Bloggasm

Google is all about doling out authority.

Measuring the number of links coming into your website, it gives you authority on any number of subjects and keywords. So when your website suddenly gets downgraded within its index, it’s effectively taking your authority away. It’s coldly telling you that you’re not the expert that you previously were, that you’ve been toppled from the castle from which you had previously ruled.

As I wrote here previously, I noticed about a week ago that I had been harshly and inexplicably downgraded in Google’s index for several keywords, a move that effectively cut my traffic from the search engine by half. This, of course, upset me, because I had worked very diligently to write quality content –content that has been linked to by thousands of blogs and websites — only to have my authority whisked away in such a short span of time.

Over the next few days, I began exchanging emails with SEO expert and friend Stephen Ward. He determined that Google bots were able to still crawl my website and therefore theorized that I was experiencing something called “Google Dance,” which means that as Google updates its algorithm websites tend to get thrown through a loop. He advised me to sit still and eventually the dust would settle and my posts would rank well once again.

Well, Stephen emailed me today with confirmation that Google has completed a major algorithm change, and that I shouldn’t be surprised if this trend continues for a long time. For whatever reason, Google has likely thrown me into a hole that I will have to somehow slowly crawl out of.

So how harsh was this downgrading that I experienced? As I wrote to Stephen in an email:

For instance, let’s return to my name “Simon Owens.” There is no doubt in my mind that based off the thousands of links that bloggasm has gotten, many with the anchor text of my name, I am the most prominent Simon Owens on the internet, and of my different websites (my livejournal, an old livejournal account, and bloggasm), Bloggasm has seen by far the most links with that anchor text. Why then is it ranked third, when obviously anyone searching my name would most likely be looking for Bloggasm? Why is it ranked behind a livejournal account I haven’t updated regularly since 2005, one that probably hasn’t seen any fresh links in that amount of time? It’s absolutely silly.

Since Bloggasm was first created, I have had my posts linked to by over a dozen of Technorati’s 100 most popular blogs on the internet. I’ve made it onto the front page of both Digg and Reddit. I’ve been interviewed and featured in articles in The Washington Post, ABC News, and several other major news outlets. I’m currently ranked within the top 10,000 on Technorati.

And on top of all this, I produce a good bit of original content. I actually conduct original research and publish feature-length articles — all in my spare time.

But despite all this, despite the fact that I don’t engage in any questionable website practices (selling links, link exchanges, spamming other websites with links), Google has for some reason determined that many of my posts aren’t worthy of a decent ranking.

It’s absolutely maddening when you really think about it. All false modesty aside (and obviously I’m biased on this), Google’s new algorithm change has actually weakened its search results in regard to this website. There is absolutely no excuse for why Bloggasm should come up in third place, behind a livejournal that hasn’t been updated or linked to in years, when you Google my name.

So in an effort to spread whatever Google love this front page may still have, here are some links to original articles I wrote for this site — articles that gathered tons of links and should have plenty of authority but sadly don’t:

1. Youeditor: Anthology Builder and the self-selected table of contents

2. Tor Books to offer social networking, original short fiction and nonfiction online — this was one of the posts that were harshly downgraded, despite the fact that it was linked to on BoingBoing and dozens of other websites.

3. The rise of the genre ezine: Will it ever find a profitable model?

4. Is journalist burnout on the rise? — this article got harshly downgraded despite the fact that it was linked to by Romenesko and dozens of other websites.

5. Readership of major liberal blogs declined in 2007 while conservative blog readership increased — this post was harshly downgraded despite the fact that it was linked to by some of the most popular blogs on the internet, including Andrew Sullivan, Think Progress, Little Green Footballs, Crooks and Liars, Newsbustors, Salon.com. Are you getting the point yet how fucking stupid this algorithm shift has been?

6. The Dawkins Effect: How The God Delusion mainstreamed atheism — this one was harshly downgraded even though it was linked to by at least two A-list blogs and dozens of smaller ones.

