Users don't care? I moved to DuckDuckGo probably a couple of years ago and for general search it is just fine—not tracked, and I don't find my web pages for weeks after full of trash adverts of whatever I searched for.

Your choice, and your move, prove that there's a viable free market there. You're not locked in to Google, if you don't like their approach you can walk, and there are viable alternatives there. So what's the problem, really?

The problem is competitors doing all they can to dethrone Google. Google has many detractors... WIRED being one of them. Notice no Google share icon available on this page but there is email and PIN? I mean who shares anything through Pinterest anyway?

That's a competitor problem NOT a Google problem.

You miss the point. The completion sponsors these "STUDIES" It is a normal process when dethroning a product.

I don't find any adverts either.... that's why you need an ad blocker plug-in.

I've been using DuckDuckGo quite a bit recently, but I do find myself going back to Google if I can't find what I'm looking for within a couple clicks.

I tried ddg for a few weeks back in 2012, but just wasn't finding the results I needed from searches.
It seems to be much better now.

You can't really blame Google for doing a job better than any other search engine available, even if they skew the results toward businesses that know now to implement better SEO using the Google services.

What you can do is use Startpage as your search engine. It takes Google results and anonymizes them by hiding the searcher from Google. Thus with no identifiers from the individual Google must serve organic search results. Startpage keeps your searches secret. They don't store any information about you. Thus there will be no big company building a profile of you and your likes and dislikes will be private.

When you use Google directly from your computer or when you sign in to Google pages or properties like Youtube, they know your past search history and try to generate results based on previous searches you've done.

Google definitely seems to be saying "do it my way or suffer the consequences" more and more.

Not at all. If you don't like Google's results there are other search engines. That's not "suffering the consequences" it's exercising the free market. Anyone can walk, at any time, and there are alternatives there for them, so what's the problem?

Certainly Google can do what it wants. I'm looking at it more from a webmaster perspective. I can't change what search engine potential customers use, and Google is of course dominant. So if we want to rank well with Google then we have to play by their rules, which are becoming less and less passive and more and more demanding.

Not at all Google search isn't that much dominant with its result, One would get specific and add relevant result based on ones own history within their G-account and cookie track. In addition that makes it hard to have fresh search unless you hit the gamble button a few times who wants that gamble :) .

And totally different outside of the Google service box depending which browser is use or search engine.
If google ranking play's a role with you're business and it is chosen then yes that business has to play by the rules certainly if one suspect their target customer would use Google search.

Bing users are quiet different then Googlers or Yahoo users for that matter. But I guess that view is wide in anyone vision using their services in their business right?.

92.3% of search engine references to our site are from Google so we would be very unwise to ignore their influence and edicts.
3.3% are from Yahoo
2.8% are from Bing

google has become too big to handle

"The problem with all this is that, generally, even though they are the ones being harmed, consumers don’t care all that much—at least not enough to change their habits." And that's an incisive observation. No one is locked in to Google, anyone can walk whenever they want, and as other comments here prove, there are viable alternatives available. That combination means there is a free market and there is competition in it. That most users choose Google is testament that the value they think they receive, over and above any of the criticisms, is worth it to them. So what's the problem, really?

True most search users have a one sided view about search in general using the dominant search engine, Accept the users who know which search engine targets their specific needs, Yahoo users for shopping ,blend of small and big business media , online gaming and local social happenings, Bing social , education , business etc. Google is good at serving a good plated search result based on what people search the most for and that quiet a big crowd. Which make it natural scary that it knows so much because the information is perfectly tailored to anyone need.

The problem is the one side view that this is just about Google Search and search results, which it isn't. The arguments are that Google is using one service to force out competition in other markets. Video, Shopping ect.

Sure as users we can all jump ship to another search engine. However, from a business perspective businesses can't just leave out Google Search optimization as an option. It would be like telling an app developer if you don't like Apple just develop for Android. You'd be leaving too much market behind.

