LOVE IT OR HATE IT…THE FUTURE OF SEARCH IS HERE

hahah +Carl Donohue ...touche...just brought them up because they are the biggest social network in the room. Plus I hear size matters ;)

but size matters ... Google are THE major search engine. What they do matters. What Alta vista does? Not so much. Why?And it MAY go that way with f/b, neither of us know that at all. But from what I've seen, G+ have stepped above and beyond .. when a G+ share of an article returns higher than the article itself, on a major tech website, for unlogged in users, I think that's a little unreasonable. I'd be surprised if anyone thinks otherwise, to be honest.Why would anyone want to use facebook as any kind of standard? Isn't that like saying 'well, Hitler did it'? :)

+Carl Donohue - They are the largest, but not the only ones doing it, was more my point. Bing does it with Twitter, although search results very and are on the second page at times for now. With Microsoft purchasing Skype and connecting directly ("betting" more appropriately) with Facebook, you can see where this is going. Just cause Google is the largest, does not excuse the others if you or others have a beef with this practice. FB has talked for years about social search....what do you think the new ticker is for :)

and nobody likes to be bitten in the end. :)For my web presence? no solution but to play along best I can.For my web searching? Turn the function off, best I can, or use some other tool. And for now, Bing is not using facebook is it? And the "problem" IS google .. as you point out, nearly 70% of search on the web is via google .. so that's a problem, imo.

I appreciate the social touch that this new feature provides. Sometimes when I'm searching for a solution on Google for Linux (as an example) the results may tell me that already visited a certain link at some point in time. This insight helps me save time, so that I can focus on another URL if I need to.

I agree for the most part with everything you said +Carl Donohue but the problem is not just Google, if that is your take on it. With Google at 67% of search on the internet, bing powered search is 27%, what do you think Bing is going to do with Twitter or FB? I understand and respect your reservations...but where do you see things going? If they all end up doing this, whats your game plan both as an individual and business man?For me, I have to make calculated choices based on how things are and where I see things going that will effect my business and lively hood as a photographer and founder of a handful of organizations. It is obvious where I am betting my money. What would you do? Like I said above, I would prefer all social to be integrated, with filters, such as the ones we both agree on from the "Filter Bubble" speech in TED, however not planning ahead could bite you in the end.

Either way, as you say, it's here, and I doubt it'll go away anytime soon.

Sure - which is why the option of including that in a search is reasonable, if that's what folks want. Of course, if that's what they really want, they could just do a search on G+, and not have Soc. Media included at all in general google results.I think part of the issue is history and context. Rightly or wrongly, we have a general understanding that google (or any search engine results) are returned organically. Google have also made a point of indicating, very clearly, when search results are ads, i.e., "sponsored results". But now that goes away. For example, folks mentioned the RUL above .. wouldn't that kind of make all those people on that list 'sponsored results', every time their G+ content, or favored content, is returned? In my eyes, it would.A search engine is more than just a marketing tool; it's also a viable research tool. And research should be something more valid than how many G+ friends someone has, or doesn't have, and how much chatter they engage in on those channels.

I guess using my example in the OP +Carl Donohue , I don't see the negative. I know you have photos of the region of Alaska I searched for, but I don't want to have to go ask you, Jan, Ron and Scott to share them with me. By being connected your images showed up first. I liked that. I don't circle or +1 or share just anything. Others might not be so vigilant, but you can not ignore the desire to have or popularity of such a feature from an end user point of view. My wife does a Google search for "Organic Gardening" and something you wrote shows up because you are both connected. That doesn't seem very Machiavellian to me.

+Vicki Wilson Will do, but I am on my tablet right now. Will check when back at the office computer in a bit.

fair point +Carl Donohue . On the flipside though, judging from the comments in this thread, would you not agree that it seems that people do seem favorable to this kind of search?

Hey +Colby Brown .. because it makes the game include sharing and +1ing other peoples work simply they return the favor .. which, if we're honest, is definitely a large part of the game. But for soc. media, that's fine .. I don't think that kind of dynamic should influence search results. If I want to know what my friends like, I can ask them .. but if I want to search for an article on caligraphy, I would like a search engine that returns results based on caligraphy, not my G+ circles, or F/B friends etc.

It is the visibility in a Google Search which is not supposed to be biased that people are concerned about. I do know that if I am not logged into Google+, the images that show up in a personalized search do not show up. Once I log in to Google+ I can see my photos for a given search. The question is will everyone who is logged into Google+ regardless of having me in a circle can find my photos, or only those who have circled me? Type this search in and let me know "Swan Lake and Iris Gardens Sumter SC" +Colby Brown I am curious if you will see the images I have posted show up just under the main website as I do or not?