7. Harriet Klausner: the publishing industry’s secret weapon?

8. The Sideways offensive: Will Merlot sales ever recover?

9. The Million Writers Award: raising the profile of online literary journals — this one doesn’t even come up first if you google the words “Bloggasm” and “million writers award” in the search field. Pathetic.

10. When “webscabs” unite: Celebrating International Pixel-Stained Technopeasant Day

11. The Creative Commons Confound: Whether releasing your book for free will help boost your sales — this one, like all the others, was harshly downgraded despite the fact that it got linked to by dozens of sites and at least two A list blogs.

Well there you have it. Thanks a lot Google for rewarding my hours of hard work and thousands of links with the ranking I deserve.

I actually got a chance today to comb through my RSS feeds at length, so for once you might find some of these links to not be a week out of date. Either way, here are some media-related links for your amusement.

1. I’ve long said that the reporting on the demise of the newspaper industry rarely contains any real context because it tends to ignore the journalism industry as a whole. Though newspapers are laying off reporters, we’re seeing an increase in the number of journalists who either blog full-time or write for other online venues for a living. Gawker has published a chart of newspaper revenue over the last few decades and as you’ll see it adds even more context to the equation. Chris Anderson explains the chart at length.

2. Here is a brilliant account of the tension and parasitic relationship that website owners have with Google. Considering I’m experiencing my own falling out period with Google right now, the piece rang especially true for me. I’ll probably have a longer post on this later.

3. I’ve noticed that hard-core Digg users have formed odd, cyclical alliances with certain political figures or themes. At first, you couldn’t visit the social bookmarking site without coming across a pro- Ron Paul story. Then it was nonstop pro- Obama articles. Now, on a slightly related and perhaps more bizarre note, we’re seeing intense anti-Clinton articles making it to the front page. Here is a good example. How do these trends begin, and why do they suddenly end for a new tide of political stories?

4. I don’t find Maureen Dowd funny at all, but this post explaining her writing sure made me laugh.

5. It’s kind of neat when every now and then we get to see a Gawker Media blogger go and bite the hand that feeds him by attacking his own boss on the blog. You don’t see things like that in traditional media outlets. Look here to see a Valleywag contributor complain and viciously attack his boss for a new round of pay cuts.

6. There have been a number of news stories showing that CNN has been winning the ratings game against Fox News, something that would have been unthinkable two years ago. I have a love/hate relationship with cable news, but when I do tune in I usually stick with MSNBC.

7. A South Carolina senator is proposing a tax surcharge on purchased pornography, saying that the money should go toward managing sex offenders. Because we all know the completely made up connections between looking at porn and going on to become a sex offender.

It is not uncommon for pundits to try and develop scientific ways of measuring bias in the media. These methods, of course, are usually rife with logical leaps and aren’t really scientific at all.

But today I stumbled upon an article published in a mainstream news source that used a particularly stupid methodology of detecting a media slant. John R. Lott, Jr, writing at FOXNews.com, offered this as proof that the media only reported on bad economic news when there was a Republican president in office:

A Google search on news stories during the three-month period from July 2000 through September 2000 using the keywords “economy recession US” produces 1,610. By contrast, the same search over just the last month finds 50,763. Or, even more telling, take the three months from July through September last year, when the GDP was growing at a phenomenal 4.9 percent. The same type of Google search shows 7,310 news stories.

Now Lott gives us very little information on how these Google searches were conducted (the few links he provides to the supposed searches are complete gibberish), but anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the internet can immediately spot the inanity of such figures.

I mean, c’mon. He counted the number of news sources in 2000 and compared them to 2007? Do you have any idea how many blogs and websites are currently indexed in Google News?? Of course there are 50 times the number of “news stories” that use those keywords today; it’s because there are thousands more websites that exist today (it’s not very difficult to get a blog listed in Google News) that were non-existent in 2000.

Unless there is some way that he conducted his Google search that only examined the exact same news sources, FOXNews.com should publish a correction with that story, since it is using incredibly bogus numbers to prove a point.

