Search strings

culturekitchen's "The Year In Keywords"

Well, our internal statistics for 2007 are finally tallied and we have some interesting data and insights about our work.

Most people who stumble upon our site are not looking for articles on politics. It seems like most are trolling for a sexual thrill --or so it seems by the keywords and phrases people have used to stumble upon our site.

I used to think it was funny but after years of looking at the site's stats and knowing that we don't write pornography, all I can think of is that the search engines definition of "optimization" is what we would call in the real world (and if we were talking about real people), plain and simple prejudice.

Search engines (and I am mostly referring here to Google), have decided that this site deals with a certain kind of material and thusly pushes our content up the top of pages that they have decided to have our site ranked in "with prejudice". Meaning that, the better our ranking in a search page, the more prejudiced or biased the search bot learns to be towards our site.

I am not one to believe that software, especially software that presumes to mimick human thought processes (but only faster) are above malice. After all, code and the software that is created with it is the product of the human mind. It is just another form of expression, another language.

Searchbots are meant to find pages relevant to the strings of text "fed" to them by web surfers. At no point are they meant to make sense of the search string based on the context of a site.

I could go on forever on this one and will eventually.

In the end, what I find incredibly interesting about these search strings is that, especially when there are several strings "tied for the same ranking", when read together, they sound like really bad emo poems.

The top 10 rankings for search keywords and/or phrases


liza's picture

| | | | | | | | | | |
Syndicate content

Visit our sponsors

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Visit our sponsors

Who's online

There are currently 1 user and 1299 guests online.

Online users

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Words to live by

One thing that I've found unsettling, though, in listening to coverage about the protests thusfar, is this "good immigrant/bad immigrant" rhetoric that's present in what some people are saying, protesters and organizers alike. This morning, while listening to NPR, I heard one woman speak about how Latino immigrants aren't doing anything to harm this country, that they "love America" and just want to become good, hard-working Americans. Then I heard one organizer, speaking at one of the rallies, say something like this: "Nineteen people hijacked planes and participated in the 9/11 attacks, and not one of them were named Gonzales, Rodriguez, or Santiago. But you can bet that many of the people dying serving their country in Iraq are named Gonzales, Rodriguez, and Santiago" so on and so forth.

I understand that much of this is in response to the whole immigration debate getting wrapped up in worries about "national security" - how the specter of terrorism seems to make allowances for all manner of discrimination, racism and xenophobia, and how countless immigrants are nonsensically made to suffer because of it. However, it definitely seems like a very bad, very problematic move to buy into this sort of dichotomy that pits "good" immigrants or "good" brown folks (here, Latinos) against "bad" ones (apparently people of Arab or Middle Eastern descent - because, you know, the actions of individuals become the responsibility, the fault, the burden of their entire race and religion.) Latinos, like all other immigrants to the United States, deserve to be treated with respect and dignity and are entitled to certain rights and protections because they are human beings, not because they're good, flag-waving*, American-loving immigrants. No one is illegal, no matter whether your name is Juan or Mohammed, Gonzales or Atta.


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify