The individuals responsible for the deterioration of the internet

The individuals responsible for the deterioration of the internet

As the public begins to question the effectiveness of Google, what are the implications for the search engine optimization experts who capitalized on valuable content and spread it across the web? Well, they discover new avenues to accumulate wealth and perpetuate their practices.

The alligator immediately captured my attention. Naturally, that was the desired outcome. When news broke that a 10-foot alligator would be unleashed at a rooftop bar in South Florida, as part of an event dedicated to individuals accused of ruining the internet, it was hard not to be intrigued. Had it been presented as a link — "WATCH: 10-foot Gator Prepares to Maul Digital Marketers" — I would have undoubtedly clicked on it. Instead, I had the opportunity to meet the professionals who specialized in such gimmicks, the very individuals responsible for turning online existence into what one tech writer recently termed a "search-optimized hellhole." Consequently, I promptly booked a plane ticket to the Sunshine State.

I aimed to comprehend what sort of individuals spend their days capitalizing on our most irrational urges for the sake of web traffic and monetary gain. Who exactly are these individuals profiteering off the misery of others?

In today's age, many people are dissatisfied with their ability to retrieve information from the internet. This dissatisfaction, for the majority, can be attributed to the quality of Google Search results. People claim that the links that appear when they seek answers online are "completely unusable," "worthless," and "a nightmare" due to the lack of authenticity in the content. Some lay the blame on Google itself, asserting that this all-powerful, trillion-dollar corporation with a 90 percent market share in online search is corrupting our access to the truth. However, others attribute the blame to the individuals I sought to encounter in Florida — those who practice the enigmatic art of search engine optimization, commonly referred to as SEO.

Engaging in SEO is not simply about purchasing advertising space labeled "Sponsored" above organic search results; it is akin to the Wizard of Oz projecting his voice to amplify his authority. The goal is to manipulate the algorithm into displaying a website as prominently as possible in search results by tailoring the content to appease the algorithm. This technique capitalizes on Google's perceived objectivity, enticing users and subsequently bombarding them with various forms of advertising. Voilà: a business model! Over time, SEO techniques have become increasingly covert and widespread, to the extent that conducting a simple Google search can feel akin to looking up the definition of "sneaker" in a dictionary, only to find an inaccurate description suspiciously resembling a promotion for Nike ("footwear that allows you to just do it!"). Perhaps this is why SEO and its practitioners are reviled: their actions have seemingly shattered the illusion that the internet was ever concerned with anything other than commercial transactions.

So, who ultimately pursues a career in SEO? The stereotype portrays an unscrupulous hustler: a content-driven opportunist willing to forsake rules, ethics, and discerning taste in exchange for a vast audience and immense wealth. They are nihilists seeking thrill and amusement, pranksters reveling in their ability to elude capture.

Cade Lee, who provided me with insight over the phone based on his decade-long experience in SEO, described the field as "modern-day pirate shit, as close as you can get." He noted that at SEO conferences and networking events, he often encounters a distinct arrogance among practitioners. "They all possess a certain level of ego," he explained. "Once they achieve success, they believe they are geniuses, having surpassed Google itself."

As I contemplated search engine optimization and how this group of self-absorbed individuals progressively eroded our collective notion of reality in pursuit of Lamborghinis and conquest over the formidable algorithm — which, technically, comprises multiple algorithms but is often perceived as a unified entity — my anticipation for the alligator party in Florida grew. I wondered if I would witness the comeuppance of someone who had amassed millions by inundating the internet with deceit. Perhaps, right before my eyes, an SEO professional would fall victim to a gargantuan, primordial-looking reptile. Maybe I could even reframe such a tragedy as a sensationalized anecdote for a viral article about individuals who make a living from SEO, subtly implying that nature was exacting punishment on the wrongdoers, all while maintaining the moral high ground and pretending I hadn't hoped for this precise outcome from the very beginning.

After all, like everyone else, I rely on Google. I, too, desire reliable and relevant information when perusing this vast repository of human knowledge. And like everyone else, I relish the gratification of revenge.

The first setback at the alligator party came in the form of a misrepresentation; the alligator was only five and a half feet long, contrary to the advertised length of 10 feet. A classic case of clickbait!

