Slog Comments
Spreading Santorum, #1 Result When You Google "Santorum," 2003-2012
1
I just Googled it, and it's back to #1. Don't know what happened, but nice to know that it's back.
2
My results: #1 is Urban Dictionary, #2 Wikipedia, and #3 his campaign site.
I'm a bit sad, but he'll always be a foul stain in my book. Google can't change that.
I'm a bit sad, but he'll always be a foul stain in my book. Google can't change that.
5
I didn't find it until the second page, and it went straight to the blog site, bypassing the primary brown splotted page altogether. I sense a conspiracy.
7
For me:
#1. Rick Santorum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
#2. Campaign for "santorum" neologism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
#3. Urban Dictionary: santorum
So, yeah. It looks like Google changed something.
#1. Rick Santorum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
#2. Campaign for "santorum" neologism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
#3. Urban Dictionary: santorum
So, yeah. It looks like Google changed something.
8
I get blog.spreadingsantorum on the first page, but the index front page is on page 2 of search resuts.
9
I figured it out: I use the German version of Google (Google[dot]de), which still has it as #1. Google[dot]mx (Mexico) and Google[dot]com[dot]br (Brazil) also have it as #1, Google[dot]fr (France) as #2, Google[dot]it (Italy) as #3, Google[dot]ru (Russia) as #3, and Google[dot]es (Spain) as #6. It's been scrubbed from the English versions: US/International (Google[dot]com), Canadian (Google[dot]ca), British (Google[dot]co[dot]uk), Irish (Google[dot]ie), Australian (Google[dot]com[dot]au), and Indian (Google[dot]in). Sad.
Apparently santorum is very popular in Germany, the land of the weird fetishes.
Apparently santorum is very popular in Germany, the land of the weird fetishes.
10
Hmmm. Something to do with Google privacy policy changes? Maybe they're now using our personal search histories and dwell time/clicks on pages that are primarily political news versus primarily humor/mockery to determine the order of results served up.
11
Sorry for using [dot] instead of the real URLs above. Using the real URLs flags it as spam or something within SLOG and blocks the post from being published.
13
@9, spreading santorum is also #1 (well, #2, after a "Santorum niews" website) also at Google[dot]com[dot]nl, the Dutch page. Indeed: I get very different results searching from the basic American English page and from any non-English page.
This probably should be publicized. Did Google cave in? Or is something else going on?
This probably should be publicized. Did Google cave in? Or is something else going on?
16
spreadingsantorum.com is still in Google's index, but you've been bumped to page 2 for the term "santorum".
Also, Google has replaced spreadingsantorum.com with spreadingsantorum.com/index2.html as the main search result page, which is the main content page for the site. Google may have determined that the main home page (the one with just the definition on it) didn't have enough content on it , and penalized it accordingly.
This also could have been caused by all of the recent news around the primaries, which tends to temporarily kick up a frothy mix of stories from high-quality news agencies that will stay on page 1 of Google until the news cycle passes.
Do one of the following:
- If you claim the domain using Google's Webmaster Central tool, it will likely tell you if you've been penalized. https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/…
- Hit up @mattcutts on Twitter. He's the head of search quality at Google, and will often respond publicly to high profile search ranking issues like this one.
- Replace the splash page on spreadingsantorum.com with the main blog content, and start adding new content everyday.
- Wait it out.
/Bill
More...
spreadingsantorum.com is still in Google's index, but you've been bumped to page 2 for the term "santorum".
Also, Google has replaced spreadingsantorum.com with spreadingsantorum.com/index2.html as the main search result page, which is the main content page for the site. Google may have determined that the main home page (the one with just the definition on it) didn't have enough content on it , and penalized it accordingly.
This also could have been caused by all of the recent news around the primaries, which tends to temporarily kick up a frothy mix of stories from high-quality news agencies that will stay on page 1 of Google until the news cycle passes.
Do one of the following:
- If you claim the domain using Google's Webmaster Central tool, it will likely tell you if you've been penalized. https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/…
- Hit up @mattcutts on Twitter. He's the head of search quality at Google, and will often respond publicly to high profile search ranking issues like this one.
- Replace the splash page on spreadingsantorum.com with the main blog content, and start adding new content everyday.
- Wait it out.
/Bill
17
#13: Awesome!
Google probably caved. Now that Santorum is more than a failed senate candidate, he probably has better lawyers going after Google. But as Dan said, they've still got the urban dictionary, the Spreading Santorum blog, and the Mother Jones article ("Rick Santorum's Gay Sex Problem") in the first page alone. This isn't going to go away by removing one search result.