As I said in the OP, the age of ZERO influence on search is gone. Why do we think FB is tracking the pages we visit outside of the network? Advertising $ is why. In the very least, I see having to engage with those that care enough to follow your work is much better then coding a website. This is of course from a guy that outsources all my html and web development needs though.

+Carl Donohue How do your spam your followers to get +1's and comments? One would think it would be community driven. I personally dont +1 content I don't like. Making spam accounts and driving up your own numbers will serve you no good because people still have to connect and interact with those spammers, which doesn't happen. How do you game a system built on curating the content you like?

I disagree with +Charles Lupica above .. SEO 'tactics' are reasonably well known, and the info is reasonably available. Taking the time to design and code a website accordingly is a reasonable approach to doing well in the rankings. but simply trying to garner +1s and shares for the sake of it isn't such a great approach .. it's more akin to spam than to sound search results, IMO.I'd rather they offer a default of ZERO social media in their results, with an option to turn that on if the user would like.

Just taking great images has never been enough. Just look at 500px or 1x to see amazing photography work from people that do not make any money in this industry.

As would I +QT Luong , not sure any photographer, full time or not, would rather be starring at a computer screen doing social marketing rather then out shooting. That being said, it is part of the business and many of us have already spent countless hours trying to add SEO to our websites to be seen. This may or may not be the next logical step or evolution in marketing.Lastly, if twitter and FB refuse to have their content indexed, how is that Google's problem? Refusal and being denied the ability to participate are certainly different. Personally I want them all on board, but don't see it happening. Maybe I am wrong.

+QT Luong My sentiments exactly! I am just sorry that I can only hit +1 once.

SEO based on "technical methods" and "tactics" is already vastly over-rated, as I explained in http://terragalleria.com/blog/2011/12/20/seo-thoughts-from-a-top-ranked-photographer/ In some sense, the Google breakthrough has been to leverage the community for search. The community was the entire web. I don't see that as less democratic than possibly relying on a company-owned social network (at the exclusion of other, larger such networks).Personally, if this means being super active on G+, I am not totally enthusiastic about the idea that one would need to "engage the community" to prosper. I'd rather prefer to spend that time doing good work.

Well said +Charles Lupica and I equal your thoughts on the subject. TIme will tell how everything plays out. Thank you for the kind words. It has been a pleasure interacting with you on a number of subjects and projects.

You put this very well +Charles Lupica !

Search algorithms are generally considered to be trade secrets. If the algorithm is public or can be easily guessed, people will scam the system to push their results to the top. Current SEO methods let you create a false sense of value by providing technical methods to increase "apparent" value / weight. A new system, like this one, based on community interaction will be much harder to scam. People/companies that create great content and engage the community will prosper. People / companies that rely on cross referencing and other SEO tactics won't do as well. There is a reason that Colby Brown is where he is, and it's far more than RUL. I have to say I was living in a near vacuum before coming to G+. I had no ide of who +Colby Brown was. I had almost no followers, I was new to G+ and a social media "enfant terrible" when I arrived. Colby Brown interacted with me, as did many other people of his G+ Stature. Colby Brown and many of the top photographers on G+ interact regularly with the community. They try to help people starting out, they add content and value to G+ for me. To me this is what makes G+ work. People who have no direct reason to give me the time of day taking time to help me get the most out of G+.This is why community ranked content in searches is fantastic and frightening. If I were a big company, I would see this as a big threat. Now my SEO manipulations and high-cost advertising won't necessarily get my product top billing. My company will need to add value. The content will need to be interesting. The interaction will need to be more personal. In some ways this is the newest form of democracy. One voice (comment, plus, share) makes a difference. A voices of people I have chosen to trust will influence what I see first. What content arrives on top. That's pretty hard to scam. It sounds interesting to me.

+Colby Brown I'm always available to talk to you anytime. I'd still love to do a trip with you one of these years. I've never been to Sitka.

Thanks +Colby Brown, that worked!

wow... very interesting! Exciting yet kind of spooky at the same time? :)

+Carl Donohue Good! By the way, you don't need chrome to see the results. Just make sure you are logged on to Google + before trying your search on google.com

+Colby Brown That does make sense and I have a feeling we will be seeing many changes and fine tuning in the months to come as Google continues to evolve.

+Niklas Storm If you edit the cookie for google.se in the same manner it should apply for that domain as well.

