
So Google’s putting us in charge of relevancy. Or rather it’s putting however many active gmail users in charge of their own results, which might vaguely affect other gmail users’ results.
As an incoming link to a website is a ‘vote’ for relevancy, so now, we can comment on a site in the search listings and other geeks, ahem, users can read it and decide what they want to do. Is the site relevant? Is it irrelevant? Do we care? Does a site’s appearance in the SERPs rile us so much that we feel we need to ban it from any future search listings for the specific search we’ve just conducted?
Grant Sterling of SearchEngineLand.com was quoted generously by BBC Tech but the key point made by him was down to one tiny little word: “So this could be quite dramatic if they get a lot of people participating…”. Did you get it? No buts…
I’m lucky enough to know quite a lot of brilliant geeks. We need them, they’re brilliant (some are quite successful too, but I don’t know them). And it is the people who get excited every time Google sneezes that might engage with the SearchWiki for a while. It’s been blogged that Google’s only in this for the data and to learn more about how people interact with the search results. No surprise that Google aren’t in this for the fun of it. But will they really learn anything about the wider consumer?
Personalised search in various forms has been discussed for a long time. But this isn’t it. If it’s personalised for me, fine. If I have to do the personalising, that’s time I could have spent clicking on sites or doing another search. It’s encouraging us to edit the results for ourselves, but surely the point of Google’s algorithm is to offer up the most relevant sites? So why are they asking us to tamper with it? Do they not think they’re doing a good enough job?
So it’s about encouraging social engagement, commentary, reviews, opinion, feedback. Lovely. But what happened to the 1.8 second rule? The time you have to grab the attention of the searcher before they click (I’ll try and remember where I heard this but don’t ask me). You need to (forgive the phrase) ‘win the click’ through immediate relevancy and a strong message. If I’m in search mode, I’m not going to stop and click through to comments on whether I should click on a site or not. I’m going to read the summary/title/url, then my decision’s made. Then I’ll click on the site, decide it’s not relevant, and click back to the results cursing their meta description for fooling me…won’t we all?
Sphere: Related Content![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=cf8a036d-7f21-4133-98c1-032107dfc67d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f33c85ec-eee7-4161-a46f-d349ea3bbaf1)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=5ad7e6a9-a50c-43fb-8fb1-ab746fb1bea7)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=aa57f1ac-10f8-48cc-be2d-59dc6604edb4)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=5d7cc9f4-ccf7-4de6-9881-7ba83c5f4950)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e594dc8a-64fa-43fa-bead-43e4a7e4cf6e)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=a3d318a6-95b4-4265-af5c-f6232f0dde0a)
