
You don't see Google on first page of search results by googling “search engine” - wenbin
https://www.google.com/search?q=search+engine
======
jessaustin
Speculation only, but this might be as much to prevent user confusion as for
any other reason. Lots of people, especially lots of people who need to
research the term "search engine", don't understand the difference between
Google and an empty address bar. (That is, they haven't learned about
addresses.) If they click a link and just go back to the same page, they'll be
confused and frustrated.

~~~
aisofteng
Your suggestion implies that Google manually modifies the results it gives to
some search queries.

~~~
nulagrithom
They do.
[https://www.google.com/search?q=recursion](https://www.google.com/search?q=recursion)
Plenty of other examples.

~~~
aisofteng
Adding a "Did you mean..." is not modifying search results.

~~~
justinlaster
Could it be argued that spelling suggestions are still a search result in and
of themselves?

~~~
aisofteng
No.

~~~
manojlds
And even if it is, doesn't qualify for "manually modifies the result."

~~~
justinlaster
It's specific to that search term, and has absolutely nothing to do with the
Google's general functionality. How is it not "manual"?

They clearly are able to create result sets crafted by their employees for
specific search terms.

~~~
cgriswald
Google's general functionality includes suggestions. Spellcheck, even of more
obscure search terms, doesn't require _manual_ intervention. The system could
easily determine that people who search for "pancales" follow up that search
immediately with "pancakes".

~~~
justinlaster
Did you miss OP's example? Why would spellcheck give you the same word you
just typed in? It's manual intervention.

They are clearly able to modify search results based on a rule system.

------
verbify
The other comments claim it's deliberate. I'm not sure. Google are pretty
adamant that they don't manually edit results. And it's at least possible that
most references to search engines in news articles and the like reference
alternatives to Google. Google is the kleenex of search engines - it's so
synonymous that people forget that kleenex is a kind of tissue.

~~~
jaypaulynice
But they can control the content of the page. I looked at the source page and
there is 0 mention of "search engine" on Google.com source page.

I'm pretty sure Google works contextually to know "search engine" means
searching the web. Gogoduck does have the reference 5 times in the source code
but Bing doesn't. Gogoduck can take the chance with their content to be the
first, but if the leading search engines were to sue or act against Gogoduck,
then it would be in Gogoduck's favor to get the spotlight.

If you go to Google to find Gogoduck then Google is of course the more
valuable.

------
axiom92
Query "search engine set default". It figures that you mean business, drops
the cool guy act, and is quick to point out ways to come home from IE.

------
tyingq
That's got to be intentional, either as an amusing Easter egg, or to try and
provide an example of their unbiased approach.

It certainly doesn't jive with the page rank approach.

~~~
f_allwein
I thnk it makes sense - probably not many people are linking to Google wth the
anchor text "search engine". Or rather, they would be more likely to do so
with ant other search engine.

~~~
tyingq
Supposedly, Google got smarter some time back and relied more on contextual
meaning of the linking page, as a whole, vs literal anchor text.

------
jaypaulynice
Anti-trust probably...Google doesn't want to be seen as a monopoly even though
it has a monopoly on search. One less lawsuit. No ads at the top also. Since
the user is looking for a search engine on Google, it could mean they're
looking for an alternative to Google.

~~~
thomasthomas
if i was google's lawyers i'd argue search isn't an industry. they make money
via ads so its in the ad industry. itsmy chief problem with thiels 0 to 1.

~~~
aisofteng
If you were Google's lawyer, then you would be a lawyer. From the content of
your post, it seems clear you aren't one.

~~~
thomasthomas
google, facebook, twitter all eating from the same pie: ad dollars.

~~~
127001brewer
Actually, this comment reminded me of the following:

[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisi...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisings-
century-of-flat-line-growth)

TLDR;: _But in one sense, the advertising business is about as static and
boring as they come. The industry has never grown in scale. Looking at data
since the 1920s, the U.S. advertising industry has always been about 1 percent
of U.S. GDP. It’s surprisingly consistent, mostly tracking between 1 percent
and 1.4 percent—and averaging 1.29 percent._

So when you said, "...eating from the same pie", according to the linked
article, they actually are.

~~~
thomasthomas
tangentially related: thats why i love amazon's upside. retail means theyre
swimming in way bigger pond than facebook/google (at least with their core
products)

------
parennoob
I don't know about the specifics of how this is related to their algorithm,
but it makes perfect sense from a philosophical standpoint.

You are using Google (the world's most well-known search engine) to search for
other search engines. So either you are clueless about what a search engine is
(in which case they win, since you're using them without knowing the term), or
you're explicitly looking for alternatives (in which case, according to their
philosophy, the way to serve you best is to give you a great list of all the
other search engines out there).

------
CM30
Interestingly, you do see it on the first page in Bing and DuckDuckGo.

And while I did initially think that might be deliberate (because hey, why
bother showing a link to your search engine on the first page of results in
your search engine?), Bing and DuckDuckGo are listed when you search 'search
engine' in those search engines.

Makes me wonder why Google doesn't list themself here.

~~~
ryanmonroe
I would assume results rankings are based on how many people click the link
after searching the given terms. Probably no one searches "search engine" on
Google then clicks on a link to google.com .

~~~
rosstex
You're right: they all search "Google" and click Google.

Source: my mom.

------
lisper
Heh, the first result is DDG, the second is the wikipedia page on search
engines, and the third is this:

[https://searchenginewatch.com/2016/02/25/say-goodbye-to-
goog...](https://searchenginewatch.com/2016/02/25/say-goodbye-to-
google-14-alternative-search-engines/)

"Say goodbye to Google: 14 alternative search engines"

------
supernintendo
Surprised to see Dogpile still around (and near the top of results). I
remember using it as my main search engine in the early 2000s.

------
smsm42
I think it's very good relevancy-wise. If you look on google for search
engine, it's more likely that link to google.com is not helpful, since you
already know of google.com, supposedly. How that is achieved though might be
an interesting question.

OTOH, DDG is the second result for "search engine" on DDG :)

------
h4nkoslo
Why would you? You're already there. It's effectively a synonym for "different
search engine".

------
jbob2000
Because google isn't really a search engine anymore.

Search engines just do dumb scraping of web pages. Google _understands_ the
webpage, so that when I look up "pancake recipe" it will just show me the
steps to making pancakes rather than pointing me to websites with pancake
recipes.

It's more like an "internet integrator".

~~~
tyingq
Google says it is:
[https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/464?hl=en](https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/464?hl=en)

~~~
jbob2000
Because that's how they're known, search engine is the colloquial term for
them. It just seems disingenuous to call them that when their version of
"search engine" is space-age while everyone else is palaeolithic era.

I thought it would spark an interesting discussion...

~~~
tyingq
I'll vote for "contextual ad engine". I suspect the r&d dollars are mostly
spent there now that there's little incentive to improve the organic results.

My definition of ad is broader than Google's though. I would include all their
various widgets that are displacing organic search.

------
smaili
_Say goodbye to Google: 14 alternative search engines_ is 3rd :)

------
samfisher83
Duck duck go appears first.

