41 Comments

1. Cynic:

I have noticed that LGF uses Google for searches which have not been very effective in my opinion.

Why not change to other search engines?

answers.com was a lot more effective providing the hits in descending date order; and they have a 1-click search on any word in the page which makes things that much niftier.

Mar 22, 2005 - 10:18 am 2. CERDIP:

ditto.

Mar 22, 2005 - 10:20 am 3. erp:

Putting your money where you mouth is. Good for you.

I’ve been using Google for so long I’ve forgotten how to function without it, but I’m willing to try. What search engine would you recommend?

Also how to go about letting them know why I won’t be using them anymore?

Mar 22, 2005 - 10:27 am 4. Roger:

This is not a function of their search engine, of course, but of Google News, which hand picks their sites. (Search engine is automatic.) Still, maybe it is time to use other search engines.

Mar 22, 2005 - 10:30 am 5. Godzilla:

Via Michelle Malkin, this is what was is in one of Google’s caches about the shooter (jeff weise):

Link

Mar 22, 2005 - 10:34 am 6. Eye Doc:

I’ve removed mine as well.

Mar 22, 2005 - 11:05 am 7. Silicon valley Jim:

Also how to go about letting them know why I won’t be using them anymore?

press@google.com will get a message to their public relations department.

Mar 22, 2005 - 11:07 am 8. Daddy's Roommate:

Now if you could just get rid of Creepy Floorhumper over there…why is that guy on so many blogs?

Barney Frank/ROsie O’Donnell in ‘08!!!

Mar 22, 2005 - 11:09 am 9. Eric Deamer:

It’s interesting to note how few comments there are on any of these foreign policy or media criticism posts versus the number on the Schiavo post. Give the people what they want Roger! Join everyone else and go all Schiavo all the time! If blogging is indeed like rapping then the Schiavo case is Fiddy, The Game, and Eminem all combined.

Mar 22, 2005 - 11:24 am 10. C.Y.:

I dropped mine as well, mostly becuase of Google News and its apparent bias, but also becuase ot their inability to keep decidedly liberal anti-Bush ads off my blog, which is conservative in nature.

I hope enough blogs do this to make it hurt.

Mar 22, 2005 - 11:40 am 11. Roger:

To be clear, unlike C. Y., my removing Google Ads had nothing to do with the political POV of those ads, if any. I welcome ads from all sides. They are, after all, labelled as advertising and should be recognized as such by readers. My reasons for removing Google Ads are listed in the the post above.

Mar 22, 2005 - 11:48 am 12. Terrye:

I never used google that much until I started using mozilla and then it was just there.

Don’t worry Eric she will be dead soon enough nad then everyone can forget about her.

Mar 22, 2005 - 12:13 pm 13. Jason A. Lefkowitz:

“I never used google that much until I started using mozilla and then it was just there.”

Terrye,

Mozilla/Firefox actually comes with a bunch of search engines — Google is the default but you can choose from others too.

Just click the little “Google” logo in the search box and you’ll see the list of installed engines you can switch over to.

And if you don’t like any of the ones it comes with, you can add new ones — there are search plugins for hundredds of sites now, like Amazon, Ebay, Wikipedia, etc.

Once you check out how flexible that little search box is, you will be pretty amazed at what it lets you do!

Mar 22, 2005 - 12:32 pm 14. ahem:

It’s too bad that companies like Microsoft and Google — which are originally innovative and appealing — always seem to morph into large, overbearing, obnoxious monoliths that find a way to outwear their welcome. It must be an unwritten law of business.

I’ve been looking for a google replacement for the last couple of weeks but haven’t found anything I prefer. Hey, you programmers out there! The time is ripe…

Mar 22, 2005 - 12:37 pm 15. Katherine:

Terrye,

I personally like A9 (that is Amazonís web search eangine). Just follow Jasonís instructions and can find it there.

Mar 22, 2005 - 12:39 pm 16. Wallace:

Creepy Floorhumper over there

Really, who needs Google ads when ya got an ex-con showin’ ya how to lose weight with squat thrusts.

Mar 22, 2005 - 12:42 pm 17. WAmom:

I think I have the answer to Google News problems. Try FINDORY.COM . It takes the same feeds as Google News, but brings you the articles/posts you should be most interested in, based on your previous reading. Even better, it covers all bloggers with RSS feeds. This new personalization technology is really neat, requires no registration and keeps your preferences private because all are stored only on your computer.

Mar 22, 2005 - 12:54 pm 18. Joe Schmoe:

I actually ordered two of Creepy Floorhumper’s products. Surprisingly, they are excellent. I wrestled and did martial arts in my youth, and the author’s exercises are basically more advanced versions of what we used to do at the gym. The author’s web site has a lot of endorsements from respected figures in the martial arts community. Someone who has never been into martial arts wouldn’t recognize them, but these “celebrity testimonials” persuaded me to give the whole thing a try and I am glad I did.

