This is an outright awful search result which warrants a post all its own. Is this what you would want to see if you were searching for a “search engine”? Shouldn’t at least some, or even just one (1) of the world’s best search engines appear on this page? https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=search+engine At least Google was different. http://www.bing.com/search?hl=en&q=search+engine http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=sfp&p=search+engine Now we are left with three junky search engines. The best search results actually look to be on GigaBlast.com http://www.gigablast.com/search?q=search+engine At least there is a few good resources listed there (including the three most used search engines, and they’re ranking at the top, exactly where they should be).
Mega search engine “Google” is set to a pay the largest civil penalty ever secured by the FTC for a violation of one of their orders. The $22.5 million fine involves Google’s tracking of users who accessed the Web through Apple’s Safari browser but many claim that the FTC shouldn’t have let Google off so easily as they’ll admit no wrongdoing in the case; so long as they pay the money – essentially allowing the firm to buy its way out of trouble - despite violating a previous agreement signed last year. In October 2011, an FTC settlement with Google “bared the company from future privacy misrepresentations,” and required Google to implement a comprehensive privacy program. While this fine is gargantuan in size, it’s a mere slap on the wrist for the search engine giant whom will pay this debt with revenues generated from a single day of profits (Google generates roughly $133,333,333.00 per day of which about 25% is classified as net income). In addition to paying their ransom of $22.5 million, Google will have to disable tracking cookies – those of which caused their problems in the first place. The allegation suggests that Google placed cookies on the computers of Safari users for several months between 2011 and 2012 without their knowledge. Cookies were served from publishers of Google’s DoubleClick Ad Network which Google had originally claimed were exempt from tracking ability by default settings in Safari’s browser which blocks these cookies on iPhones and iPads as well as
Google’s redesigned Maps for Mobile app has created quite a stir recently. The program changed the way that it serves users local ads. Individual cellular phone users are now expected to click-through ads more often. Phrases like “click to call” have really helped with the click-through rate. Phone users tend to do other things with their mobile devices than merely surf the Internet or run apps. They also use them to place calls and do many of the things that someone would do with a landline telephone. These updates reflect this fact. Cell phone users might very well be more likely to place calls to places of business. Small business owners might be attracted to advertising on the platform for that reason. Social features are also becoming increasingly important with individuals who do regular web searches. Google+ has decided to go above and beyond the norm with this aspect of the service. Google Places for Business listing accounts are an excellent way for businesses to drive extra traffic to their sites. Local listing tabs now present on Google+ are apparently impacting search results. While it doesn’t appear that traditional search engine optimization techniques will be obsolete any time soon, social media has a lot to do with increasing rankings. More importantly, local businesses can use Google+ to reach new clients in their own area. This is better than trying to reach out blindly across the Internet. Traditional local search solutions have been provided by Yelp for some time now. Yelp