Google’s cultural imperialism

Google logo in stars and stripes

OK, the title is a little dramatic but I stick by the sentiment.  Google made changes to its search results today that are biased towards American sites in the UK results pages.

I’m no Google hater, in fact I’m a keen user and despite knowing that their results are little, if any, better (and sometimes worse) than other search engines, I find it difficult to change my habit of checking there first.  I also use and like many other Google products regularly and carry an Android phone.  Google is well embedded in my life.

So, on the same day that Google took a stand against China for it’s freedom of speech failures, it also decided that American English is the correct version of English and that your results should be given in American first.  Even on when searching from Buckingham Palace.  I haven’t actually tested that but presumably.

So, a search for “utilisation ratio” (no, I don’t know what it means either) shows the following:

Utilisation v's utilisation

and provides the results for the American spelling, “utilization ratio” rather than the British English version, “utilisation ratio”.  But I typed with an “s”, why on earth would you assume I meant with a “z”?

Now, it’s good that Google tells us what’s going on but what is the point of insisting on American spelling?  Isn’t this just further filling the UK search results with less relevant foreign pages?

As has been well documented by the likes of DaveN, SearchCowboys and Kevin Gibbons, Google often includes irrelevant foreign sites for searches that require local results.  Even now the famous “tennis court hire” search on produces 40% Australian results on the first page.  Okay, so there are probably more tennis courts for hire in one suburb of Sydney than the whole of the UK but that doesn’t matter, Google should aim for a top ten that shows the best ten local results. There may be searches where a couple of foreign options might be okay but “tennis court hire” isn’t one of them.  In the event that someone in the UK wants to investigate hiring tennis courts in Australia, they’ll probably specify that fact.

I digress. The “utilisation ratio” example doesn’t always hold.  For example Google doesn’t even think twice about “coloured contact lenses”, “aluminium windows” or “moustache pictures” before providing only UK spelling results.  It seems to be only terms with words ending in “-isation” that Google has decided to give the US version of and even then not for all of them. I’ve not figured out a definite pattern but it may be to do with the number results with a particular spelling.

Here’s a good one – type “urbanisation in the UK” into and you get results for “urbanization in the UK”

Here are the urbanization results:

and here are the urbanisation results:,,2166176,00.html

I removed the BBC results that appear on each page for ease of comparison.

I’m not sure about you but I can see straight away from the URLs that the second set of results are much better – quality newspaper articles and authoritative UK sites against Tiscali and an Amazon book about Vikings in Ireland?  At least it’s Amazon UK I suppose.

“parking offense” and “parking offence” are interesting as Google serves up different results but doesn’t seem to notice that they are just US/UK spelling variations.

Bottom line is I don’t understand what the point of this change is, if someone could explain it I’d be forever grateful.

In its defense, I’m sure Google didn’t mean to cause any offense so perhaps there’s no need to chastize it ;-)

Least relevant Google result returns….

A while back I wrote about a bizarre result that I was seeing for the term “hibs” on Google UK and .com (It also appears for terms like “hibernian fc edinburgh”!!!). It sorted itself out fairly quickly afterwards but I noticed today it has returned to the top spot for this search and various other Hibernian related searches…

All heil Flugplatz Bielefeld (now with added map and horizontal sitelinks).  WTF?  If anyone can give any sort of explanation for this I’d love to hear it…

Google UK result

Google UK result

Ban the phonebook / Yellow Pages

It seems there is growing momentum in the US to do something about the amount of waste caused by phone books.  I live in a block of 9 flats and when new books come out (white pages, Yellow Pages and Thomson Local) they are dumped at the bottom of the stairs and sit there for about a week until I put them in the recycling bin.  No-one wants them – people have the internet or know their friends’ numbers.

Business directories such as Yellow Pages and Thomson must be on borrowed time.  I wonder how much business that companies actually get from them.  I know that in a year of advertising through them I didn’t receive a single call.  I suspect it might still be worthwhile for taxi companies, emergency plumbers and takeaway food but I think Yellow Pages only still exists because lots of companies don’t actually measure how much business it brings in and are just in the habit of paying them.  They also have high pressure sales people lying about the number of calls you’re likely to receive in order bring in new business.  It’s a short term income but one that a dying business is forced into.

According to stop the waste, over 80% of Americans would be happy with an opt-in system whereby you only receive a book if you request one, I suspect the same figures would be seen here.  Obviously that wouldn’t go down well with Yellow Pages who are happy to print thousands of totally unread books every year in order to sell advertising but it makes sense from both an ecological and moral point of view.

I’m just going to have a check, I think I have a Yellow Pages somewhere – I suspect it may be from years ago.

Two ticks….

…okay, it’s pristine but only from 2007 so not as old as I thought. The recycling just got a kilo heavier.

Update: Link to 11 Biggest Spammers in history where the Yellow Pages is #1.