too much news has turned into cookie-cutter ripoffs on what the Big Boys decide to cover.
I had taken your earlier post as more of a stylistic complaint than content-based. My error, sorry.