The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > General Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-14-2011, 01:30 AM
rogerbox rogerbox is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Why is this google result so bad?

If you google "interesting podcasts", on the first page are 3 posts on webforums from 2007, 2 from 2006, and 2 from 2009. The other results leave a lot to be desired too.

I periodically do this search because I have ran out of new things to listen to, I listen to a lot of podcasts during my work days. How can something that should be a rather common google search be 5 years old (which is forever in internet time). This is the only search I can recall on google on something not obscure at all with such awful results... I am thinking that some manipulation could be involved?
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 05-14-2011, 02:15 AM
Cugel Cugel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Might be merely the choice of search terms. Try favourite (or favorite I guess) podcasts.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-14-2011, 02:53 AM
Rex Goliath Rex Goliath is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Because 'interesting' isn't a headline word. "Best" and "top-rated" are. Try using those terms, and you'll get better results.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-14-2011, 03:07 AM
Hero From Sector 7G Hero From Sector 7G is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Are you looking for recommendations? I don't want to hijack this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-14-2011, 04:19 AM
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
I usually pick a number in searches like this. All of the following are good numbers 5, 10, 20, 25, 50, 100.

So I'd try Top 10 most interesting podcasts. And if I want things to be new, I'd use the date limiting feature.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-14-2011, 06:19 AM
njtt njtt is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
"Boring podcasts" might work better.

Really, Google does not know what sort of thing you find interesting, and all podcasts are probably intended to be interesting, and are probably interesting to someone. It is not a helpful search term, and is more likely to screw up your results than to improve them.

Your best bet would probably be to think of a specific topic or two that you are interested in, and Google that. If you were fascinated by raspberries, for instance, you might get good results by Googling "raspberry podcasts."

(What! You don't think raspberries are fascinating! )
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-14-2011, 02:15 PM
scamartistry scamartistry is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
to the OP: what podcasts do you recommend?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-15-2011, 12:23 PM
digs digs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by njtt View Post
... you might get good results by Googling "raspberry podcasts"...
The kind you find in the second-hand store?

Now I have a Prince song stuck in my head... Grrrrr...

Just to get you back, I'll tell you to skip The Google and just download every How Stuff Works podcast ever produced. Then you'll be hooked like me.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-15-2011, 05:51 PM
rogerbox rogerbox is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero From Sector 7G View Post
Are you looking for recommendations? I don't want to hijack this thread.
Sure! Shoot me a PM!

Quote:
Originally Posted by scamartistry View Post
to the OP: what podcasts do you recommend?
Check your pms!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-15-2011, 05:59 PM
guizot guizot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: An East Hollywood dingbat
Posts: 6,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Goliath View Post
Because 'interesting' isn't a headline word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by njtt View Post
Really, Google does not know what sort of thing you find interesting,
If you consider these two points together, it makes sense. Usually someone refers to something as "interesting"--it's not in the title. And then, the longer a podcast has been around, the more times it's been referred to in that way. So the Google algorithm puts it up before more recent podcasts that haven't attracted as many "interesting" references.

Add "2011" (the current year) to your terms, and that will help.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-15-2011, 06:01 PM
An Gadaí An Gadaí is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
They're not known as podcasts anymore they're sonic infonodes.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-15-2011, 06:17 PM
Rhythmdvl Rhythmdvl is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Shakedown Street
Posts: 12,412
"Interesting" is sooooo 2007. Keep up with the lingo grandpa!


There was just an article somewhere (maybe even linked on the Dope) about copywriters having to let go of catchy headlines because they don't catch Google's eye. Trying to find it, but if it rings any bells, someone post a link.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-15-2011, 09:02 PM
rogerbox rogerbox is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhythmdvl View Post
"Interesting" is sooooo 2007. Keep up with the lingo grandpa!
I'm 25. Get off my....xbox live!

Quote:
Originally Posted by njtt View Post
"Boring podcasts" might work better.

Really, Google does not know what sort of thing you find interesting, and all podcasts are probably intended to be interesting
I missed this post. I'm not stupid enough to think Google can know what I find interesting. My thinking was that it would find forum threads with titles like "interesting podcasts discussion" etc. I have never done another google search that only found such dated references. I don't have reason to think the word "interesting" was that much more common 6 and 4 years ago than today, so I found the results surprising.

Last edited by rogerbox; 05-15-2011 at 09:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.