The second issue that occurred at the alligator party was my realization that nearly everyone I encountered was sympathetic towards the potential harm the attendees might face from a five-and-a-half-foot alligator, or at the very least, they were kind enough not to wish such harm upon them. My most critical evaluation of the 200 digital marketers present, who were busy enjoying the music of a dancehall reggae band while taking shots, was that their attire reflected a Floridian lifestyle, which was unsurprising considering that most of them hailed from Florida.

One specific individual I met was Missy Ward, a blonde woman dressed in a tight orange bandage dress. She humorously shared with me that she had purchased the dress from Amazon and only tried it on for the first time on the day of the alligator party. Ward possessed a spirited and sarcastic energy that compelled me to support her. She mentioned that when she started working in SEO in 1998, the field was predominantly male, with only a few female pioneers. Eventually, she sold her company for a staggering $40 million. In that moment, I found myself genuinely excited to learn about her accomplishments. She patiently explained the history of SEO to me and suggested other individuals in the field whom I should connect with. She even recommended that I speak with a gentleman across the room sporting a sky blue polo, who hosted a well-established podcast about SEO. This gentleman was Daron Babin.

I soon discovered that Daron Babin perfectly embodied the type of individual often referred to as a "modern-day pirate." He enthusiastically recounted the cunning tricks that allowed him to amass his wealth, as warned by others. Babin's career in SEO began in 1994, even before the existence of Google. He described an atmosphere of intense manipulation within a peculiar community of geeks and nerds who frequently discussed their strategies for outsmarting search engine algo

As the sun descended and dusk settled in, I once again found myself in the presence of Daron Babin. As he began to share one of his noteworthy tactics from the '90s, involving counterfeit domain names, it became evident that he possessed a unique skillset: "I could make it appear as though it belonged to someone else, but it would ultimately lead back to me!" Although what he and his competitors did was within legal boundaries, it far exceeded the limitations imposed by the dominant search engine. While he never faced repercussions for his actions, the effects were felt by internet users on a larger scale. "Ultimately, it created chaos for Yahoo," he recounted with a sense of satisfaction, "but we certainly reaped the benefits."

The situation struck a familiar chord within me. Babin charmed me with his wit and intelligence, making him a keen observer of the world of search engine optimization (SEO). "We are entering an incredibly peculiar time from an optimization standpoint," he disclosed. Whoever believed that the internet was already saturated with SEO-focused content should prepare for what lies ahead.

Babin denounced those unscrupulous individuals and their collaborations with subpar link-building companies, paying for the creation of low-quality articles. He gleefully mentioned how they could now exploit the free version of GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer). According to him, this would only further deteriorate the quality of Google's search results, giving rise to an abundance of AI-generated rubbish that solely aims to please algorithms. This flood of content would surpass any human capacity to create and anything we had ever witnessed before.

"They will be powerless to halt this relentless onslaught," he chuckled. Reflecting on the imminent future dominated by the next generation of automated SEO, Babin exemplified how puny and irrelevant Google would become. "You simply cannot impede it!"

Returning home with a mixture of admiration for cunning rogues and trepidation regarding the future predicted by these same renegades, my focus shifted to seeking a broader sample of SEO professionals. Perhaps those residing outside of Florida, where I initially encountered Babin, would exhibit a stronger adherence to principles. A trusted contact informed me that I should seek out a man revered as Legendary Lars, as he was considered a deity in this realm.

Located in Northern California, I finally tracked down Lars Mapstead, who was simultaneously preparing to run for the presidency in 2024, representing the Libertarian party. Mapstead's early life was characterized by travel in a Volkswagen van along the Pacific coast, under the roof of his hippie parents. Settling in Big Sur, they forged a simple existence devoid of electricity, accompanied by goats and chickens. Mapstead developed into a self-taught handyman and an autodidact, known for meticulously reading instruction manuals and fixing things himself. It was in 1993, while working for a company selling computer motherboards, that he first learned about the World Wide Web.

The concept of boundless information ignited a sense of liberation within him. He vividly recalled his thoughts at the time, remarking, "It's all about collaboration and the betterment of mankind!" Mapstead promptly immersed himself in the world of website construction and the submission process for early search directories such as AltaVista, WebCrawler, Infoseek, and Lycos. The creation of chat rooms, attracting people from various corners of the globe, allowed him to unite individuals who were alone in their homes but connected online. It was an enthralling and beautiful experience. Mapstead envisaged himself as an explorer within a relatively small yet finite digital domain. "I had traversed the entire internet. There wasn't a page I hadn't encountered."

