Google search has become significantly worse than you think.
For example, if you search for “how to secure my data,” you’ll see four sponsored links at the top. Google used to be magical; finding anything in seconds was revolutionary. However, over the last few years, things have started to feel off.
I’ve done a deep dive and found three major reasons why Google search is not just in decline but borderline broken. The first issue is how they’ve changed the results page. Look at a results page: aside from the four ads before your content feeling almost violating, there’s something worse. This is related to something called “the fold,” which refers to the imaginary line where you have to scroll down to see more content.
The term comes from newspapers, where important information was placed above the fold so people could see it even when the paper was folded. Newspapers never reached a point where they could afford to stick big ads across their fold; they needed that space to convince people to buy the paper. Now, however, the entire fold is just filled with sponsored content.
It feels like Google has gotten too comfortable and no longer feels the need to convince people to use them
This company used to pride itself on how quickly their search engine could find accurate answers, but now you either have to spend more time scrolling past ads or trust that those ads contain what you want—spoiler: they often do not. A decade ago, sponsored links were highlighted in yellow, clearly indicating they weren’t organic search results, allowing users to filter them out. Sometimes they were even in their own section off to the right of the results. Not anymore; now sponsored search results look almost identical to genuine search results, with only a tiny, less obvious “sponsored” text differentiating them.
A sponsored ad, by Google’s definition, is not inherently the best result for a user’s query. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. A sponsored ad represents a company paying to have their site prominently displayed at the top of search results, often because their content or offering isn’t strong enough to achieve that position organically. This practice essentially allows businesses to buy their way to the top, regardless of the actual quality or relevance of their content.
In contrast, an organic search result that appears at the top of the page is there because Google’s algorithm has determined it to be the most relevant and valuable answer to the user’s query. These organic results have earned their position through factors like content quality, user engagement, relevance, and overall site authority. When Google is functioning as intended, these organic results should be the best possible matches for what the user is seeking.
The prevalence of sponsored ads at the top of search results pages creates a conflict between Google’s purported mission to provide the most useful information and its business model of selling ad space. Users are often forced to scroll past multiple paid placements before reaching the organic results that might better serve their needs. This setup prioritizes Google’s revenue stream over user experience, potentially leading to less satisfactory search outcomes and eroding trust in the search engine’s ability to deliver unbiased, high-quality results.
When searching for products, it gets even worse. For instance, I’ve been looking for a new chair lately and found not a single organic result—just an entire carousel of shopping ads. These product listings are taking up more space on the results page than they used to; they are 34% bigger compared to 2021. It really starts to feel like Google is intentionally making organic search results worse so that shopping directly from ads becomes the best option.
When searching for “thinnest mini fridge,” the sponsored results are spot-on, showing fridges that fit the description. However, when scrolling down to the organic results, none of the products match the search criteria. The organic results show short and wide fridges, which is not what was being looked for.
This discrepancy is puzzling, as Google, with its current level of intelligence and review data, should be able to provide the best-rated product for the exact search query. It seems like Google might be deliberately making organic results less accurate.
Google’s Business Model & the Sponsored Carousel
Google’s business model might explain this behavior. Google doesn’t make more money if you find the perfect product; they make money from your attention. Their ideal situation is that every company realizes they need to pay Google to be part of the sponsored buying section to sell their products.
This creates a pay-to-win environment where the sponsored shopping segment is not just a visibility boost but designed to be the only easy way for users to shop on Google.
When searching for more detailed queries like “world’s most comfortable chair,” the shopping carousel is filled with relevant results. However, scrolling down reveals mostly list-based articles, which is a separate issue.
Google doesn’t seem to care if it takes users to scam sites. For example, when browsing furniture, sites like Litfad appear in the sponsored carousel despite having poor reviews and warnings on TrustPilot.
Google’s approach to sponsored content raises questions about whether they’re overwhelmed or simply don’t care if a company is a scam as long as they pay for placement.
This wasn’t always the case. In the early days, Google’s founders stated that advertising income often provides an incentive for poor quality search results. They believed it was crucial to have a competitive, transparent search engine in the academic realm.
However, in Q2 2024, Google made $847 billion in revenue, with 76.3% coming from ads and about 75% of that specifically from Google search ads.
Even for searches where there’s no product to sell, Google tries to push their own services and initiatives.
Google’s Displacement of Other Companies
Google has leveraged its dominant position in search to promote its own services, often at the expense of companies that helped build Google’s initial success. This practice has effectively backstabbed many of the businesses that contributed to Google’s rise. Here are some examples:
- Mapping Services: In the early days of online maps, companies like TomTom and Garmin had invested millions in developing their mapping technologies. Google effectively wiped them off the search results by prominently featuring Google Maps, which quickly became the go-to mapping service for most users.
- Analytics: Google Analytics became the dominant web analytics tool, overshadowing competitors like Omniture (now Adobe Analytics) and Webtrends. By offering a free, powerful analytics solution and integrating it closely with its other services, Google captured a massive market share in this space.
- Browser Wars: Google heavily promoted Chrome through its search page and other services, contributing to the decline of competitors like Firefox and Internet Explorer.
- Video Platforms: YouTube, owned by Google, is often prominently featured in video search results, potentially disadvantaging other video platforms.
- Travel Services: Google Flights and Google Hotels appear prominently in travel-related searches, competing with established services like Expedia, Booking.com, and Kayak.
- Shopping: Google Shopping results are often displayed above organic results for product searches, potentially reducing traffic to independent e-commerce sites.