I agree when it comes to search consumers have choice and since we don't seem to 'care' then we can't truly think we are being harmed. What it boils down to though is whether or not Google's combined services and them using search results to push those other services more and more impacts and hurts competition or our access to better sites and services. In same cases I'm sure it likely does.

Then there is the question:
Where would Yelp be now without Google in the first place? Their complete business was build on traffic from Google SE. They are just greedy and want more. I'd like to see Google banning their whole domain for a month, then see whos still complaining...

I'm sort of playing devils advocate here (or the other way around I guess) but again you are just talking about Search Results. Think of it in the same terms that MS got hit with. Sure without Windows most software companies would never had made it. However, because MS used their position and 'bundled' their software and gave it priority over others, regulators determined it hurt competition in the market place. The same applies here. Google as a search engine, and a dominant market force, has to allow for an equal playing field for similar results from the competition.

It makes for an odd paradigm - on one hand it is Google's business and they should be allowed to self promote. On the other though if your only results are those that come from one source, or from partners/paid sources ect. then, even if it us unknowing, you are being harmed. The same goes for the market, if company A holds the key to reaching consumers and they chose what you see, you might not get the best options out there because they might not ever make it to market.

This holds true not only for Google, but all major players like in their respective markets like FB, Apple ect.

"It would be like telling an app developer if you don't like Apple just develop for Android. You'd be leaving too much market behind." Really???

The example you give is not comparable to the Yelp vs. Google services issue as they aren't platform locked they are web-based, i.e., much larger...much more diverse.

And if, as in your example, the only problem holding you back would be the you choosing to exclude of a piece of the market because you don't like it (or you depend on one search engine to bring in customers), then you have larger issues to resolve with your choice of business model, your offering and your occupation in general.

I might see your point if Apple were 99.9% of the market and they were actively seeking to eliminate the competition. But, so long as there were 0.1% market available and you two were the only ones in that space you couldn't automatically claim antitrust issues simply because almost no one wanted to use your offering.

Google's services and apps are not imbedded with Android. And in those instances where manufacturers CHOSE to include them, they can be disabled, removed or you can choose to use something else. So a comparison on the OS level, at any level, can't be made to the anti-competitive embedding Microsoft pulled with IE.

As far as Google's services and applications, can you list any that do not have active competition in their prospective market place? Those that would have a regional or service related exclusivity lockin that would not allow you to choose or switch to some other competing brand? Search, office apps, email, maps, music, calculators, translators, phone listings, movie/tv on-demand, vendor ratings... I can go on ... are very active with competition and viable competitors for people to click and choose from.

Interoperability and choice are two words I more than understand:)

My household has three Windows 8.1 laptops, two Windows 7 desktop PC's, one Windows 7 laptop (all going to Windows 10), two Galaxy S5's, one iPhone 5s and one Android-based LG tablet. I also operate a Linux-based mini-PC with a Windows virtual partition as a media center with access to Steam, Youtube, Pandora, Netflix, Hulu and higher end cable service apps like HBO and MAX GO among others.

I use Google office apps right alongside Microsoft's Office and have done so for years. I prefer Gmail to Yahoo Mail and Outlook for home (Outlook over Gmail for business). I use Google calendar for both business and personal events with the only exceptions being customer change control and project planning events. I also prefer Google's search to that of Yahoo and several others, however, I do occasionally use Bing! And routinely use Chrome and IE interchangeably and alongside one another while finding Opera tedious and Firefox an outright mess.

Each operating system, app and service, needed to find its niche calling and its niche clientele to become relevant and established and few NEEDED Google or any one specific search engine.

In Yelp's case, they're crying like an eight-year-old because Google won't boost them to the net for the dunk shot and recognition they feel they deserve but haven't earned on their own merit.