Everything changed on that fateful day when a New York-based company approached him with an offer to pay $2,000 per month for placing banner ads on one of his websites. It became apparent that more clicks equated to increased advertising revenue, and higher search engine rankings resulted in more clicks. With an insatiable hunger for higher rankings, Mapstead devoted himself to learning every possible tactic. He began incorporating images of women in bikinis and created a 60-page slideshow, each page adorned with banner ads. Recognizing that most search engines merely ranked websites based on the frequency of specific search terms appearing within the site and its tags, he intensified his efforts to stuff keywords into his pages. By repeatedly resubmitting his URL to search engines and waiting for the impact of these manipulations, he witnessed his results change.

Mapstead soon found himself earning between $25,000 and $30,000 per month, toiling for 12 to 14 hours a day. The magnitude of this income surpassed his wildest dreams, transforming his life and casting an unknown expiration date on his newfound success.

Around this period, in 1997, an Italian professor published a journal article on the concept of Search Engines Persuasion. Highlighting the burgeoning problem of finding accurate information on the ever-expanding World Wide Web, he expressed concern about the emergence of countless companies committed to maximizing the visibility of customer web pages. Consequently, this trend led to a significant deterioration in the performance of search engines. 

Enter Google. This company revolutionized the world of search by evaluating websites based on their links from other websites, considering each link as a vote of relevance and trustworthiness. The founders pledged to deliver a neutral navigation system, free from advertisements: a simple, clean white screen accompanied by a search box that would seamlessly direct users to helpful websites. Users quickly recognized the superiority of this link-based sorting methodology compared to existing search engines. By-

Mapstead, similar to many early adopters of SEO, quickly adapted to the changing landscape. Shortly after Google's rise to prominence, a secondary market emerged, offering links for sale. For a modest sum, firms in India or the Philippines would provide thousands of links from specialized blog networks. The process was straightforward: purchase links that directed to your website, and witness a rise in your Google search ranking.

Over time, I came to realize that people have been attempting to manipulate search results since the inception of the internet. In response, there have always been voices decrying these manipulations as detrimental to the usefulness of search. This pattern operates in cycles: SEO practitioners exploit loopholes in algorithms, critics voice concerns about search results, and search engines innovate and close these loopholes. The cycle perpetuates itself.

Before the widespread disillusionment with online information we experience today, SEO had encountered significant challenges on multiple occasions. In 2003, as Google's IPO approached, the company discreetly introduced an update to combat SEO manipulation. By 2011, SEO had once again become overwhelmingly pervasive. An article by TechCrunch titled "Why We Desperately Need a New (and Better) Google" argued that "Google has become a jungle: a tropical paradise for spammers and marketers." The subsequent year saw Google implement two major algorithm changes, referred to as Panda and Penguin.

While the general public may have embraced these updates as positive developments, Mapstead and his SEO colleagues viewed them as devastating. He expressed, "They change the rules instantly overnight, and then you’re out of business. Here you’re trying to rely on this business model to feed yourself and your family, and they’re pulling the rug from underneath you, and you’ve gotta scramble to pay rent."

However, there is little need to worry about Mapstead. He possesses an inexhaustible mental resourcefulness. He played a role in launching several companies, including the once-ubiquitous hookup site AdultFriendFinder, which was sold for $500 million in 2007. After attempting retirement, he grew bored and created a couple of Facebook pages dedicated to his passion for hot rods and custom cars. This coincided with the peak years of social media. As Bastilla had previously described at the alligator party, Mapstead's "core knowledge of SEO" proved advantageous. Eventually, his pages amassed 25 million followers. He remarked, "I was basically just spamming Facebook with cars and articles about cars and sending traffic to banner ads, and that turned into $120,000 a month. And that was supposed to be my hobby!"

As I engaged with more SEO professionals across the country, I began to see them as endearing rather than malevolent. While many had accumulated considerable wealth, few wielded significant power. Unlike tech titans such as Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, who transitioned from geeky teenagers to masters of the universe, SEO practitioners remained the subjects of ridicule. They were beholden to the whims of algorithms, desperately pulling levers behind the scenes, yet ultimately somewhat hapless.

