Salon is running a front page story titled The Google Backlash (that's the single page printable version) in which I'm quoted heavily.

(BTW, I love the Google muscle image on the first page. That cracks me up.)

Who'd have thought that my complaints about PageRank would get that sort of attention.

Heh. Don't worry. Blogs are still just a fad, right? :-)

At least that's what I keep hearing... We'll see. There's a heck of a lot of momentum here right now. But we all remember what happened to push technology, right?

Posted by jzawodn at June 25, 2003 03:39 PM

Reader Comments
# Gerald Steffens said:

Great, though I had to pay a big price in order to see your part of the story - I had to view the Ultramercial ;-) The price for your famousness is even higher - your blog has been dropped once more for the keyword "jeremy". Keep cool, don't bother about Pagerank and Rankings, at the moment Google doesn't get Googles point.

on June 25, 2003 05:05 PM
# Jeremy Zawodny said:

Yeah, I "watched" the ad on Linux so was probably spared most of it.

It almost seems like someone at Google read the story and then thought, "hey... we can fix that!" :-)

I guess this further serves to reinforce my point?

on June 25, 2003 05:16 PM
# kasia said:

Google search for my name keeps fluctuating between my main page and my blog.. it's funny.

on June 25, 2003 08:59 PM
# Danny Sullivan said:

It's entirely unclear that Google's ranking of your home page over your blog page in a search for "jeremy" shows any sign that it is "retarded," as you put it in your original post on the matter.

Your home page is about you personally and does a much better job of describing who you are as opposed to your blog, which covers a variety of topics.

As for speculation that Google is targeting blog links, that's a blog-specific attitude. There's a range of links that Google may wish to weight differently, because of the changing nature of links period.

When Google first developed its link analysis system (of which PageRank is the popularity component, not the entire system which also take context into account), it's fair to say that blog content was minimal and interlinking probably not noticable.

That's not the case now, and it can have an impact on results -- though from my perspective, generally still only on fairly unusual queries (of which "jeremy" would be).

In addition to blogs, we also have a greater interconnectedness of content networks (Cnet, Yahoo, and so on).

Finally, and most important, is that web site owners and marketers are much more savvy about building links now in hopes of influencing search engine rankings.

There are plenty of people who run non-blog, non-blog connected sites who are reporting changes to their rankings over the past few weeks on Google. So, rather than saying that Google is just targeting blogs, it's more accurate to say it is reassessing how it measures links overall.

And so to return to your original post, you are completely right in the saying that PageRank is showing its age (though what you really mean is link analysis). Google is currently making changes to adjust for this, and it will be interesting to see if it (or the other search engines) will be able to continue to leverage links for better relevancy in the coming years.

on June 26, 2003 02:17 AM
# wil said:

I still maintain that Google's pagerank is now much better and refined in that it gives me your homepage when I search for 'Jeremy'. After all, Jeremy is who I'm searching on, not your thoughts on Linux, open source, Google, etc. -- not that I don't find these thoughs facinating, just that I was actually searching for Jeremy. If I wanted to know your thougths I would search for jeremy blog, or jeremy mysql, jeremy open source and I'm sure your blog would be up there, just as I'd expect.

Another great job, Google.

on June 26, 2003 02:44 AM
# Gerald said:

Fascinating. Jeremy, your pagerank article and the following discussions have drawn so much attention to your blog that even Danny Sullivan from searchenginewatch made a trip to your site in order to give some comments here ;-) Personally I agree in most points with his arguments, but there is one great difference left. IMHO your blog should reside/rank before your homepage, just because of the voting of so many links out there saying that there is something important or interesting behind it. And the more people discuss on jeremy and blogs and pagerank the more links will show up to your blog - all saying "vote for jeremy!". Who defines what is your most important or meaningful page? What happens if you set your blog on your index-page and if you move the old index to a page named "about me" for instance. Would or could google track such a change convincingly? Google is far away from understanding such things, and real live is arbitrarily complex. My vote is for your blog as the most important page - so i call for number one position for your blog :)))))

on June 26, 2003 04:24 AM
# Dan Isaacs said:

At least that story about you and the nurse is still in the top 5 when searching Groups for "Jeremy". ;)

on June 26, 2003 11:36 AM
# Konduct said:

I think "Search Engine Spammer Bites The Hand That Feeds Him" would be the most appropriate title for this article. If he would have only played by the rules.

on June 26, 2003 02:33 PM
# Gerald said:

Currently resides at number 2, the blog at 77 for your ego-ogling. Don't tell me that Google knows what it is doing :)

on June 29, 2003 05:10 AM
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone. My current, past, or previous employers are not responsible for what I write here, the comments left by others, or the photos I may share. If you have questions, please contact me. Also, I am not a journalist or reporter. Don't "pitch" me.


Privacy: I do not share or publish the email addresses or IP addresses of anyone posting a comment here without consent. However, I do reserve the right to remove comments that are spammy, off-topic, or otherwise unsuitable based on my comment policy. In a few cases, I may leave spammy comments but remove any URLs they contain.