A few weeks ago, I
noticed that Google seemed to think that one of my
blog entries is the best match for the search "Schwarzenegger
comments, a crowd of people came to chide me for bashing Google.
I suppose I deserve it, since I've complained
on more than one occasion.
But at that time, I missed the fact that Phillip Winn noticed that removing
the word "for" from the query changes the results.
So let's look at this closely. The first screenshot on the right
enlarge) is from the first search on Google. Notice what I've
circled in red using my high-tech crayon. For those who can't read
it, it says:
"for" is a very common word and was not included in your
then, that removing "for" from the query should produce the same
results. After all, Google is telling me in no uncertain terms that
they're ignoring "for" in my query.
it yourself or look at the second screenshot no the right (click to
enlarge). Notice that the result are different. Yes, I'm still
in the results, but it's a different set of results with a different
order to it. The number of documents matched is even different.
They're not ignoring the word "for" in my query. It clearly
factors into the method they're using to produce those results.
This got me wondering what other lies Google tells? Have you run
Posted by jzawodn at August 21, 2003 11:51 AM
The opinions expressed here are mine and
mine alone. My current
, 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
. Also, I am not a journalist or reporter. Don't "pitch" me.
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
. In a few cases, I may leave spammy comments but remove any
URLs they contain.