Let's not forget that they refer to themselves as "SEOs." Truly, they use phrases such as "As the SEO, my job is to get more traffic." This title seems to crave the same level of prestige as a CEO, a desire to be taken seriously. In comparison to the rest of the tech industry, SEO has always lacked a certain allure or messianic complex. Take, for instance, the fact that while many tech CEOs who claim to save the world reside in Miami, the alligator party took place an hour up the coast in Fort Lauderdale.

Peter Kent, author of numerous explanatory tech books, including SEO for Dummies and Bitcoin for Dummies, asserts, "The SEO people are just trying to make money. The cryptocurrency people are trying to make money, but they’re also trying to overthrow, you know, the existing system." Although Kent has engaged in his fair share of SEO work, he offers an outsider's perspective. For years, he has maintained that 80 percent of SEO practitioners are scammers, contributing to the industry's tarnished reputation. He explained, "A lot of companies and individuals out there selling their services as SEO gurus don’t know what they’re doing or don’t really give a damn." As a consultant, he is often asked to assess the work of other SEOs. "I would take a look at their site and determine the firm had done next to nothing and had been charging thousands a month for years on end."

When I shared the statistic of 80 percent scam practitioners with other SEOs, most agreed that it sounded accurate, though opinions differed on whether this stemmed from greed or sheer incompetence.

"it is not because they have a scammer's heart," said Bruce Clay. "It is because they lack the real expertise." Clay, an avuncular man with a mustache, is often credited with coining the phrase "search engine optimization" and is therefore known as the "father of SEO." He informed me that his agency never hires an SEO professional with less than a decade of experience.

While Google provides guidelines on how to improve search results by making websites interesting and useful, the exact formula for determining website placement remains a closely guarded secret. This means that SEO involves a significant amount of reverse engineering and guesswork. Without a clear cause-and-effect relationship regarding changes in a site's ranking, less skilled practitioners may find themselves resembling premodern farmers, struggling to decipher how to make it rain. Should they perform the same dance as last year before it poured, or perhaps make a sacrifice?

The algorithm is exceedingly opaque, complex, and dynamic, creating an environment where fraudulent SEO professionals can easily feign expertise while making it challenging for outsiders to discern the good from the bad. This confusion is further amplified for small businesses seeking to hire someone to enhance their Google ranking. Even a talented SEO expert may require a year or more to make a noticeable difference, which can wrongly imply that the reputable SEO professional is a scammer when, in reality, the impatience or reluctance of the client to implement essential advice hinders progress. "There is a great deal of effort required to move the needle, and many companies are unwilling to invest the necessary funds, despite the potential long-term benefits," explained John Heard, a seasoned SEO professional based in Kansas. 

Undoubtedly, some individuals bristled at the notion that the industry is filled with con artists. "There are scammers in every line of business. It is just easier to label oneself as an SEO rather than a doctor," remarked Barry Schwartz, an exceptionally articulate and prolific writer who has spent the past two decades covering SEO for the trade publication Search Engine Land. In both our phone conversations and his work, he staunchly defended SEO as a legitimate and dignified pursuit, emphasizing that the search community comprises dedicated individuals striving to help their clients' websites succeed in Google Search. This success is not achieved through dark or corrupt tactics, but rather through meticulous and intelligent work.

Several individuals I spoke to shared a similar viewpoint: the best SEOs are those who adhere to Google's rules, which essentially require the creation of exceptional websites without explicitly optimizing for Google. The goal is to design websites with human readers in mind, rather than solely catering to the algorithm. Many SEO professionals perform precisely this kind of work, whether it involves rewriting content or enhancing site speed. However, the presence of reputable SEOs does not negate the existence of scammers, charlatans, and rule-breakers who achieve progress by violating Google's terms of service. This situation is akin to a well-behaved student in a classroom not negating the disruptive behavior of those refusing to conform. A few disruptive individuals can easily overshadow the rest.

Even Schwartz acknowledged the impact that rule-breaking SEO professionals have had on the internet experience. We delved into a discussion about the types of small businesses that are particularly lucrative clients for SEOs, including lawyers, accountants, and contractors. These professions are eager to garner attention from online users seeking local recommendations. When asked how he would personally go about hiring a reliable attorney, Schwartz replied, "I am uncertain if you can trust anything you read online. Perhaps you should seek advice from a friend."