Following on Dpollmann (below)- Google would be well within their right to filter/strip results containing Yelp content and simply informing users, as a kindly gesture, that if they wish to find Yelp related results that they run their search from that site directly or they should simply remove Yelp from Google generated results outright like they do for paid news service and other proprietary content. Users could either use one of the other search engines or Yelps site directly if they NEED to. It'd give Yelp a live perspective of just how much free help they currently garner from Google.

Google owns the rights to their algorithm and should be able to decide how they want THEIR results to appear. Those people not liking the results will naturally defect to a service that works the way they like;-)

""The problem with all this is that, generally, even though they are the ones being harmed, consumers don’t care all that much—at least not enough to change their habits." This is a false assumption masquerading as a conclusion. An individual can care, but what can one person do? No big company cares if 100 people stop using them.

One person can use Yahoo, Bing, Yelp, Mapquest, etc. and have their friends do the same (and so on), instead of using Google. And you're right, Google doesn't care if 100 people stop using their products. So, one conclusion that can be derived is that more people like using Google than Yelp and they don't see Yelps issues as being Google's problem.

NO ONE is forced to use Google or Yelp(thankfully). They use the service of their own choosing and return if and because they derive a benefit they don't from any other like service.

Yelp sucks and they blame Google rather than improve the failures in their own product that result in their brands decline because they fail to retain or regain customers/views. -Timmy got a First Place award and I want one too because he didn't help me leading up to or during the competition...boo-hoo!!!

If you compile an old school styled phone book, what relegates you to add my phone number or any other >you< don't want in >your< book? The same goes for ads!

If, by word of mouth, your book becomes a bestseller, and someone decides to compete, what obligates you to place advertisements or promotions for THEIR product not only in your next revision but in front of promotions for other products you've developed? Especially in light of copies being given to or taken by only those wanting one...free...while you cover the costs of research and publishing? Why does it become your problem if a startup, a competitor no less, has to tread water and find their own way to success as you had to? They have the same opportunity to make a better product and gain acceptance the same way and using the same methods you did;-)

And even if this book of yours, or Google's services, were purchased there would be no reason to force inclusion or override yours for that of a competitor's product/service as a) there is active competition in the marketplace and b) consumers are free to take their money where they want as there is no prohibition on doing so.

Look at coupon search listings : 4-5 companies manipulate the coupon search listings : retailmenot, good search, coupons, couponcabin. similarly all the big corp like walmart, amazon skew the results by employing thousands of SEO guys, content and price is not much different from the smaller guys

The problem is that users THINK they receive value that is over and above any other from Google - when this may not be the case.

Yep, glad someone finally figured it out.

This happened with my previous employer NexTag. They did comparison shopping before Google (Shopping), and the moment Google launched their product, they forced NexTag's top SEO listing off their top 10 results... relegating them to page 5 in results instead of page 1... a position NexTag had for about 7-10 years.

As Steve Jobs pointed out, Google claims to do no evil... but they're no different than most large entities. They do whatever it takes to get ahead.

Speaking of Steve Jobs, Apple maps is phasing out Yelp listings domestically and in some countries not showing Yelp at all. Perhaps Yelp should do a study of Apple maps show that consumers are getting degraded results without Yelp listings.

That's so odd... I wonder why they don't do the opposite of Google and leverage the best of what's currently out there....

This consolidation of information is disturbing.

Apple is trending toward quality by reducing users' to exposure to Yelp.

An odd position for Yelp to take. Yelp uses it's massively powerful SEO to show it's results above the websites of small businesses, then shows the consumer it's own version of reality. If you don't like it, you can always buy advertising from Yelp. A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

If Yelp is looking to force Google to show more of it's convoluted reviews so it can sell more advertising, then perhaps Yelp should be investigated, too.

This is obvious attempt by Yelp to deceive the popular media.

You discredited your own story when you reference Yelp. I cannot think of another company more dishonest about reviews that completely alters their own search results, while attempting to extort businesses for profit. Fck Yelp!

