It's interesting reading Understanding the Psychology of the Google User (Through the Actions of an Engineer) in SeoBook today; it puts forth that Google puts out contradictory messages (I guess, just like the government does, and often, just like people do, themselves when they're conflicted - in this case, when Google itself, is Conflicted).  

It all comes down to, according to Shomoney (see video below - especially at 4:15 till the end of the clip) that if you make Google look stupid, they'll drop your site out of the index because the quality and integrity of Search is Google's main way of making money - and if they lose that - they lose everything:

Overall, to me it says that Google is, more and more, turning into Yahoo, but maybe a bit more technologically savvy Yahoo.  Perhaps, as Google becomes more like a Portal, more like an Advertiser, it's thinking (which used to be focused just on search relevancy) is subtly changing, morphing into it's truer "Yahoo" form.

I think, the problem stems from a company that went public and is trying to satisfy the needs of most people, that use Google and wants to believe it it's search integrity, and the needs of investors that want to see Google's stock price go higher and higher and higher. 

Now Google, as a public company, is at cross purposes … one group intends to be "purist" and opt for "search relevancy" while other go after the money, and higher ad revenue.  It's not easy reconciling the pulls to go in different directions (to keep different groups happy with the organization happy - but that's what Google has do now - because it's existence serves many needs - not all of which are in-sync with one another). 

Like, the relevancy group wants to opt for relevance while the money interests want to sell out to the highest bidder and yet not mess up the search relevancy … but how can you do that?   You can't - (not if your totally honest about it)  and that's what is becoming more and more apparent as Google matures as a company.  

In fact, that's why Google, at the beginning, was more likable, because you could understand and know what Google's intent and purpose was when it was just a search engine that was privately owned, it was just a company about Search, and improving Search Relevancy with a great search engine, the best search engine at the time….but now…. what is Google? 

Google has become more like a conglomerate of  interests … all self serving …

Here's how SeoBook puts it - he finds a couple of the more obvious conflicts Google is mired with now - perhaps, somehow, Google will explain how they are not conflicts of interest, but just incomplete explanations of how they operate  - I am taking this from the SeoBook post:

The Changing Desires of the Magical Fictitious Average User

• One day Google sells the story of how "PageRank reflects the unique democratic reflection of the web" and a day later they talk about "hand editing to protect our users".
• One day they talk about how "Users don’t want to see results sorted by who has the biggest pocketbook." and the next day they are talking about how "ads are a type of information".
• One day they talk about how "the FTC believes ads need to be clearly marked" and the next day they tell publishers to blend ads in the content and remove the ads by Google notification from their own ads.

I bet there are different people in Google saying it one way and another group is saying something else - they probably don't even realize there is a conflict here.

More damning is the following set of points that make Google sound no different than Yahoo…in fact, you could substitute the Google for Yahoo and it would fit perfectly.  

How Relevancy is Defined

• Money to Google = relevant, good user experience.
• Large profit stream going elsewhere = spam, unless such classification hurts Google.
• Relevancy algorithms and user priorities change to match Google's business interests. Spam is redefined as business partnerships allow Google to increase revenues. Google is never considered spam, even if Google pays their partners to steal your entire website and wrap it in Google ads.

Doesn't that just sound like Yahoo personified?  

Wasn't Yahoo just about Money, Money, Money..the more money you spent on advertising, somehow, the higher up in the organic search results you became ……… don't tell me that's not true - I've seen it over and over and over again, in any segment where there was a lot of money to be spent (made) on advertising.

The problem is - as I see it - you can't become advertising portal and search engine while retaining total integrity in both directions — something has got to give - one thing is bound to spill into the other - creating a collection of conflicted positions, more of a political situation (probably, again, made by different groups within Google, each serving different stakeholders with somewhat different interests).

Perhaps what is really surprising, is that Google is trying to act like it's not self serving where as many other large companies are clearly self serving, and simply are acting in accord with that …. it's clear the companies might have started to serve a public need, but once those companies became public, they also served the need of making other people who invested in them richer and richer - and that changed what those companies were about.  At least, that's how I see it - but I'm not an investor - and don't own stock in anything, so maybe it's easier for me to think the way I do.

It would seem to me, at this point, if you accept what I have put forth, so far, that Google ought to just spin off it's Search Engine into a seporate company or spin off it's advertising off to a different company - and just let them operate doing what each does best.   The only problem I see with doing that - it would cause Google to lose part of it's competitive edge, and make it slower to respond - which it today's world, means falling behind.

But, at some point, Google needs to resolve the image of what people think they are…
.and what they actually have become.