After acquiring substantial insight into the world of SEO, I felt it was crucial to understand the perspective of search engines. Gaining access to Google proved challenging, potentially due to the significant public relations issues the company has faced over the past year (such as being accused of monopoly practices by the federal government and losing ground to platforms like Reddit, TikTok, and large language models). Consequently, I decided to meet with a cheerful and charismatic individual named Duane Forrester to gain further insights.

Forrester served at Microsoft from 2007 to 2015, playing a pivotal role in the launch and management of Bing, which perennially played second fiddle to Google's domination of online search. Prior to and following his tenure at Microsoft, Forrester worked as an SEO specialist, affording him a unique perspective on the industry. It's akin to an aerospace engineer who spent time at the Department of Defense but now excels at winning military contracts in the private sector. Forrester possesses a comprehensive understanding of the intricate interplay between SEO professionals, who are constantly seeking insights to enhance their work, and the search engines striving to safeguard the secrecy of their algorithm. Furthermore, he boasts an extensive network within the industry. Similar to Schwartz, he seeks to underscore the tremendous efforts exerted by all individuals involved. "I've lost count of the myriad individuals who have built and sold companies and amassed substantial wealth," he shared. "Achieving such success necessitates more than a typical 40-hour workweek; it requires a commitment of 400 hours." (For reference, a week consists of 168 hours.)

Presently, Forrester resides in Los Angeles, where he requested our meeting take place at one of his preferred establishments—an English pub with a distinctive Disney World flair nestled inconspicuously in a desert strip mall. Upon entering, one is immediately immersed in Anglophile decor, replete with Union Jack flags, a Big Ben mural, and a red telephone booth. Over a traditional English breakfast, he regaled me with tales of his upbringing in rural Canada, where his parents owned a motel. As a child, he would tinker with the pay phone outside until he eventually managed to make free long-distance calls. "That's when I realized there was so much more I could explore," he reflected.

Throughout the 1990s, Forrester shared insights and advice with fellow SEO professionals on online forums. He vividly recalls his initial foray into the world of SEO conferences, where he was invited to speak. "Those individuals who took the stage were perceived as possessing superior knowledge, although I'm not sure we truly believed it," he quipped. "We all recognized that we were essentially improvising." 

After years of virtual friendships, SEO specialists eagerly anticipated the opportunity to congregate in person, fostering an atmosphere Forrester described as an embodiment of enthusiastic youthfulness bolstered by substantial financial resources. "It felt like no expenses were spared in New York City," he reminisced.

For Forrester, this marked the commencement of his extensive career, involving keynote presentations and superlative networking. Clay, the esteemed SEO pioneer, affectionately referred to him as the "cruise director" of the SS SEO. The conference circuit has been particularly kind to Forrester, affording him opportunities to attend events in Napa, Hawaii, Barbados, and various other destinations. Moreover, he has indulged in countless private dinners at exquisite restaurants in cities across the globe. "I've genuinely lost count of the number of Michelin-starred meals I've enjoyed, as the tally has now reached dozens during my time in this field," he admitted. "I simply couldn't decline an invitation to an event hosted by a company, serving as a token of appreciation for everyone's contributions. We gather, have a marvelous time, discuss industry matters, and create unforgettable memories."

Over the years, his experiences have encompassed a wide spectrum. He recollects entering hotel rooms at 2 a.m., finding an atmosphere brimming with substances and revelry. The audacity of his fellow SEO professionals left him in awe. "One individual even drove her Aston Martin to a conference and unabashedly parked it at the entrance, promptly receiving a parking ticket," he recounted. When he suggested she relocate the vehicle to avoid towing, she nonchalantly responded that she would merely shift it to another parking spot and accept another fine. "She reasoned that leaving her car prominently displayed out front served as an icebreaker to engage potential clients, all at a far more economical cost than renting a suite at the hotel," he elaborated. To top it off, she offered Forrester a joyride in Seattle—a proposition he willingly accepted.