Google probably caved. Now that Santorum is more than a failed senate candidate, he probably has better lawyers going after Google. But as Dan said, they've still got the urban dictionary, the Spreading Santorum blog, and the Mother Jones article ("Rick Santorum's Gay Sex Problem") in the first page alone. This isn't going to go away by removing one search result.
18
@14 - I assure you, we're grown up. Santorum deserves the definition bestowed upon him. And besides, it's such a.... concise definition for the substance it describes.
19
@14, you forfeited the right to tell anybody to "grow up" with your completely psychotic responses (@2 and @6) to this post last week:
http://slog.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/m…
Not only did you go skidding way past the adolescent-humor mark, you were a mewling, puking, spectacularly rude baby. And you were wrong @6.
http://slog.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/m…
Not only did you go skidding way past the adolescent-humor mark, you were a mewling, puking, spectacularly rude baby. And you were wrong @6.
20
@16(Bill), @17(Nandor), I've tried doing what Bill suggested and claiming the spreadingsantorum website with google webmaster tools, and there was no message about any penalties against the website (but I don't know if I'm doing it right). Can anyone hit mattcutts? I don't have a Twitter account (yes, I'm primitive like that).
At any rate, Bill, how would one explain the discrepancy between the search results from the English-language versions of google when compared to the others? Wouldn't any of the situations you describe automatically apply to them as well?
At any rate, Bill, how would one explain the discrepancy between the search results from the English-language versions of google when compared to the others? Wouldn't any of the situations you describe automatically apply to them as well?
21
even a search for "spreading santorum" doesn't yield the spreadingsantorum.com website on the first few pages. That seems like an extremely unlikely situation if its just a google tweak and not actual censoring of that particular result.
23
It may also have something to do with the timeliness of the links. Soooo... Start linking again!
And "spread" it around. Embed links in replies to news stories, blogs and such, and NOT just on SLOG, not that Santorum doesn't deserve it here, too. Just that I think Google may have capped the number of references from a single domain that they'd count.
But, yeah, even if that theory is right, that wouldn't fully explain what we're looking at. It does look an awful lot like Google caved to pressure and gray-listed us or something.
For everyone: a quick refresher on embedding links:
Use the "anchor" tag in your text, plugging "http://spreadingsantorum.com" into the href field, and bracketing the single word "Santorum".
(The html interpreter here in Slog makes it very difficult to type it out for you, although some smarter geeks than me have done it before.)
If you're not sure if you've done it right, test the links you've posted and see if they work. If not, try, try again. On the other hand, if it does work, just keep doing that again and again! Everywhere, especially on news sites, your own web pages, and political blogs.
And "spread" it around. Embed links in replies to news stories, blogs and such, and NOT just on SLOG, not that Santorum doesn't deserve it here, too. Just that I think Google may have capped the number of references from a single domain that they'd count.
But, yeah, even if that theory is right, that wouldn't fully explain what we're looking at. It does look an awful lot like Google caved to pressure and gray-listed us or something.
For everyone: a quick refresher on embedding links:
Use the "anchor" tag in your text, plugging "http://spreadingsantorum.com" into the href field, and bracketing the single word "Santorum".
(The html interpreter here in Slog makes it very difficult to type it out for you, although some smarter geeks than me have done it before.)
If you're not sure if you've done it right, test the links you've posted and see if they work. If not, try, try again. On the other hand, if it does work, just keep doing that again and again! Everywhere, especially on news sites, your own web pages, and political blogs.
24
Sigh. This may not be a "tweak" at all. The search for spreadingsantorum doesn't even turn up the main page of the definition website on Google, AT ALL, although it does turn up the spreadingsantorum blog and allusions to it on other websites.
Google blacklisted spreadingsantorum.com, methinks.
Google blacklisted spreadingsantorum.com, methinks.
25
Dan, this may give more info. Get one of the "tech savvy youth" to check it out.
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/…
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/…
26
@25 NEVER MIND!!! OMG, no, don't use that page!
Shit, the description I read on Google of it indicated it was a tool to help you with rankings. I seem to have exactly the opposite!
Shit, the description I read on Google of it indicated it was a tool to help you with rankings. I seem to have exactly the opposite!
27
@25, 26 This might be the right site: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/…
Very sorry about previous posts. :-(
Very sorry about previous posts. :-(
28
Adding to 'round the world with santorum… http://spreadingsantorum.com is still #1 on google denmark.
32
Spreadingromney is still there. But it's fallen back to page 4 of the results since yesterday, when it was on page 2. My first thought was to wonder whether Romney had been able to pull strings that Santorum couldn't, and kill both pages now that it affects him. But since his result is still there, presumably not.
