The credibility of web content will be taken more into account in Google’s search algorithms to determine its position, not just that of inbound links
Would anyone really tell lies on the internet?
The answer is yes. Not only that, but given the chance they will push their unsubstantiated information all the way to the first position on page one of Google herself.
There is no shortage of fringe groups and whack-jobs online with an agenda to push.
As things have stood for a while, these types of dubious web pages have been able to rise to prominence on Google simply by gaming their main criteria of determining rank.
Just make a nice backlink profile referencing your wild delusions and the world’s your oyster.
The backlinking system stands on the principle that if a number of established websites are linking to your page, then it must be “good”.
On the face of it, this idea is almost overly simple and leaves the search results wide open to abuse and manipulation. However, it’s cheap computationally and generally produces reasonable results.
Google is now looking into more sophistication in the way that it processes its ranking algorithm.
A research team within Google is developing a means to quantify the “trustworthiness” of a given piece of content. We can infer that the intention of this research is to gain the ability to use the metric in isolation of inbound links.
That doesn’t mean that Google will stop using backlinks in search algorithms, just that they will have an extra dimension to evaluate against a web page.
Put simply, Google will read the “facts” presented in content and count every “wrong” fact which will add up to a score. The fewer wrong facts Google finds, the higher the trustworthiness of the page, therefore the higher up the rankings it can go.
“Wrong” and “facts” are in quotes above because the question still hangs – how does Google know what a “right” or “wrong” fact is?
The answer is that Google maintains a gargantuan Knowledge Vault, which they got from…er…the internet. So we’re back to square one as to what is a “fact” on the internet, but these are facts that have unanimous agreement. Also, Google considers them to be facts, so that’s that.
Cynicism, you say that you detect? Well I never.