+Jamie Rich - Since day 1, it was said that all public posts are indexed by Google Search. This is not as new as it sounds, and you can opt out of it. Don't share anything to the public :)

+Andrew Mitchell - Fair point. However what do you think Facebook is doing? The biggest difference between the two companies is that FB sells your data to 3rd party companies. Google takes your content and +1s and uses it to show case other content, be that ads, blog posts or other links. Between the two, I am happier with it being kept in house with Google+ rather then sold to the highest bidder. Certainly just my opinion though.

+Carl Donohue, no it doesn't seem to be implemented locally. It works on google.com, but not google.se.

+Akash Kalgude - If you click on the Google+ icon inside the drop down menu (which is in the Google+ logo) just once, that welcome sign goes away.

+Ron Niebrugge - Well that depends on the algorithm that they use, because interaction with the content still seems to pull the highest rank. So having 500 people follow you and getting 100 +1s means that your post or image will now have a higher potential ranking for EVERYONE those 100 people are connected with since a +1 = a recommendation in SEO terms. So having 50,000 people follow you but only getting 50 +1's would not be as beneficial...does that make sense?As I said above, the RUL will need to be adjusted, but since none of us have control over that, the best way we can stay on top of things to harness the followers we do have to create more engagement with the content we all publish. I am also not saying that numbers do not play a role, I just feel is is 2nd to getting people to engage and interact with you. Bing is doing this to some extent with Twitter posts and Facebook is not to be forgotten either. That "slippery" slope is the entire future of online search for all of the big players...not just Google.

Did anyone think there wasn't a business case that was driving Google+. We are their drones, working for free to +1 the world's content, and hence help to sift the good stuff. Of course some have their own interests at heart, it sells their goods or services, but anyone who is doing this in their leisure time should take stock. How does it benefit you? Do you have shares in Google. Nothing is free.

{wades in after having read the Post, but not the Comments. At least not yet...} It all depends on why you are in G+, doesn't it? Yes, I'm here because of photography, and yes as a new serious photog wish to make as many good connections as possible. But... on the other hand, if I'm elsewhere, I really don't wish to have Google give me G+ results from a search. Also, I really despise that they just did this, without telling us first! They should have made an announcement, along with a simple Opt Out choice. ...just my couple of pennies worth...

I already put you on a list, +Ron Niebrugge

your site still ranks high wheN i search, +Ron Niebrugge .. damnit. :)

+QT Luong makes a good point. Right or wrong, this does add a huge premium for those included on the recommended follower list. Your quote: "I can do more with 500 engaging followers then 50,000 that don't care to interact." used to have merit, but not anymore. Wouldn't you rather have your photos at the top of search results for 50,000 people instead of 500? I think most would. I just think Google is entering a slippery slope when they start playing favorites. I would be lying if I didn't say I would love to be on that list. #little jealous :)

Hey I like those search results! +Colby Brown didn't know you were coming up here - let me know if I can be of any help!From an SEO perspective, I need to get back to the drawing board and I see only photos from my blog show up in those results, not my main website which historically has ranked high.

/Offtopic +Colby Brown In case you've edited the cookie to enable the new Google layout, how did you manage to get rid of the top menu asking you to try it out. Its so annoying to have it on every page, I ended up resetting the cookie :|

Hey +Colby Brown .. definitely give me a holler if you're headed toward Wrangell - St. Elias.I'm going to need that Chrome extension, I think .. the google search results here don't include the G+ results at all .. on any of my 4 browsers .. I wonder if it's implemented regionally?

Thanks +Colby Brown the extension works!!

+Niklas Storm - Great point. I hope and personally believe that we will get more fine tune controls for Google Search. As I said above, anything Google does is usually much much better by the 2nd revision :)

To me it's obvious that I want content from people I know (i.e. have circled), since it's usually people I trust. However, it could also be interesting to only get content from specific circles. It's not necessarily so that my photography friends are the best to ask e.g. on software development.

Cool +Colby Brown thanks!

+Frank Yuwono +Olav Folland +Joe Azure - Here is the chrome extension to force it. The problem is cookies that expire. The Bar is not on everyones browser just yet...obviously.https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/oiamgkpplhllmgmjkmpoapkidpgfhmdo

+Jon Cornforth - I am, but not till next year. In July I will be spending 10 days shooting in Sitka. I would love to pick your brain about Alaska and even have a proposal that you might be interested in.

+Colby Brown Interesting. Thanks for the information. It will be very interesting how this effects SEO in the coming years. Are you planning a visit to Wrangell-St Elias? The week that I spent there in September 2009 was spectacular. Let me know if I can offer any advice on visiting Alaska.

lol - I don't even have that...