33
@20 Changes to Google's search results usually don't switch over all at once, they will roll them out to some portion of their audience at a time and can be ready to rollback if there are unexpected results. Google has a video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5RZOU6vK… has some interesting information on how they change there search algorithm.
In some ways it doesn't surprise me that spreadingsantorum.com was a bit fragile in its ranking. In itself, it is very low in content (on the other hand blog.spreadingsantorum.com is very rich in content, kept up to date, and in other ways would seem quantifiably a high quality web site.) A slight change in google for how they rate multiple sites in the same domain would drop the ranking of the spreaingsantorum.com spash page
In some ways it doesn't surprise me that spreadingsantorum.com was a bit fragile in its ranking. In itself, it is very low in content (on the other hand blog.spreadingsantorum.com is very rich in content, kept up to date, and in other ways would seem quantifiably a high quality web site.) A slight change in google for how they rate multiple sites in the same domain would drop the ranking of the spreaingsantorum.com spash page
34
It was still number 1 yesterday afternoon. I checked while waiting in line at the post office because two women were talking about Santorum and how they wanted to look into him more before our primary next week. I was standing behind them and said "I heard he has a Google problem." They both looked at me and one said "Really? I didn't know that!". I suggested she go home and Google his last name and left it at that. I then Googled it myself on my cell phone and it was still the first site. This was around 3:00pm EST.
35
I just checked, it's sixth. I do think it has something to do with changes at google, but hey, that's okay, there are worse sites for that jerk around
36
I just Googled it and it came in #1. I came here to mention that, then Googled it again and it was nowhere to be found. Even entering SpreadingSantorum only results in the blog. It's only when I put in www.spreadingsantorum that it's back at #1. Definitely some Google hi-jinx.
38
I just checked again. I'm not seeing the main page of www.spreadingsantorum.com at all.
However, I did find this Richard Cohen op-ed, from the Washington Post, reprinted in the definitely right-of-center New York Daily News ("Rick Santorum, American Mullah"):
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/rick-…
However, I did find this Richard Cohen op-ed, from the Washington Post, reprinted in the definitely right-of-center New York Daily News ("Rick Santorum, American Mullah"):
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/rick-…
39
Regarding different Web search results for different people: see Eli Pariser's http://www.thefilterbubble.com/
40
It's not terribly surprising - now that there's a US Presidential candidate who claims his real name actually is "Penis Sexpoop", there's a bunch of stories about The Candidate Named Sexpoop rather than about the frothy mix he's taken as his stage name. More people legimitately are looking for the former Senator and thus he becomes a more valid search result.
It'll change once he drops out of the race. Once fewer people are looking for Santorum The Person and more are looking for "how do I get santorum out of my sheets without staining?" you'll see the rankings change again.
The same thing would happen if there was a "Dan Savage" as a serious candidate for president - hits on Sex Advice Columnist Dan would go down and pages about Candidate Dan would go up.
It'll change once he drops out of the race. Once fewer people are looking for Santorum The Person and more are looking for "how do I get santorum out of my sheets without staining?" you'll see the rankings change again.
The same thing would happen if there was a "Dan Savage" as a serious candidate for president - hits on Sex Advice Columnist Dan would go down and pages about Candidate Dan would go up.
41
Canadian here:
Googled "santorum"
1)His wikipedia
2) Wikpedia neologism
3) Urban dictionary
Spreading was halfway down page two.
Googled "santorum"
1)His wikipedia
2) Wikpedia neologism
3) Urban dictionary
Spreading was halfway down page two.
43
I bet Google is personalizing links based on your previous search history. That was supposed to roll out tomorrow. Try logging out of your google account and try it again, preferably in a different browser so cookie using doesn't interfere.
45
it's a bit early in the century to be claiming anything, and comparing Santorum to Quisling, in any context, is in poor taste. Santorum is a B-list politician who is preaching to his own choir (sound familiar?) and it was amusing to make fun of him for a while. Quisling was a true evil. Dan, you're so right on sometimes (coming out to family being the most important thing you can do) and sometimes you're just a self-important ass who behaves at least as poorly as your "enemy".
47
Even if it is removed from Google, the damage has been done. Please see the word association for Santorum's name as culminated by The Daily Beast:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20…
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20…
48
Oh Dan, thanks so much for adding a tiny piece of funny that we all could access with a few keystrokes! I try to keep it at #1 by googling it most every day. Plus, in every tweet or FB posting concerning this most dangerous Dolt since Duhbyah, I add in some of the definition following his surname. I will continue to do so for, well, forever!