Following his association with Bing, Forrester gradually curtailed his alcohol consumption at conferences. This mirrored the behavior of his Google counterpart, Matt Cutts, an engineer who spearheaded the company's web spam team before stepping back in 2014 and eventually departing in 2016. Cutts held celebrity status among SEO professionals, with an incessant stream of questions and complaints directed his way. In our conversation, he revealed that before his departure, he estimated having sent approximately 50,000 emails to individuals external to Google during his decade-and-a-half tenure. 

Various SEO professionals attempted to entice Cutts into imbibing at conferences, hoping he would divulge industry secrets. However, the outcome typically involved the collective intoxication of all SEO participants, while Cutts remained sober and diligently jotted down the latest SEO techniques in a small notepad, quietly seated in a corner of the bar.

"my favorite question to ask an SEO," Cutts informed me, was, "What's the worst thing you've ever done?" This query often elicited responses that seemed like a combination of showcasing accomplishments and engaging in a personal confession. Many SEOs felt compelled to expose the vulnerabilities they had discovered in Google's algorithms, even when conversing with the one person they should have refrained from sharing such information with—the individual who planned to eliminate those vulnerabilities upon returning to his office.

As someone who had previously worked in the SEO field, Forrester comprehended that the capabilities of SEOs would significantly impact the quality of Bing's search results. Consequently, it made sense to establish effective communication with SEOs whenever possible. Similarly, Cutts endeavored to serve as a bridge between SEOs and Google. However, Forrester believed that Google projected an attitude he characterized as follows: "We possess expertise in what we are doing, we will thwart your attempts to exploit the system, and quite frankly, we will disregard your feedback because it does not concern us."

Despite working within a large corporate entity, Cutts exerted effort to remain accessible and approachable as an individual. He revealed to me, "One important lesson I learned early on was that even when someone is shouting at you, there may be a nugget of information hidden within their words that you need to acknowledge, listen to, respect, and integrate into your thinking." Most SEOs whom I interviewed expressed appreciation for his endeavors. When Google launched the 2011 Panda update, which had a detrimental impact on numerous SEO businesses, Cutts openly acknowledged the insurmountable challenge of achieving the level of epistemological neutrality initially promised by Google's founders. At the time, he informed Wired, "[T]he only way to be neutral is either to randomize the links or to do it alphabetically."

Nevertheless, certain individuals personally attributed the downfall of their companies, which had relied on the previous iteration of the algorithm, to Cutts. During his tenure at Google, Cutts frequently received death threats and hate mail. When SEOs sent him gesture-like offerings such as fruit plates or brownie cakes at Google's offices, he recounted to me, "We would take them down to the kitchen with a note of caution: possibly poisoned."

Following Cutts' departure, Google replaced him with several individuals, but none of them were capable of truly filling his shoes. Forrester conveyed to me, "Some of these personalities occasionally displayed standoffish behavior, some projected superiority, and some were excessively reserved."

Among the individuals brought in by Google was Danny Sullivan, a former journalist and founder of Search Engine Land, an industry publication where Schwartz is employed. In 2009, Sullivan was deemed "the closest approximation to an umpire in the search world." Thus, when he published "A deep look at Google's biggest-ever search quality crisis" in 2017 and subsequently accepted a position as Google's public liaison for Search a few months later, some SEOs interpreted this move as if a congressperson, who had been working on legislation for gun safety, had quit to become a lobbyist for the NRA.

Forrester conveyed to me that a prevalent belief exists within the industry, suggesting that Google made Sullivan an irresistible offer intentionally designed to silence his voice in industry discussions. While I, personally, do not hold this belief," Forrester continued, "I have noticed that compared to Cutts, Danny refrains from engaging extensively in public conversations because he participates in private discussions with businesses."

Finally, after numerous hoops and hurdles, I managed to secure a phone conversation with Sullivan, albeit under the supervision of a communication chaperone. During our conversation, I noticed that he appeared angry and defensive. He expressed annoyance that anyone would perceive his era at Google as being less transparent than Cutts'. Assertively, he stated, "We possess an abundance of help documents! Furthermore, we have more personnel assigned to collaborate with SEOs compared to when Matt worked here!"

Sullivan's anger stemmed from the public's and the media's lack of comprehension concerning what he considers fundamental principles regarding how search functions. Consequently, he has adopted a somewhat reprimanding tone online. He expressed frustration over people's insatiable desire to uncover every minute detail about Google's algorithm because, as he emphasized, even if they possessed a comprehensive list of all one thousand ranking signals and their corresponding significance, it would not genuinely enhance SEOs' capabilities in performing their jobs more effectively.

