Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
(1999)
More evil than Dr . Evil ? ”
S. Carrière, R. Kazman (1997)
WebQuery: Searching and Visualizing the Web Through ConnectivityComput. Networks, 29
J. Moreno (1948)
The Three Branches of Sociometry: A Postscript, 11
J. Bar-Ilan (2006)
Web links and search engine ranking: The case of Google and the query "jew"J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 57
(2007)
The state of search engine marketing, 2006
(2004)
The changing online landscape: from free-to-all to commercial gatekeeping
(2002)
Localized Google search result exclusions: statement of issues and call for data
(2005)
Google and google bombing now included New Oxford American Dictionary
(1999)
Search engines gang up on Microsoft
(2002)
Google bombs aren’t so scary”, Search Engine Watch, available at: http:// searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page
(2004)
No. 1 Google result for ‘Jew’ is a fanatical hate site – for now
(1999)
Modern Information Retrieval
(2004)
Google says it doesn’t plan to change search results”, The New York Times, April 13, available at: www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/technology/13google.html?ex
(2004)
Quixtar admits Google bombing ”
(2001)
Bush’s dubious victory at Google
L. Katz (1953)
A new status index derived from sociometric analysisPsychometrika, 18
M. Bergman (2000)
The deep web:surfacing the hidden value
A. Yakhnis, Wu Ke (1998)
Searching the world wide WebScience, 280 5360
A. Gulli, A. Signorini (2005)
The indexable web is more than 11.5 billion pages
A. Spink (2011)
Web Search: Public Searching of the Web
(2007)
Google bombs’ defused”, The Real Quixtar Blog, available
Michael Bergman (2000)
The Deep Web : Surfacing Hidden Value
J. Bar-Ilan (2007)
Google Bombing from a Time PerspectiveJ. Comput. Mediat. Commun., 12
(2005)
Googlebombing ‘failure’”, Official Google Blog, available at: http://googleblog
(2007)
Google halts ‘miserable failure’ link to President Bush”, available at: www
(2007)
A quick word about Googlebombs ”
(2002)
Google time bomb. Will weblogs ruin Google’s search engine?
(2002)
Google runs into copyright dispute
G. Pinski, F. Narin (1976)
Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physicsInf. Process. Manag., 12
E. Garfield (1979)
Citation indexing: its theory and application in science
(2006)
An Introduction to Search Engines and Navigation, Addison Wesley, Harlow
(2003)
Foes of Bush enlist Google to make a point ”
S. Brin, Lawrence Page (1998)
The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search EngineComput. Networks, 30
Lucas Introna, H. Nissenbaum (2000)
Shaping the Web: Why the Politics of Search Engines MattersCyberspace Law eJournal
(2007)
How to use HTML meta tags?
Purpose – To investigate how search engine users manipulate the rankings of search results. Search engines employ different ranking methods in order to display the “best” results first. One of the ranking methods is PageRank, where the number of links pointing to the page influences its rank. The “anchor text,” the clickable text of the hypertext link is another “ingredient” in the ranking method. There are a number of cases where the public challenged the Google's ranking, by creating a so‐called “Google bomb” – creating links to pages they wanted to be highly ranked for given query. Google is chosen as the search engine, because it is currently by far the most popular search engine. Design/methodology/approach – PageRank, one of the major parameters of Google's ranking algorithm is described, and the author explains how this algorithm is exploited by communities of users to promote a certain web page for a specific query. This process is called “Google bombing.” Recent reaction of Google to this phenomenon is also described. Findings – Specific examples of “accomplished Google bombs” show that the public is able to manipulate search results. Originality/value – Google, instead of being an unobtrusive information retrieval tool has become highly influential in the web scenery. Some users pay for search engine optimization, while others utilize the power of the crowd to influence Google's rankings. This paper supports the claims of Introna and Nissenbaum regarding the power of search engines.
Journal of Information Communication and Ethics in Society – Emerald Publishing
Published: Oct 19, 2007
Keywords: Information searches; Search engines; Internet
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.