Chris then makes a general statement and asks another totally separate question to that of the above article header, as follows:
<........We've been waiting for years for Facebook to "get into search" and "take on Google," and we appear to have the company's first real attempt at doing so.
.....Do you think Facebook has a legitimate shot at cutting into Google's share of the search market?" >
My brief answer to both questions is:
Facebook's Graph Search IS (or, may prove to be), the 'new' SEO.
Where instead of users finding products or services (in general search), the new Graph Search does have a certain potential ("Give Facebook a chance to move it forward out of beta- and add the stuff it really wants to add."), to get to 'reverse' this whole process.
And that, by using RT (real time) 'search intent' data we'll likely get to see SEO almost NLR-ed (or, no longer required- for businesses), where businesses that represent any searched for Products and Services may likely, soon be (themselves) finding individual (in-market) 'users' or, target audiences, and across a ONE publisher based marketplace.
All resulting from a user's known 'search intent' that's being declared (or, performed), across a very wide range of sites, that include search engines-a business' own site search or, that certain data being 'mined' from social, of the kind that can so easily be found, on Facebook.
How's that? Read my MediaPost (Joe Mandese) story, HERE.
And in answer to whether Facebook has a legitimate shot at cutting into Google's share of the search market(?) will become some-what
irrelevant - when PLAs (offering products or, services in real-time) gets into 'full swing'.
Where Google's advertisers will find a target user on any of the Google partners or, on Facebook-a user's current location or, next 'port of call' and vis-a-vis, Facebook. (In real-time.)
In his article, Chris (Crum) does state that Facebook will also be making suggestions in the search bar, and will display Bing results (and ads) for web searches. It's not hard to suggest, what those may well be.
It surprises me that a well known (renowned) SEO expert can make the following statement:
"Consider me," writes Danny Sullivan at Search Engine Land. "Not only have I not liked my electrician, my plumber, my dentist, my doctor or my tax person on Facebook .......... but I don't even know if they have Facebook pages. I have nothing to offer to my Facebook friends in this regard. Similarly, despite the huge number of books I read through my Kindle, I never go to like those books on Facebook, so books I love are more or less invisible on Facebook."
I'd suggest to Danny (in view of this "data" he has released on himself), that it will have likely already-both been 'crawled' and apportioned to his own (coded) 'IP addy' (or, from his Kindle ID), to be sold on to the likes of an Amazon (soon to come, on Facebook, I feel), with ads suggesting some other 'good reads' for him, on the way.
Relevancy? (Relevant ads?) Chris suggests:
"Another potential relevancy problem is that people change their minds. Just because you liked something two years ago (or longer) does not mean it represents your current opinion."
An independent RTB (Open) marketplace
In an Intent-Based global marketplace (with up to 100 billion 'events' per day, capability - Looksmart have stated that it now receives over 5 billion pieces of user search intent data, daily) it all gets to happen, in 'real time'.
Always, only an opinion.
LOOK: $0.97 0.00 (0.00%) 4:00PM EST
Disclosure: Long LOOK