The New York Times, The Google Algorithm and Regulating what's "best" in search?

"Google handles nearly two-thirds of Internet search queries worldwide. Analysts reckon that most Web sites rely on search engine for half of their traffic. When Google engineers tweak its supersecret algorithm — as they do hundreds of times a year — they can break the business of a Web site that's pushed down the rankings[.…]With […]

"Google handles nearly two-thirds of Internet search queries worldwide. Analysts reckon that most Web sites rely on search engine for half of their traffic. When Google engineers tweak its supersecret algorithm — as they do hundreds of times a year — they can break the business of a Web site that's pushed down the rankings[.…]With these caveats in mind, if Google is to continue to be the main map to information highway, it concerns us all that it leads us fairly to where we want to go," writes The New York Times in a article entitled "The Google Algorithm." Basically, the piece wonders if the government shouldn't step in to control the way Google tweaks its search engine results.

Google SVP Marissa Mayer posted on same day on FT, about the impact for consumers of governments potentially regulating search results. Since, the post was behind FT's paywall or technically, a registration wall, since you can sign up for free, Google re-posted it on Public Policy Blog:

"Search engines use algorithms and equations to produce order and organisation online where manual effort cannot. These algorithms embody rules that decide which information is "best", and how to measure it. Clearly defining which of any product or service is best is subjective. Yet in our view, the notion of "search neutrality" threatens innovation, competition and, fundamentally,your ability as a user to improve how you find informatio," writes Marissa Mayer.

Full Post: Our op-ed: Regulating what is "best" in search?