We know that for sometime John Chow is not ranking even for his own name in Google. It maybe due to anything he has done wrong in eyes of Google. But question is Shouldn't he rank for his name in Google? He may have done wrong but a searcher looking for John Chow in Google expect his website on first page {actually 1st spot}. But by not doing so Google is not losing its own credibility? This may be a war {very small} between John Chow vs Google. John Chow is losing lot of traffic from Google. But what Google is doing by not showing his website on first spot? What you think about it?
Err john isn't losing that much traffic, he said he only received around 150 for the term make money online.
Google is doing this manually because they want to warn us so in the end no one will buy links again. They want to detect paid links with their algorithm, so they warn all webmasters via john chow's case. John chow is famous, that's why google chose him. Nothing wrong with them, I think. Because we all watching everyone buying links everywhere and in competitive keywords, an "usual" website can ranked well above a good website (who unfortunately they are pathetic in promotion). Google didn't want to lose in SE wars, that's why they are doing this. They just want the best result for everyone who are using google. Remember, almost all people are using google if they want to search for something. So google just want the best return for all people. I think google are worrying about the "links business", maybe they predicted everyone will only depend on paid links in the future and forget about their own content. However, if there is a saying "content is king, backlink is queen", but with paid links, "backlink is king, content? As long as not below standard, it's ok." Google want to change this future. For me, google want us to improve our content so google users will be satisfied in their "googling". That's why they want to detect paid links as soon as possible. This is my opinion.
Well first G does not rule the net and neither does John Chow, but they both have brands to market & protect, the loser so far has to be G as they are the fat cat, and as such appear to assume that they can act similar to a government by blocking access etc etc John Chow is the little guy and I am sure all this free publicity is in fact helping his business considerably To answer the question about G if they do not rank his name then that is providing a dis-service to G surfers as they cannot access a very popular site because of this block The longer it goes on the more support the underdog will get
I don't think that this is done by manually , they may apply the penalty manually but it is not a full manual process , if it was so they can select the rankings but they apply a penalty and the site ranks at the bottom for all the search terms. This is the opposite of a nickname being more popular than the word it self. Google may lose credibility in our eyes but the boss is the searchers , we are the workers.
Question is that.. Isn't it failure of Google that its 'not' ranking the site for which user 'search' ????
Yes this is a problem , with this kind of penalty a site ranks nowhere for its terms of search.They should solve this. But this a known problem , in the short run John Chow will lose it , google has the money and the power.
Yes, that's clearly a failure to deliver searches who wants to go to John Chow's blog. You see by hiting that "I'm feeling lucky" button sends searches to a different site.
Who cares? Questions is shouldn't google give his website on top spot when a 'searcher' search for 'John Chow'. It internal fight between Google and John Chow. But common searcher should not suffer from bad results. He may be dropped for 'make money online' but he shouldn't be dropped for 'John Chow' keyword otherwise Google is playing EVIL on its own side. If tomorrow for some personality and you find it hard to search in Google then you can think that it may be result of Google's penalty. Google PENALTY shouldn't effect SEARCHERS. {USER of Google}
I think Google should be allowed to do what they are doing. It is their business after all. Google can ban domains from the engine. Just like Digg bans domain names, directories ban websites, men banned from womens gyms, China banning almost every website on the net. We can ban Google spider from coming to our sites, why cant Google ban websites from being listed on their search engine?
Google is not a public service company; it’s a business out there to make maximum cash for its investors and stock holders. They can choose to do what they want, if you don’t like their tactics, then you can move on to another search engine. In any case, John Chow is not that big a brand name to cause creditability loss to google. A few webmasters getting pissed due to it is not some thing that is going to effect google, because its customers are not webmasters. And frankly speaking, webmasters can’t really say they don’t care about google, because it’s the largest search engine out there and every one wants free traffic from it. As for John, well he is a bit pissed; however he has managed to turn this situation in his favor. Cleaver marketing on his part, he truly is evil.
It is not a fight between google and john chow but google against paid links, I think So in overall, it is a fight between google and internet business. john chow is the first target because he was in the "frontline". maybe...
He is not the first and he is not going to be the last, just that he is evil enough to highlight the whole situation in a manner that shows him as a victim of a large corporation's lust to dictate the world!
I think "Evil" is not the right word to use there - put in such a situation, he had two choices - either to give up or to take advantage of... and he chose the latter. So he is "smart".