So I'm reading through a recent AP story chronicling the growth of "social search" (search results based on human input) and low and behold I come across the following passage...
"Traditional search results are largely based on objective criteria such as counting the number of links other sites have placed to a given Web page. Social search gives people subjective answers -- the best sushi restaurant in Chicago or the best Web site for information about French impressionism -- not necessarily the site visited the most." (AP, July 9th)

Anything sound weird here? Of course. How about the fact that traditional search results are not based "the site visited the most"!

Unfortunately, this is actually a common misconception regarding search. Its just sad to see a "tech" writer make such a blatant error for such a supposedly reputable organization. The only perspective more common than this misconceived notion is the "I don't know how search works" point of view.

This unfortunate journalistic fiasco is just another indicator of how the search market (especially on the consumer end) is still in its infancy. Keep that in mind the next time you get frustrated because one of your clients doesn't quite "get it" when it comes to understanding search results and search engine optimization.

Here's a link to the story in question, in case you fee like seeing it for yourself (its good for a laugh or two):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060709/ap_on_hi_te/social_search_1