*yawwwn* Very late, old news. I've been telling people this for YEARS. WIRED, want to do a real story? Do an article on how certain entities are dangerously sympathetic to Google's big ass table.

Breaking news: Study funded by Yelp proves that no-one uses Yelp unless unless Yelp links appear at top of Google Search.

There's a reason search companies and other online network businesses have made such massive fortunes so rapidly - it's because they pay nothing for their raw materials - but sadly for them it's beginning to change, why? Read on here : https://www.linkedin.com/pu...

Few fortune 500 companies and coupon sites like retailmenot, good search, coupons, couponcabin are manipulating the search results

The 45% difference in CTR doesn't mean that Yelp's results are better. If Google's results contain business name, ranking, location, phone number and a few reviews... users might have all the info they need without clicking through. They can simply scan through the results. Whereas on Yelp users might have to click into each result to find the info they are looking for. Besides that Google is a public company.. they can do what they want to their search results. If Yelp wants to be at the top of search results, they should start their own search engine.

On a broader sense it's also why Apple has the chance to sweep away the incumbents in yet another market:

https://www.linkedin.com/pu...

Yelp® is teaching and using my Patented Technology. Google® found to be testing an "app" Feb. 24, 2015. Making phone calls and sending messages from Google serach pages, and Google's box, like OneBox. https://chrome.google.com/w...

Here are the facts.

The established advertising fact that people tend to call local numbers, area codes and phone numbers, both.

Increase consumer user negative feedback using out sourcing rather than local merchants/vendors. Imagine connecting by using generic "Call" buttons and phone calling a phyisican in India using web cam. rather than an actual listing with the phone number.

Phone numbers might have the role? See results with phone numbers also added in the top listings.

The fact that user-based (Yelp calls, "local intent-based", has listing using "local" area code numbers and the phone numbers in the listings together. Google's deploying (their own) "universal" serach.

Google's "merchant" (based), so who pays more for top ratings and reviews sited. Yelp saying based on user's experience ratings and reviews.

Yelp is still a merchant. Physicians with "ZocDoc" as their mechant become listed over other physicians without merchant ZocDoc® and health care prviders calling on the ZocDoc and the Yelp apps for help.

Treating providers without being ZocDoc providers and/or Yelp get lowered when they stop paying for ratings/reviews made by each program don't pay for the merchants.

The established advertising fact that people tend to call local numbers, area codes and phone numbers, both.

NOTE! Underscoring, emphasing and highlighting importance of listing a (an actual) local area code number and local phone number, both. The "accuracy" of the phone number producing better and more reliable results than map.

The click is on the same site, decreasing clicks and operating on tiny screens, including watch display monitors. "Call" buttons less relaible; unknown identities, no assurence its the same business, even same country. Ask taxi drivers why it's all "2's" etc...

My U.S. Patented Technology also is operating on tiny screens. maps and can be on watches. So, "watch" for us!
https://chrome.google.com/w...

It's clear that the feds need to shut down Google. Then we would all have an easier time finding the information we need.

I find competitors arguments fairly hysterical.

This is a silly study.

Read between the lines and what Yelp is actually saying is: It wants paid inclusion from Google. Of course people are going to find the screenshot showing 719 reviews more useful than one with just 31. That's why Google bought Zagat, which is to say that Google is offering up the argument of quality over quantity.

Bing pays Yelp. Google won't. Figure it out.

Google is obsolete.
Being structured information can search for people itself - while now people search for information.
The idea of searching for information is wrong - the information should search for you.
The structured information searches for people based on their profiles of structured data - that guarantees that the found people really need the information.
Structured advertisements find people that want to see and read them.

I discovered and patented how to structure any data without the queries: Language has its own Internal parsing, indexing and statistics and can be structured internally. Please browse Internet on my name 'Ilya Geller' for the technology and patents.
All search engines - like Google, Bing - are obsolete.
All retailers on Internet - like Amazon, eBay - are obsolete.
All database providers - like IBM, Oracle - are obsolete.