Recent Comment
Spotlight
- Reader Michael Megalli writes: It is difficult to engage in genuine conversations with the marketplace when you can't change the reality of how a company does business, what it sells, how it works with partners, etc. [go]
Recent Comments
- JG: " This is one point, JG, where I think ..." [go]
- pz: " Glad ya'll are out there to inform us of ..." [go]
- David Mullings: " I know that if someone created a fan pag ..." [go]
- nmw: " This is one point, JG, where I think< ..." [go]
- JG: " google lets you play with the machine ..." [go]
- Matt: " I don't believe in it and don't accept i ..." [go]
- JG: " I will second tim's comments. And it wa ..." [go]
- nmw: " Good point, Doug -- and that doesn't< ..." [go]
- nmw: " Mr. Hittel, I think I understand what y ..." [go]
- Ian McAllister: " I couldn't agree more that brands should ..." [go]
- Doug Schumacher: " Their ads are delivering good informatio ..." [go]
- John Battelle: " So perhaps Facebook "borrowed" it from G ..." [go]
- Jason: " That's the same "Facebook blue" that Goo ..." [go]
- tim: " I've seen Google on TV -- after PBS show ..." [go]
- Ken Hittel: " Fair enough in re: the bright guys who l ..." [go]
- Michael Megalli: " One of the key advantages of a brand is ..." [go]
PERFECT FOR THAT PERSON WITH EVERYTHING
Order 'The Search'
Yup, it makes the perfect gift for that officemate or colleague who you thought had everything....including you! If you order here, I promise to sign it, assuming we can figure out the shipping...
You can also buy the audio version here.
Check my book page for more info.
Blogger's Rights
Top Posts
- The Database of Intentions (or how this all got started)
- From Pull to Point(or the first post where I riff on the "Point-To Economy")
- Google As Builder (or the point at which Google stopped being simply a search engine)
- On Google v. Yahoo
- TV and Search Merge
- On Sell Side Advertising
- Battelle Gets Searchstreams
- Search and Immortality
- Toward the Endemic (on endemic advertising)
More coming soon...
Active Topics
- 35 comments: WTF??!!! (04.17)
- 26 comments: Twitter. Oh God. (04.30)
- 16 comments: The Future of Search Series (05.08)
- 16 comments: The Music In Magazines (05.07)
- 13 comments: The Best Minds of the Web... (05.05)
Monthly Archives
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
About John Battelle
Searchblog Newsletter
Enter email to subscribe to Searchblog's newsletter:
Calendar
| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Syndicate
Powered by
February 6, 2006 6:59 PM
Hey BMW: You Ain't Street Legal, Google Says
From Yahoo news:
In a move that analysts say indicates a problem that still needs a solution, Google has removed BMW's German Web site from its index for violating Google's guidelines against trying to manipulate search results.
The move was first reported by Google employee Matt Cutts in a posting to his blog on Saturday. He said BMW.de had been removed last week because certain pages on the site would show up one way when the search engine visited the page but when a Web user opened the page, a redirect mechanism would display a completely different page.
Matt's post is here.
Ricoh is also a violator. You Have Been Warned.
- Posted by John Battelle on February 6, 2006 6:59 PM



Comments
This is unfair to the users of Google who are looking for Valid, Relevant SERPs - those Users suffer because that ENTIRE Web site option is NOT being presented to them in the SERPs.
What difference would it have REALLY made if they just simply had that same doorway page, but used a Static Link instead.
Or placed that same text at the very bottom of the Landing Page.
This ironically, would have made that site within Google's Guidelines.
So in reality, the whole Banning centers around using a JavaScript Redirect Link on ONE PAGE.
They wanted the LANDING page to be visually appealing - but visual appeal means nothing to Search Engines.
It is unrealistic to expect Webmasters to treat Humans and Search Engines as if they are one in the same!
Recalling the Google CLOAKING controversy of a couple of years ago, after they were out-ted, they ONLY REMOVED
that ONE controversial page for a few days until the matter was fixed, then reinstated that page. They Certainly did not remove the ENTIRE GOOGLE DOMAIN.
Working for a major European SEM I have watched with interest as this whole issue escalated throughout yesterday.
What really caught my attention is the lack of understanding about search engine optimisation in many of the reports in the mainstream press - what it is, how it can be approached and what is or isn't dangerous practice.
BMW.de banned from Google - highlights media ignorance
http://www.search-engine-war.co.uk/2006/02/bmwde_banned_fr.html
this whole story seems so strange to me. first, why on earth does BMW even need SEO? doesn't traditional marketing work better? besides, who DOESN'T know BMW? was it fake? did BMW really care? will website results really affect their sales? my (perhaps) far-fetched theory is that it was a publicity stunt for BOTH bmw and google. it's a win-win situation for both parties. google gets to scare site owners and seo businesses to NOT go the backdoor route and bmw gets lots of exposure...
Google wouldn't ban if it wasn't for nothing, or if it was for something barely wrong. BMW was known to be doing the worst kind of trick to deceive the search engines, the same technique porn sites do, in google, fake pages with links to the frontpage just for the googlebot, and they did that for a LONG time, almost 2 years, so they got what they deserved.
I'm a google user and I prefer much more to have some results not showing because they were trying to cheat the system than having this results showing with more importance than they deserve, obfuscating my real search.
A much worse problem with BMW's website is that it keeps failing user testing, because of their infatuation with glamorous design instead of usable design. The worst example was when we tested shore finders and locators a few years ago: users couldn't find the dealerships from BMW's website. (This may have improved - haven't tested this recently.)
In another study, we tested journalists trying to find PR information. One reporter said about bmw.com: "Here I'm just fishing. This is the part I never like. I have no confidence when I hit something that it'll get me to where I want to go." Another journalist commented, " I am already aggravated with this website because I cannot find what I want…. They are coming up with names that don’t even mean anything."
BMW needs to start designing more for the way the Web is rather than the way they wished it were. Otherwise, even if they get people to the site, they won't stay.
Jakob, it's not just BMW. Although I still disagree with most of your search engines as leeches piece, that last sentence above just somes up most of the designers and dvelopers I meet on a day to day basis.
BMW.de Has Just Been Re Added as of an hour ago
They have agreed to Google's Demands :LOL
However, Google was caught Cloaking a year ago, they did NOT remove the entire Google.com index from their own SERPs - just one page for a few days
Seems that we've recently seen Google kicking sites out of the index as well as people suing to keep their site out of the index.
I just came across this one from Chilling Effects which is quite interesting:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/notice.cgi?sID=937
Apparently, a CA court ordered Google to remove references to 4 individuals and companies from their SERPs. I didn't even know that this could happen. I wonder what the basis of this request is. I did try to verify whether some of the results listed have been removed from the search results by looking at the cache, and this appears to have happened.
Since the original court documents aren't on the Chilling Effects site, I can't tell what this lawsuit is all about, but consider this:
One of the pages that the CA court ordered Google to remove from their index resided on www.cob.uscourts.gov, which is the US Bankruptcy Court - District of Colorado! This was a bankruptcy order. There should be no DMCA or other issues associated with Google indexing a court order. Strange, no?
Leave a comment