- Reviews: Google Reviews are prominently displayed for local businesses, competing with dedicated review sites like Yelp and TripAdvisor.
These examples demonstrate how Google has consistently used its search dominance to promote its own services, often at the expense of companies that once contributed to Google’s ecosystem. This strategy has allowed Google to expand into various markets while potentially stifling competition and innovation from other companies.
SEO
Google’s search results page is starting to resemble an old 2000’s web portal. Ironically, one of the main reasons Google beat Yahoo to become the world’s dominant search engine was because they specifically avoided this approach. Yahoo tried to keep users on their own pages as much as possible to increase revenue.
While Google has changed and prioritized user experience less, it’s not entirely Google’s fault that finding the right web page has become difficult. Much of the problem lies with the people creating web content.
Search Engine Optimization (SEO) has become a massive industry, valued at $1.8 billion in 2022 and projected to reach $7.1 billion by 2028. SEO involves analyzing Google’s algorithm and using various tricks to improve a page’s ranking.
As the algorithm has evolved, so have the tactics used. In the past, having many reviews, even negative ones, could boost visibility. Now, sites include buzzwords to capture as many search queries as possible. Articles like recipes include unnecessary preamble to improve SEO. Old articles are updated with new dates without new research.
Companies try to rank highly for unrelated searches to increase clicks and revenue. The problem is exacerbated by the prevalence of affiliate marketing in search results. This has led to a situation where searching for the “best” of anything often yields top 10 lists of products selected based on potential kickbacks rather than merit.
Many of these articles are written without the author actually testing the products, instead relying on Amazon ratings and prioritizing expensive items for higher affiliate earnings.
Google’s challenge in fixing this issue lies in the complexity of determining result quality. Currently, they rely heavily on user reactions to gauge the value of search results.
Google’s algorithm primarily focuses on user reactions rather than the content itself. If a document gets positive reactions, it’s considered good; if negative, it’s deemed bad. This simplified approach is the source of Google’s “magic.”
In practice, this means that if a page ranks high, gets many clicks, and keeps users on the page for a long time (even if they’re scrolling through irrelevant content and ads), the algorithm interprets this as a positive signal. This creates a vicious cycle where low-quality content can maintain high rankings.
An unfortunate side effect of the constant arms race between Google and growth-focused sites is that genuine, high-quality sites often get buried. For example, smaller review sites like housefresh.com, which actually test products, may rank lower than top 10 list sites or magazines that don’t conduct thorough reviews.
The Final Frontier
Google’s success has always been tied to AI, but their integration of generative large language models is making things worse. Users have likely noticed an increasing number of AI-generated overviews in search results, which are often inaccurate.
Marketing executive and search expert AJ Kohn coined the term “goobbledygook” to describe these often nonsensical AI-generated responses. Even if these AI popups were to work perfectly, it raises questions about how this helps the sites that originally gathered and published the information Google is using to train its AI. It appears that Google is trying to replace these sites entirely.
While AI summaries could make the search experience faster, there are concerns about Google potentially using AI to replace the need for visiting other websites altogether. This could lead to users spending their entire browsing session within Google’s search page, with the only way to get ahead of the AI being to pay for it.
This trend is reminiscent of the concept of “enshittification,” coined by Cory Doctorow. It describes how online services initially entice users with high-quality products, then gradually degrade the user experience to better serve business customers, and finally exploit both sides to maximize profits for themselves.
Google’s relentless march towards becoming its own ecosystem is a far cry from their original “Don’t Be Evil” motto. It’s ironic how a company that once prided itself on providing unbiased search results has now become a behemoth that plays fast and loose with people’s businesses and lives.
The changes Google makes to its algorithms, often given cute names like “Penguin” or “Panda,” have real-world consequences that are anything but adorable. Multiple quality, legitimate businesses rely on Google for their livelihoods, and with every update, Google can essentially play God with their traffic. The result? Closed businesses, lost homes, and in the worst cases, lost lives as people lose all hope.
Take, for example, a small e-commerce site that’s been operating ethically for years. They’ve built their business around Google’s guidelines, providing valuable content and products to their customers. Then, boom! A new algorithm update hits, and their traffic plummets overnight. No warning, no explanation. Just a sudden drop that could mean the difference between paying the bills and closing shop.
Or consider a local service provider who’s been serving their community for decades. They’ve finally embraced the digital age, investing time and money into their online presence. But with one tweak to Google’s local search algorithm, they’re suddenly invisible to potential customers. Years of hard work and reputation-building gone in an instant.
These aren’t just hypothetical scenarios. They’re the reality for countless businesses around the world. And for what? So Google can squeeze a few more ad dollars out of their search results? So they can push users towards their own services?
The integration of AI into search results is just the latest step in this troubling trend. Google is essentially training its AI using our websites and content, on the hard work of others, then using that AI to keep users on their own pages. It’s like inviting someone into your home, letting them study your family photos, then having them replace you in your own life.
And let’s not forget the human cost. Behind every failed business is a person – someone who poured their heart and soul into their work, only to have it crushed by an algorithm they can’t even see, let alone understand. Some recover, some don’t. Some lose their homes, their savings, their relationships. And yes, in the most tragic cases, some lose hope entirely.
Google’s march towards profit isn’t just changing the internet – it’s changing lives, and not for the better. The company that once promised not to be evil now seems to be the very definition of it, all while hiding behind colorful logos and cutesy algorithm names. It’s time for users and businesses alike to wake up to the reality of what Google has become, before it’s too late.
