Twitter unhappy about Google's social search changes

Twitter has complained about changes made by Google to integrate its social network Google+ into search results.

The new feature, called Search plus Your World, will automatically push results from Google+ up the search rankings.

Tweeting on the news, Twitter's lawyer Alex Macgillivray described it as a "bad day for the internet".

Full story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16511794

[Moderator]

Does Twitter have a search engine ? ?
Am i missing something here ? ?

Does Twitter have a search engine ? ?
Am i missing something here ? ?

I think the idea/point is that google are pointing all there search results to there own service.

I think the idea/point is that google are pointing all there search results to there own service.

And?

[Moderator]

How do you think Bing operates ? ?
It's the nature of the beast...

And?

I'm answering a question, what are you doing?

How do you think Bing operates ? ?
It's the nature of the beast...

Agreed, I didn't write the article or make Twitter unhappy so

How do you think Bing operates ? ?

is directed at the wrong person.

Sorry Patio and BC. Not meaning to be a little off just posting the news.

Alright everybody. That settles that. Mulreay will post news, and we will not discuss it.

Alright everybody. That settles that. Mulreay will post news, and we will not discuss it.

Your getting on my nerves now.

If posting a news article means 'I' have to justify it then *censored* yeah don't comment. You seem to think your being clever with your snide remarks but your just being petty.
So I shouldn't defend myself? When EVERY comment from you was directed at me?

Please don't try to be clever at my expense.

Anyway I apologised for getting a tad tetchy and I will apologise again.

Your getting on my nerves now.

Woah, sorry I asked for more information!

If posting a news article means 'I' have to justify it

Well I sort of figured that if you knew the point of the original article you might have been able to shed some light on how that point was an issue. I wasn't asking for justification in any way. Also, seems that (after reading the article) that "point" is moot; the reason for the "favouring" is because twitter won't let them(google) index twitter anymore.

You seem to think your being clever with your snide remarks but your just being petty.

What snide remarks? I simply asked for a clarification.

Anyway, from reading the linked article, I still am unclear as to why this is an issue (to twitter). Seems they brought it on themselves; google isn't "Pointing" their search results, insomuch as twitter (and as the article notes, facebook) simply aren't allowing google to index their pages. Which seems a bit weird, for them to be surprised that, by removing themselves from google's index, they suddenly rank lower on many searches. I guess they didn't realize how the two sort of went hand-in-hand. Of course, now that twitter no longer is as well-indexed, Google+ bubbles to the top.

Not that I would personally put it past Google, though. Then again, I would prefer it no social network was indexed. If I, for some reason, want to google, say, "Raisin bran" I would prefer if a wikipedia page was near the top (or something similar) as opposed, to, say, a facebook fan page for raisin bran, or a twitter hashtag, or something.

I think the point Patio and BC were trying to make was that if you go into a Ford dealership (Mercedes, whatever) they won't recommend a Chevy.  All companies are going to push their own products.  It's how they make money to pay their bills and employees.

I think the point Patio and BC were trying to make was that if you go into a Ford dealership (Mercedes, whatever) they won't recommend a Chevy.  All companies are going to push their own products.  It's how they make money to pay their bills and employees.

Well, yeah, and what makes it sort of funny is that twitter (and again, facebook is mentioned in the article) basically don't want google to index their pages (for whatever reason). of course, by not indexing the pages, they will end up lower in search rankings; hardly surprising.

Actually, in some ways, it is sort of funny. Microsoft's default search engine is Bing, and some people get all angry about that, but Firefox being paid millions of dollars to shove google as everybody's default search engine, well that's somehow different.

And of course that has nothing to do with twitter. Oh well.

#raisinbran

I think the point Patio and BC were trying to make was that if you go into a Ford dealership (Mercedes, whatever) they won't recommend a Chevy.  All companies are going to push their own products.  It's how they make money to pay their bills and employees.

Yeah, like I said I'm a little tetchy.
Sorry BC and Patio not meaning to be cross just sometimes it feels like your criticising me. And I know your not, it's just the article. 

[Moderator]

The one thing in this equation that has not been considered...so i'll bring it up is the efficiency of how a search engine operates...
Think of how many people tweet ..or twit as i call it every thing they do at all odd hours of the day...

OK if your still with me imagine one day you want to find a local supplier for let's say bathroom fixtures and you do a google search for bathroom fixtures...your 1st 3 pages are filled with Twits that just said i gotta take a dump BRB...

Nightmare waiting to happen.

The one thing in this equation that has not been considered...so i'll bring it up is the efficiency of how a search engine operates...
Think of how many people tweet ..or twit as i call it every thing they do at all odd hours of the day...

OK if your still with me imagine one day you want to find a local supplier for let's say bathroom fixtures and you do a google search for bathroom fixtures...your 1st 3 pages are filled with Twits that just said i gotta take a dump BRB...

Nightmare waiting to happen.

Very true and nicely put.