The guy who runs these ads is a self-published author who has expended a great deal of effort finding old “strongman” calesthenics from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The sort of things that used to be taught by Charles Atlas, etc. Interestingly, they do work. The “Farmer Burns” deep breathing and stomach flattening exercise is fantastic and has, in fact, improved my digestion.

It may sound crazy — actually, I guess it does sound crazy — but the exercises do work. Don’t be put off by the fact that the author lays the marketing hype on with a trowel; the results speak for themselves. I am actually thinking ordering the flexibility videos now!

Mar 22, 2005 - 1:05 pm 19. Rob:

I had my own run-in with Google. I went there one day and saw the headline:

Negroponte Joins Dark Power Shaddows

More here (including a screen shot to show I’m not making this up).

They really need to clean up their act

Mar 22, 2005 - 2:24 pm 20. fubar:

I ditched Google and have been very pleased with Microsoft’s new search engine. It’s a beta version, but I was very impressed not only with the search results (which I compared against a Google search) but also because it integrates a desktop search which has been an enormous time saver. The other search engine I would recommend is actually a meta search engine - dogpile.com. They pool the results from several search engines (including Google) and give you the results by search engine or overall relevance. I like it to go by search engine and see how the other engines do relative to Google.

Rest assured, there will be more competition in the future - Microsoft thinks its a threat to their operating system so they are putting big bucks into a competitor.

Mar 22, 2005 - 3:50 pm 21. David Thomson:

I think itís safe to guess that the top executives at Google are predominantly liberal. Most of those earning a living in this particular industry are downright hostile toward main stream conservatism. Why would Google highlight a Nazi blog? Do they believe the Nazis deserve a ìfair hearing.î It seems that many well meaning people fail to understand what the First Amendment demands. We are obligated to allow those who disagree with us politically the right to utter their views. However, we do not owe them a soapbox!

Mar 22, 2005 - 4:15 pm 22. acassa:

I ditched google too. I’ve noticed that their search results are just really far behind on being updated.

I started using Yahoo - so far I really like their search engine - but I’m still looking around at others.

Cynic - thanks for the pointer to answers.com

Mar 22, 2005 - 4:19 pm 23. Dishman:

I started using AltaVista back when DEC owned it. I’ve generally been happy with the results.

As for Google, maybe VNN is their idea of “the right”, never mind that they call themselves Socialists and otherwise sound to me like lefties. If this is Google’s idea of balance…

Mar 22, 2005 - 4:22 pm 24. robertsq:

Most of the data that Google AdSense does not disclose is due to its efforts to avoid scammers. Before you stomp off in a huff, you may want to log into some of the webmaster discussion groups and read up on AdSense. Between the people who hire companies in India to click on the ads on their sites, the people who try to get their competitors kicked out of AdSense by repeatedly clicking on their ads to make it look like their competitors are scammers, and the people who click on their competitors ads to increase their expenses, there are all kinds of things that Google has to address to keep things on the up-an-up. Part of their strategy is withholding information that could be useful to scammers–the same way the U.S. is now taking information off the net that would be useful to terrorrists. This is a moving target, and recently Google has increased disclosure on a couple of items in its reports. At any rate, if you check out the webmaster discussion groups (e.g., webmasterworld) you will find plenty of explanation and discussion of this, and staff from Google participate and act as ombudsmen.

The people in the comments above who are boycotting AdSense slay me: I bet their blogs don’t get enough traffic to make any money anyway. I have a fairly high traffic non-blog site, and my advertising income is relatively significant. I don’t really care about Google’s margin; I do care about AdSense’s payment per impression relative to affiliate advertising, direct advertisers, and other options available to me, and it compares very well. I don’t feel ripped off at all. And I think the interface controls and reporting is much better than the competition.

Mar 22, 2005 - 5:17 pm 25. asher:

Roger, good move. I’m boycotting [originally mistyped "goycotting" but maybe that works too] Google. I’ve been leaning toward Yahoo for a while anyway; I generally get better results with them.

Plus, my blog generally ranks higher on Yahoo. If that isn’t proof of Yahoo’s inherent superiority, then I don’t know what is.

Mar 22, 2005 - 5:28 pm 26. Roger:

Sorry, robertsq, no sale.

Let’s start with this. I wrote Google for information on how they were splitting revenues with me and they refused to tell me. I am in a business relationship with them, not the lottery.

Then I discover Google News is linking to a website that espouses hate as “news” agency. You can read about that link here, if you’re interested….

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/03/22/hate

Then come back and defend Google News.

Mar 22, 2005 - 6:02 pm 27. richard mcenroe:

Hey. c’mon, Roger, a little perspective here… you’re just the content provider. Take your two percent like a man… (why yes, I used to work for Ace Books, how could you tell?)