49
Oh Dan, thanks so much for adding a tiny piece of funny that we all could access with a few keystrokes! I try to keep it at #1 by googling it most every day. Plus, in every tweet or FB posting concerning this most dangerous Dolt since Duhbyah, I add in some of the definition following his surname. I will continue to do so for, well, forever! Cheers, Mark
50
He's in Pasco today.Don't know where he will be, but speculation says he's too afraid to publish location.Planned parenthood supporters should be there.Hoping the boys who own Out and About,the only gay bar, loved by straights ,and lgbtq will rally some people to at least toss some glitter his way. Some say Washington State will be a win for Santorum over Romney for GOP candidate. `
51
Probably late for this, but Google search results are very personalized. Just about everyone is going to have different results.
52
I say this is Google pretending to do Santorum a favor while jabbing a shiv in his whiny ass. Way to go Google! (I can just hear them chuckling, "Happy now, SANTORUM? Heh, heh, heh...")
53
My local LGBT rights group (glaaforum.org) was used to appearing on the first page when people searched for candidate ratings. Now they have been bumped to the second page. It would seem that Google has defined something called "official pages" and bumped every result that is not an "official result" to the second page. I think I will start using the phrase "Bing it" where before I said "Google it".
55
I Googled and got spreading santorum at #11. What's up with that? Did google try to kowtow to the RS campaign by promising to mix up the top 10 or something?
Anyway, I too got the urban dictionary def. at #1.
I always got spreading santorum at #1 before...
Anyway, I too got the urban dictionary def. at #1.
I always got spreading santorum at #1 before...
56
For me the search results in the USA are:
#1 santorum's politico page.
#2 republican presidential primary results.
#3 Urban Dictionary with 27 definitions of santorum, most more foul then Dan Savages!!!
.
.
.
.
#14 spreadingsantorum.com but with a bypass of the main screen so as not to show the splat and definition.
Real low tactics on Google's part.
#1 santorum's politico page.
#2 republican presidential primary results.
#3 Urban Dictionary with 27 definitions of santorum, most more foul then Dan Savages!!!
.
.
.
.
#14 spreadingsantorum.com but with a bypass of the main screen so as not to show the splat and definition.
Real low tactics on Google's part.
57
For me the search results in the USA are:
#1 santorum's politico page.
#2 republican presidential primary results.
#3 Urban Dictionary with 27 definitions of santorum, most more foul then Dan Savages!!!
.
.
.
.
#14 spreadingsantorum.com but with a bypass of the main screen so as not to show the splat and definition.
Real low tactics on Google's part.
#1 santorum's politico page.
#2 republican presidential primary results.
#3 Urban Dictionary with 27 definitions of santorum, most more foul then Dan Savages!!!
.
.
.
.
#14 spreadingsantorum.com but with a bypass of the main screen so as not to show the splat and definition.
Real low tactics on Google's part.
59
Probably said already but Google results are customized to the user. If you're a google apps (gmail, docs, etc) user that customization will be more dramatic when logged in. But even to a regular google user I think they have some way of tracking your search history to customize your search results.
Probably only true way to get the default is to log out of Google and clear your browser's cache before a search.
Probably only true way to get the default is to log out of Google and clear your browser's cache before a search.
60
Fuck Google. Even if this isn't deliberate, they've already castrated their search engine and pulled that privacy bullshit that goes into effect tomorrow.
62
According to the updates to the linked SearchEngineLand piece, Google is claiming this has something to do with their new SafeSearch implementation, which pushes SafeSearch filtering even when you set it to disabled (now, if your search terms are not 'adult' according to Google, Google de-ranks 'adult' results; don't ask me why spreadingsantorum.com is at all 'adult' - except the fact that kids may have little interest in politics or anal sex - or why the Urban Dictionary page isn't 'adult' if spreadingsantorum.com is; also, given that lower-case santorum is far and away the more widely used definition of the word, I'm not sure why a search for "santorum" isn't itself considered 'adult'). Looks like Google might be engineering itself into irrelevance by censoring its results without direct user requests for it to do so. If I want sexy pictures of feet when I do a search for "feet" without having to limit my results by including additional 'adult' search terms, I'm going to have a lot more difficulty finding them with Google. Yahoo!, you have an opening.
63
Canadian here... I get
1. Wiki for Santorum
2. Wiki for Neologism Campaign
3. Spreading Santorum
4. His actual site.
You guys know what this means right? His wiki page needs some 'updating'
1. Wiki for Santorum
2. Wiki for Neologism Campaign
3. Spreading Santorum
4. His actual site.
You guys know what this means right? His wiki page needs some 'updating'
64
@ 62: Interesting. Add another item to my Fuck Google list. I'm not a child, I don't need them trying to be my parents.
66
Today's result for searching santorum on google yielded - Campaign for "santorum" neologism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Up from #2 yesterday!
Up from #2 yesterday!
Comments (67) RSS