Reading an interesting article written by the journalist Carlo Mazzucchelli on Computer Business Review Italy ( Google and too much tailored search ), si evince come stia diventando di dominio pubblico un fatto incontrovertibile: i risultati restituiti dal(i) motore(i) di ricerca sono poco affidabili.

Ma il concetto di affidabile ha, in questa fattispecie, un significato in termini di reale utilità, di confacenza alla realtà e quindi plauso alla verità.

…e questo tanto per iniziare ! 🙂

E’ cosa nota, non a molti, ma ci auguriamo che presto lo diventi, che i primi risultati listati sulla pagina di risposta ad una domanda, dipendono dalle parole chiavi inserite e da come i contenuti offerti dalle varie fonti, siano coerenti secondo l’algoritmo di classificazione del motore di ricerca.

Questo è quello che dovrebbe avvenire e che, theoretically, dovrebbe consentire a diverse fonti INDIPENDENTI, to be able to offer diversified contents and at the same time related to the same topic.

Unfortunately , in a commercial logic, not wrong per se, but if extreme deleterious, who has more “pens and ink” wins the race on the first and second page.

Let me explain: if a subject decided to publish his point of view on a topic “hot” involving a large company or multinational, discovering an incorrect mechanism, he should have an equal chance to see his article ( of which he acknowledges full paternity and therefore assumes all related responsibilities ) inserted in the first results returned by a question on a search engine that takes the form of the name of the company with an abusive adjective, illegal and anti-competitive.

At most, it could be found on the same page, similar results or even an official response from the subject under consideration.

But this does not happen because the former 4 O 5 pages are overrun, seamless , from results that the aforementioned company “offer” to the general public, indexing the contents , obviously misleading, precisely with the search words that unite the name of the company with the words abusive, illegal and anticompetitive.

Moral of the story ( real ): who has more engineers and staff involved in optimizing the indexing of content on the(i) motore(i) of research , shape and pilot the truth at will, literally making news disappear “uncomfortable”.

This is why it is important , under research, not doing what they want to convince us is best: settle for the first result “generously offered” from the search engine.

To have a more realistic view, and therefore useful, you need to compare at least two, if not three different search engines, explore at least the former 10 search pages and avoid giving too much credibility to the first two pages.

…do not take such a great teaching literally ” the last will be the first”, but make a fortune and start doubting….because the doubt, it is the beginning of Wisdom ( Descartes ).