Does Google's Information Box Seem Shady to you?
-
So I just had this thought, Google returns information boxes for certain search terms. Recently I noticed one word searches usually return a definition.
For example if you type in the word "occur" or "happenstance" or "frustration" you get a definition information box. But what I didn't see is a reference to where they are getting or have gotten this information.
Now it could very well be they built their own database of definitions, and if they did great, but here is where it seems a bit grey to me... Did Google hire a team of people to populate the database, or did they just write an algorithm to comb a dictionary website and stick the information in their database. The latter seems more likely.
If that is what happened then Google basically stole the information from somebody to claim it as their own, which makes me worry, if you coin a term, lets say "lumpy stumpy" and it goes mainstream which would entail a lot of marketing, and luck. Would Google just add it to its database and forgo giving you credit for its creation?
From a user perspective I love these information boxes, but just like Google expects us webmasters to do, they should be giving credit where credit is due... don't you think?
I'm not plugged in to the happenings of Google so maybe they bought the rights, or maybe they bought or hold a majority of shares in some definition type company (they have the cash) but it just struck me as odd not seeing a reference to a site. What are your thoughts?
-
Hi Saijo,
Absolutely! in fact that is exactly what I was looking for in the Information Box, I wanted to see the source of the definition. When citing a source it feels like it would look better to cite Merriam Webster rather then Google, if that makes any sense. But perhaps Google is aware of that perception and this is an effort to change it.
I know there is a difference between Snippets and the Information Box or I think Google calls it "Knowledge Graph", but when I didn't see a source my wheels started turning. I really like the Snippets as you and EGOL point out, they are extremely helpful and can be a valuable source of traffic.
Thanks guys for your thoughts,
Don
-
I have a few pages that rank with featured snippet and they bring in a lot of traffic to the site. I think that even though Google displays the content in the SERP, people click through to these sites.
-
Those boxes do not seem shady do me. I don't know where Google got those definitions. There are plenty of ways as you mentioned... license them, purchase ownership, public domain, hire authors... In all of those cases they can have an "ability" or even a "right" to display them without attribution.
I am sure that these definitions have really damaged the dictionary publishers who used to get a lot more traffic from the SERPs before these boxes started to appear. Other publishers have been hit by these types of innovations by Google, map, calculator, unit convesioin, etc.
What I don't like is Google's flagrant disregard for copyright. Most notable was their books project in which they scanned and gave free access online to millions of books often without regard to their copyright status (public domain, in copyright but out-of-print, in copyright and in-print). Google did this with premeditated strategies and tactics to claim "fair use". Google's publication of these books is not as convenient to use as a hard copy or digital file but lots of people can get information that they need from someone's intellectual property without the need to buy it.
One thing that I do like is featured snippets. These allow webmasters who know how to be placed in them an ability to gain topSERPs position for very difficult queries without the need to battle in the organic SERPs. The featured snippets often go to Wikipedia, but frequently go to other websites. Featured snipped for surety bond.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Will Russia's New Data Protection Law Impact SEOs and SMBs Outside of Russia?
We've all seen the news recently that Google will be closing its engineering offices in Russia due to new data protection laws coming into place in January 2015. The same law has also led to Adobe pulling out of Russia earlier in the year. I was wondering how you think this will impact SEOers and small/medium businesses that market _to _Russia, but are based outside of the country? Personal data has been defined in the new legislation as: Personal data means any information directly or indirectly related to any identified or potentially identifiable person. It includes, among other things, first name and family name, date and place of birth, address, information about family status, education, profession, income Source For those businesses which don't process personal data (affiliates etc), will there be any foreseeable impact? On the flipside, are there any benefits here for affiliate businesses inside of Russia? I'm using affiliates as an example to get the ball rolling, but I'm sure there's numerous more. Personally, I'd be interested to hear if you think this may impact corporate websites which don't process personal data, but operate outside of Russia.
Algorithm Updates | | ecommercebc0 -
Big hit taken on Google Search in Jan - Any Ideas?
Hello, I manage a news site that gets new items posted daily. We had had a pretty even keel with Google search and ranking for some time now only on the 9th Jan we took a massive drop and have no recovered except for one big spike on the 29th January. The only think we had done differently was not post as much over Christmas for about a week as people were on holiday but if this was the reason for it the posting is back to normal now and has been since the 6th Jan and nothing has recovered. The site is wjlondon.com - any ideas greatly appreciated. Thank you
Algorithm Updates | | luwhosjack0 -
Changes in Google "Site:" Search Algorithm Over Time?
I was wondering if anyone has noticed changes in how Google returns 'site:' searches over the past few years or months. I remember being able to do a search such as "site:example.com" and Google would return a list of webpages where the order may have shown the higher page rank pages (due to link building, etc) first and/or parent category pages higher up in the list of the first page (if relevant) first (as they could have higher PR naturally, anyways). It seems that these days I can hardly find quality / target pages that have higher page rank on the first page of Google's site: search results. Is this just me... or has Google perhaps purposely scrambled the SERPS somewhat for site: searches to not give away their page ranking secrets?
Algorithm Updates | | OrionGroup1 -
Why Am I Ranking in Bing but Not Google
My website is ranking is ranking in Bing, but it's nowhere to be found on Google? What can be some causes for this?
Algorithm Updates | | locallyrank0 -
Google automatically adding company name to serp titles
Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I was surprised to see that Google had algorithmically modified my page titles in the search results by adding the company name to the end of the (short) title. <title>About Us</title> became About Us - Company Name Interestingly, this wasn't consistent - sometimes it was "company name Limited" and sometimes just "company name. Anyone else notice this or is this a recent change?
Algorithm Updates | | DougRoberts0 -
New linkbuilding: If networks are useless, and I need high volume through a 1-man team, what's the best option?
I work for an online retailer, and we have thousands of product pages and our vertical for content is brutal -- half of them are owned by our competitors. Are there any new linkbuilding strategies that can be done through a 1-man team? I'm not talking about bots or traditional link networks. Our current strat revolves around the following: 1. Link prospecting through buzzstream tools and singular contacts 2. Finding bloggers/vloggers, sending product and having them send backlinks to our homepage level with their reviews (slow turnaround, low juice). 3. Syndicating our videos through multiple avenues. 4. Being active on social. We need to gain more authority outside of simple content building. Are there any alternatives to link networks to optimize build outs via a 1-man team? Many thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | eugeneku0 -
If we are getting clicks from a local one box as a citation in the serps's would we see this as the referrer in GA?
If we are getting clicks from a local one box as a citation in the serps's
Algorithm Updates | | Mediative
would we see this as the referrer in GA?0