Mar 22, 2005 - 7:10 pm 28. Manco_Dollars:

I think it’s a conspiracy against LGF. They use the Nazi web site for a news source, then there this big brouhaha and then they will say “ok let’s use the other racist sites like LGF as news sources”, so they can try to tar LGF as racist site.

Mar 22, 2005 - 9:05 pm 29. Ed Minchau:

Richard McEnroe:

Suppose that I am an ad provider, and I agree to pay you a percentage of ad revenue in exchange for my use of your bandwidth on your site. Suppose further that you ask me how much of a percentage I will pay, and rather than saying “2 percent” or some such, I refuse to tell you. Can I advertise on your site?

Well, that’s what Google has done with Roger. Had they said 2 percent, 1 percent, 1/1000th of a percent, then at least he would have had an answer. But they refuse to tell him.

My site doesn’t get enough hits to make ads worthwhile, but if I was in Roger’s situation I would do the same thing.

Mar 22, 2005 - 10:36 pm 30. Eye Doc:

I neglected to include my url so I’m commenting again on the same subject. As someone earlier said, some of the blogs doing this (mine included) are not high traffic. But, it’s just a question of doing what you believe is right. I’m also removing the Google search box.

Mar 23, 2005 - 4:42 am 31. paleocon:

Re: Katherine March 22, 2005 12:39 PM:

For what it’s worth, I’m also using A9, and it seems to work as well as Google, although it’s early days yet. Besides being able to install it in your Firefox search window, you can also install it in your Internet Explorer toolbar. Just click the Toolbar link on the home page and follow the instructions:

http://a9.com/-/home.jsp?src=a9&nc=1

Mar 23, 2005 - 5:17 am 32. paleocon:

Forgot to mention, it will ask you to register using your Amazon data, but said registration is not required. There will be about three functions you can’t use if you don’t, but they seem to be functions I don’t need.

Mar 23, 2005 - 5:21 am 33. Hoodlumman:

Manual Trackback

In a move of solidarity with Roger L. Simon, Google Ads have been removed* from this site. I agree whole-heartedly with him and LGF’s complaints. FIU patrons can do without, for the meantime.

File it under

Mar 23, 2005 - 6:16 am 34. triticale:

I feel left out. I don’t have the traffic to have ever bothered with ads, and the search function is a cgi script on the mu.nu server. Oh well, I’m with you in spirit.

Mar 23, 2005 - 6:23 am 35. richard mcenroe:

Ed… bit of a writer’s in-joke there. Gotta remember to post my irony tags…

Mar 23, 2005 - 7:22 am 36. robertsq:

Roger,

If you’re quitting AdSense as a protest for Google News, that’s one thing.

I was responding simply on the basis of your point about the lack of transparency. You make an analogy between Google AdSense and your book agent’s contract. There are many areas of business where such disclosure does not exist. Does your accountant disclose his overhead to you? Does Wal-Mart tell you their cost of goods sold? Google considers its take to be confidential and there’s nothing particularly unbusinesslike about that. (You could visit the SEC Edgar site and try to reverse engineer their 10-Q if you’re really interested in what they make from AdSense.)

As for the lottery aspect, it’s a given for auction-style pricing, and it would be no less of a lottery if you knew Google’s percentage, since the thing that Google (and you) take a percentage of fluctuates based on moment-to-moment market demand. The reporting interface for AdSense lets you track this on a pretty close to real-time basis if you wish. Most people just follow their monthly average payment per click, and if it shows a downward trend versus some other advertiser, they change advertisers.

Mar 23, 2005 - 7:28 am 37. Paul in NJ:

Google is sleazy in its advertising practices.

Here’s something else that’s sleazy: Google’s AdSense lets advertisers buy keywords that call up the ads when you type in certain search terms. Those keywords include registered trademarks.

Enter any brand name product you can think of, and ads pop up to cash in on it.

This practice isn’t kosher in the real world. On the web it’s currently a gray area in the law, but ultimately I think Google (and other search engines which do the same thing) will lose.

Mar 23, 2005 - 7:58 am 38. Lonewacko:

I’m with robertsq 99%.

Here’s more about what google is faced with. See, for instance, the bit about the a$bestos blog. Or, see this: He’s basically making money off increasing the useless noise on the Internet.

Mar 23, 2005 - 11:32 am 39. Ray:

I really liked Google News in the first few days it was available. The search engine automatically picked everything, including what was “news”. Guess what happened? Most of the interesting stuff came from non-mainstream sites. I imagine a lot of people complained that that wasn’t what they expected, and slowly it morphed into an aggregator for “official” news sites.

What a shame. It was much better when the sites were just picked for content by an automatic algorithm.

Mar 23, 2005 - 11:36 am 40. saurab:

hey you were talking about removing google ads from your weblog … I still see them …. hmmm makes me think !

Mar 29, 2005 - 8:00 am 41. CodeMonkeyMike:

They consider Landover Baptist to be news.. Personally, I think that takes the cake any day over what y’all are objecting to.

Apr 6, 2005 - 6:41 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: