Is Google good or evil?

As many people probably know, Google mostly decides how "valuable" your website is based on how many other websites point to it, and the quality of those links. So, obviously, if your website is new, not many other websites will point to it. In short, without popularity, you are nothing, nobody and worthless (kind of like in High School, but now you are playing with real money.)

This leads to some rather strange and bizarre behavior and activities.

For example, when the Web first started, it was normal for people to exchange links. We did it because we actually liked each other's sites. I had a website about travel in Prague: there were other websites about Prague that I linked to, because I thought their websites were cool and that my readers would actually be interested in them. And some of them linked to me for the same reason: some linked to me without my even asking them, and I found out about it from my visitors or my web log. Those were wonderful, innocent times. I miss them.

Now, if you want someone to link to you, it is a business deal. Nothing more. You want a link, it'll cost you. At the very least, you had better link back to me, and from not more than 2 levels down from your home page. I am ashamed to admit, I have some links like that, too: hey, my family has to eat, right (not that my site is actually earning me any money...)

For some "link exchange" sites, this is their whole business model.

You can find some really crappy sites which are nothing more than collections of links and advertisements. Most of those tend to be Google ads. Don't you just love it when there are like 8 Google ads on a single page, with nothing else except for some stupid links to other stupid websites? Who clicks on those ads, anyway? Who knows: maybe some guys in India or China, coming in through a proxy, so it looks like they are in the USA...nice work if you can get it, right?

Do you remember when it was OK to tell people in forums about neat stuff you'd found on the net? When people used to genuinely want to share this information with each other. Heck, you could even put your own website URL in your signature: it was obvious what it was, and nobody had to click on it if they weren't interested, right? But if they wanted to see your website, well that was also their choice. We're all grownups here.

Not anymore. Because now links are precious! Everybody knows that. The forum owner certainly knows that. He doesn't want to waste a link on your crappy website...unless you're willing to PAY him for it! So, obviously, you don't dare post a link to your own website anyplace, even if it is relevant to the discussion. Because, if you do, at the very least it will be removed, and maybe you will be banned.

Back in the old days (pre-Pagerank), links were actually a "good thing." They tied communities together and allowed people to show mutual respect and admiration for each other. It was the electronic equivalent of friendship and brotherly love. What about now?

Someone wise once said that, if you want to see more of some behavior, then reward it: in other words, "you get what you pay for."

And what does Google pay for? Love? Friendship? Community? Mutual Respect? No! You can link to as many other websites as you wish, and it won't help you. In fact, if you and another website mutually link to each other, Google decreases the value of those links!

What does Google value the most? One way links! And what's the easiest way to get someone to give you some love, without showing them any love in return? Well, that's the world's oldest profession: and you are either buying or selling...Get the picture?

Sorry, but this is just wrong, and it goes against the original intent behind hyperlinks.

Now, I admit, there are dishonest folks who produce nothing of value, who's "products" are scams, and would spam the heck out of every single forum given the opportunity.

But there are also little mom and pop shops (like mine) who spend 90% of their waking time creating good content and struggling to rise above the noise so that they have a chance to make just enough money to live. Who have invested literally all of their family's savings into a their tiny business, and fought like tigers to find good, honest products and get them to market (which, believe me, is not easy.)

Sure, when Google was small and weak, like my little business, "Do no Evil" was a reasonable goal. It would have been pretentious for them to say that they were "going to change the world and make it a better place." They just tried to do the best they could, and hoped that they would be successful.

And they were successful. And they grew powerful. And they did change the world.

So now, Google, its time to ask yourself: what are you going to do with all that power?

Can you honestly tell me that a system which blindly rewards power and money, dishonesty, greed and selfishness in others is truly "Good?"

Isn't favoring the rich and powerful, while ignoring the small, weak and struggling (who, after all, need Google most of all) the very definition of "Evil"?

Google, your technology was developed for a different Web: because of you, that Web is gone. I believe you didn't mean to do it, but you brought Evil into the world, because you failed to anticipate the consequences of your technology.

Google, powerful technology like yours is never morally neutral! By failing to do Good, you have done Evil!

Shouldn't Google, instead, TRY to reward the small and struggling newborn who just want the chance to work hard and produce something honest and real?

Isn't every new life precious and valuable? Don't we need to nurture and protect the weak and vulnerable, to give them the same opportunity to grow, mature and become the best that they can possibly be...just like you did, Google?

Sure, you may ask "how would Google do that?" How could Google change the way it works so that it helps those who are worthy and could most benefit?

That's a great question. And I honestly don't know the answer, but I'm going to think about it. And I'd like your opinion, too.