[billpatrianakos]

Maybe this is a dumb question as no one really asked it so far but, umm, I thought Google couldn't mess with rankings. Like, at all. I've read everywhere, even on Google's own properties that rankings are based on their top secret algorithm and that they not only cannot but will not manually manipulate results ever.

I really doubt they'd release a publicity statement that let loose such a big secret so what am I missing or misinterpreting? I really thought there was just no way possible to change results. I get that they can mess with ads but organic results?

Edit: Not to be that guy but what's with the downvotes? I'm honestly asking. If there's something dumb about it I'd really appreciate someone telling me. Then downvote all you like. Am I being naive to think they can't change a ranking? Am I misusing terms? What's up?

[pingswept]

I suspect you are getting downvoted because it is obvious to programmers that because Google made the ranking system, it is possible for them to manipulate the rankings in whatever way they want.

[billpatrianakos]

Thank you. I'm a programmer too but I didn't get it. I figured that could be the case but then I wonder how? I, first of all, naively assumed they couldn't do it because they say they can't (shame on me for being so trusting), and then figured that if they changed the algorithm then there'd be collateral damage. I dont really get into algorithms much so I didn't know they could target a single page like that. The smart programmers would probably say I was a yellow belt compared to their black belt. Anyway, thanks for the answer.

[tomkarlo]

It doesn't require any inside knowledge to manipulate the ranking system. There are some methods that you can't really architect against (like paid posts) from a software angle, so Google has rules and penalties in place to discourage sites from doing that in order to distort their page rank. In this case, one team seems to have accidentally run afoul of those rule and is being penalized appropriately because it makes sense in terms of the larger picture of protecting the quality of search results.

[brudgers]

>"I thought Google couldn't mess with rankings. Like, at all."

Google has done this before. Binggate was one very public example.

As in the case of demoting Chrome, Google's rationalization was that the ends justified the means.

It would be somewhat unsurprising to me if that was also the rationalization behind promoting Chrome - keeping in mind that Google is a publicly traded company with an obligation to its shareholders not its users. Google is not a moral agent.