UPDATE: I figured out exactly how his bogus Google searches were done because I was able to reproduce the figures above perfectly. Basically he ran those search terms through Google News and clicked on “past month” for one of the searches and then on the second search clicked on “other dates” and typed in 7/2000 and 9/2000. This means that the numbers he used are complete and utter BS. Fox News needs to run a correction.

The problem with Googlebombs (an “Internet slang for a certain kind of attempt to influence the ranking of a given page in results returned by the Google search engine, often with humorous or political intentions”) is that sometimes the website that is being Googlebombed gets unfairly punished.

Blogger Jon Swift highlights an instance when a page from his website was removed from the Google index because of Google bomb attempts from others.

1. The greatest science fiction porn of all time

2. I’ve heard of elaborate Facebook pranks, and I’ve reported on some here, but I think if you manage to trick the entire French media into believing your prank then you get to take home the gold medal.

3. I use Google as much as the next person, but let’s face it, their algorithm has some serious flaws.

4. A former editor for The New Republic has died. Luckily for him, he stopped working there when the magazine still had some credibility.

5. Why you shouldn’t exercise to indie rock

6. When I heard that The Virginia Pilot was for sale (Disclaimer: I work for a competing newspaper), the last thing I was expecting was for Pat “700 club” Robertson to consider buying it.

7. Some interesting Twitter messages that have emerged from the presidential press bus.

8. The blogosphere increases its influence on the 2008 presidential election.

Here are some media-related links for your amusement:

1. “Journalist escapes death by machetes” — Best headline ever.

2. If you’re a police officer and decide to arrest a guy who is holding a camera and/or a reporter’s notebook, you better make sure you’re arresting him for a good reason. Because that guy is likely a journalist, which means he can open up a whole can of worms if you screw up.

3. Charles Darwin wrote The Origin of Species. xkcd wrote The Origin of Ron Paul Supporters.

4. Oh look, Google has come up with another idea for how to squeeze as much creative juice out of its employees as possible.

5. In yet another sign that the sex industry is going mainstream, Adult Entertainment Expo seminars will be open to porn fans for the first time this week in Las Vegas.

6. I agree with James Fallows. Bill Kristol’s first op-ed at The New York Times is so bland, uninteresting and badly written that I couldn’t even begin to get angry at the actual content of the piece.

7. The New Yorker, my favorite magazine, has a new publisher because of a shake-up at Conde Nast.

8. This is pretty cool. It’s a blog written by a long-dead soldier, the entries written exactly 90 years ago.

9. Speaking of The New Yorker, they published a long feature article this week about how Google is trying to strengthen its influence in DC.

Ok, I was going to wait off another day or two before posting some new links, but some of these are starting to get outdated and will be old news by Friday. So here are some media-related links for your enjoyment.

1. Many of us can remember a time when the only widely-used browser was Netscape, but I almost completely forgot Netscape existed until I read that it’s pretty much closing up shop.

2. Sites like Technorati and Bloglines are notorious for being shut down for hours at a time because of errors and maintenance, but they weren’t the only sites in 2007 to have major outages.

3. Let’s say you’re a striking writer entering a high-class bar after a long day of picketing, and inside the bar are the very producers you’re striking against. There’s only one word to describe your situation: AWKWAAAARRRDDD

4. If you live in Australia and want to look at internet porn, make sure you ask your government nicely first.

5. The New York Times proves in one fell swoop that god is dead. More about their stupid decision over here.

6. Paul E. Steiger writes a departing column for the Wall Street Journal, one in which he pines for the golden days of journalism. This one is actually more entertaining than your normal OMG-newspapers-are-dying column that has become ubiquitous over the past year.

7. Remember that cute girl that sang a song about Digg.com? Well, it looks like her internet fame might result in her getting a record deal.

8. Kudos to Chelsea Clinton for telling a 9-year-old bitch to shove it. For all she knows, that young journalist was a Helen Thomas in training.

9. I can just picture the Gawker Media advertising staff groaning in unison when they found out that they’d have to sell advertising for a…wait for it…blog about science fiction. Something tells me this isn’t a profitable niche.

10. Maybe Tucker Carlson isn’t a gonner after all.

11. Ten obscure Google tricks you didn’t know about.