A very interesting article about Google bombing. Needless to say, I don’t encourage abuse of a (reasonably) good system.
On the other hand, were is the line between use and abuse? What is ethical, what is not? The gray zone is always the most interesting.
[link via Emmanuelle]
Related posts:
911 Stuff [en]Gator et autres espions [en]Emission radio sur les weblogs [en]Daniela Cerqui — Cyborgs: what kind of human being are we building? [en]Dealing with Spammers [en]Twitter Metrics: Let's Remain Scientific, Please! [en]Back to Being a Low-Tech Audience [en]Adolescents, MySpace, internet: citations de danah boyd et Henry Jenkins [fr]
Rando: Lac de Salanfe [en]Hangouts: Watch Me Run Screaming From Dark Green Conversation Bubbles [en]
Google Bombing works only if you are trusted by your peers (unless you
have money and can do what Scientology (and others I’m sure) do [1] aka
simulation of peer approval).
Google ranking is based on the assumption that every author will _only_
link to valuable information. Some kind of a democratic ranking, in a way.
Hence, an author can abuse once or twice the Google ranking, but after
that, readers-peers won’t trust him (aka link to you) anymore et voilà , no
more easy google bombing via weblogs for that particular author.
[1] http://www.operatingthetan.com/google/