<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>WebProNews &#187; Googlebombs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.webpronews.com/tag/googlebombs/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.webpronews.com</link>
	<description>Breaking News in Tech, Search, Social, &#38; Business</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 04:32:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Google on Defusing Googlebombs</title>
		<link>http://www.webpronews.com/google-on-defusing-googlebombs-2009-01</link>
		<comments>http://www.webpronews.com/google-on-defusing-googlebombs-2009-01#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:56:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris Crum</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Googlebombs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webpronews.com/?p=48434</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Google only needs to run its &#34;Googlebomb&#34; algorithm once in a while. And just recently, one of these times emerged. You may have read about it. <a href="http://searchengineland.com/yahoo-obama-is-a-miserable-failure-16286">Obama was ranking for &#34;failure&#34;. </a><br /><br />He doesn't rank for failure anymore, and that's because Google ran the algorithm. <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/defuse-googlebomb/">Matt Cutts was kind enough to explain</a> Google's process for this type of thing:<br />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google only needs to run its &quot;Googlebomb&quot; algorithm once in a while. And just recently, one of these times emerged. You may have read about it. <a href="http://searchengineland.com/yahoo-obama-is-a-miserable-failure-16286">Obama was ranking for &quot;failure&quot;. </a></p>
<p>He doesn&#8217;t rank for failure anymore, and that&#8217;s because Google ran the algorithm. <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/defuse-googlebomb/">Matt Cutts was kind enough to explain</a> Google&#8217;s process for this type of thing:</p>
<p><i>The short answer is that we do two different things &mdash; both of them algorithmic &mdash; to handle Googlebombs: detect Googlebombs and then mitigate their impact. The second algorithm (mitigating the impact of Googlebombs) is always running in our productionized systems. The first algorithm (detecting Googlebombs) has to process our entire web index, so in most typical cases we tend not to run that algorithm every single time we crawl new web data. I think that during 2008 we re-ran the Googlebomb detection algorithm 5-6 times, for example. You can think of it like this:</i></p>
<p><center><a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/defuse-googlebomb/"><img height="397" width="450" title="Googlebomb" src="http://www.mattcutts.com/images/googlebomb-pipeline.jpg" alt="Googlebomb or linkbomb pipeline" /></a></center>
<p>Cutts also made a brief <a href="http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/01/detecting-new-googlebombs.html">post on Google&#8217;s Public Policy Blog</a>, explaining the situation. Now that the information is out about how Google handles these things, one of two things could happen. Either people will stop trying it because they know it&#8217;s pointless because Google can just run its algorithm and stop it, or they will do it more just to annoy Google and make them run the algorithm all the time. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, <a href="http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=miserable%20failure">Yahoo remains bombed</a>. I have yet to see any explanations from them on the matter. If they have a similar algorithm, apparently they have yet to run it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.webpronews.com/google-on-defusing-googlebombs-2009-01/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Trend On Google Trends?</title>
		<link>http://www.webpronews.com/a-trend-on-google-trends-2008-07</link>
		<comments>http://www.webpronews.com/a-trend-on-google-trends-2008-07#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:22:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>WebProNews Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Googlebombs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hot Trends]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webpronews.com/?p=46212</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Last week, Google Trends monitors were taken aback by the appearance of <a href="http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2008/07/11/swastika-a-google-hot-trend">a swastika</a> among the Hot Trends list. Yesterday, another graphic popped up and stayed there, an upside down and backwards message to Google itself. <br />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week, Google Trends monitors were taken aback by the appearance of <a href="http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2008/07/11/swastika-a-google-hot-trend">a swastika</a> among the Hot Trends list. Yesterday, another graphic popped up and stayed there, an upside down and backwards message to Google itself. </p>
<p>Three usually makes a trend in news, but two could be enough of an indicator in this instance. <a href="http://www.google.com/trends/hottrends?sa=X&amp;date=2008-7-13">Sunday&#8217;s number four</a> gainer in search queries was&nbsp; <font>?l?oo? no? ??n?</font>, an apparent Google bomb with more staying power than the aforementioned Nazi symbol. </p>
<p><center><img border="0" src="http://images.ientrymail.com/webpronews/article_pics/effyougoogle.jpg" alt="Pottymouths Hot Trends" title="Pottymouths Hot Trends" /></center>
<p>With the swastika, Google attributed its appearance to a popular online forum posting the HTML. This appears to a similar situation with a weird kind of twist. Clicking on the query in Google Hot Trends brings back Google News and search results for it, and included in those results are articles from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C6%8El%C6%83oo%C6%83_no%CA%8E_%CA%9E%C9%94n%C9%9F">Wikipedia</a> and <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/14/google-trends-subverted-again-this-is-getting-%CA%8Ell%C9%90%C7%9D%C9%B9-embarrasing/">TechCrunch</a> (the sole news source to appear). However, going to read those entries will leave an interested reader disappointed: both are MIA on the sites themselves. </p>
<p>At the risk of helping to perpetuate a self-fulfilling prophecy, gaming Hot Trends to send odd or offensive queries to the top of the list could be the new Rickroll. Stay tuned for more shenanigans, which seem likely. <br />&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.webpronews.com/a-trend-on-google-trends-2008-07/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 1/13 queries in 0.005 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 238/259 objects using memcached

Served from: webpronews.com @ 2012-02-12 23:37:19 -->