Above all, Sullivan vehemently refuted the notion that Google's search results have declined in quality. Quite the contrary, he asserted that search results have consistently improved over time. He ardently maintained that those who believe search quality has diminished should critically reevaluate their own expectations. Sullivan remarked, "We have an entire generation that has grown up with the expectation that the search box will do everything for them. Although we may have enhanced matching for a vast majority of users, for the extremely discerning individuals, a single failed search experience can lead them to believe that all their searches are inadequate."

To clarify, according to Sullivan, the problem lies not with Google or SEOs, but rather with the current generation of individuals.

Of course, Sullivan's perspective is understandable considering his affiliation with Google. I began to grasp why many SEOs had emphasized that Cutts' departure marked a pivotal moment in internet history, symbolizing Google's transformation from an idealistic startup into one of the most valuable and influential companies ever to exist. During our phone conversation, Cutts came across as humble and thoughtful, acknowledging the intricacies and challenges of the search engine industry. In contrast, Sullivan sounded like an impatient corporate representative, attempting to manipulate me into believing an alternative reality.

However, what troubled me most was when I started questioning my own grasp on reality. Sullivan was not the only one asserting that search results had significantly improved. In fact, almost every SEO I engaged with maintained that search results are now objectively better than before. Strikingly, this sentiment did not stem from a bias in favor of Google; these individuals lamented the increased difficulty of gaming the system. According to them, search results have become more accurate, useful, and resistant to manipulation.

This contradicted my own observations and the experiences relayed by my friends and journalist acquaintances. Was our collective perception mistaken? Were we victims of a cognitive bias, convinced that the world was different than it actually was? Had I spent valuable time researching a problem that didn't truly exist? Could it be that Google's search results were genuinely exceptional, and I had missed the mark with my premise? Did I deserve to be criticized like an alligator attack victim?

Gradually, I began to entertain the idea that the frustration expressed by those dissatisfied with search results might extend beyond mere metrics. Perhaps it originated from an all-encompassing resentment and anger about how the internet, in general, has worsened our lives. It has served as a catalyst for division, deception, provocation, and increasing sadness and loneliness. The decades-long optimism regarding the transformative potential of technology, from the Moon landing to personal computers and the iPhone, has now given way to comprehensive disillusionment with the petty, pathetic, and violent world enabled by our devices. Can Google or the SEOs be solely held accountable for this disheartening state of affairs? Or is there something more profound and inherently human at play—a relentless drive to exploit a resource until its destruction, to profit as much as possible while muddying the waters, as Babin aptly suggested?

The person who snapped me out of my disoriented state of mind was an SEO professional named Lily Ray. Ray, a 30-something jet-setter with stylish black-line tattoos and an asymmetrical, dyed blonde pixie cut, managed to spare some time for lunch with me in Brooklyn amid her speaking engagements in Chicago and Berlin. Simultaneously, she oversaw a team of 35 individuals at her digital marketing agency, maintained a constant social media presence, cared for a Pomeranian while its owners were away at Burning Man, tended to her own mini Australian shepherd, and organized a house party she was hosting that weekend. In fact, she anticipated being late for the event since she needed to make a detour to perform a DJ set on a rooftop for another party.

Ray reassured me that my perception was not unfounded. There have indeed been significant changes in how Google's search results feel compared to five or six years ago, attributable to two main reasons. Firstly, Google's response to the disinformation concerns surrounding the 2016 election prompted a reevaluation of the assumption that popularity alone should determine the reliability of information, based on the number of links from other websites. Consequently, the algorithm seemed to shift its approach, particularly with regards to news and sites offering legal, financial, or health advice. Instead, greater emphasis was placed on what Google has termed E-E-A-T: experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness.

Ray disclosed that this increased emphasis on E-E-A-T has had a profound impact on the types of search results users encounter. Through her extensive and captivating research, she delved into how specific websites fared under these new guidelines. The effects ranged from a decline in visibility for platforms like Urban Dictionary to an upsurge in prominence for reputable sources like the Mayo Clinic. Some argue that E-E-A-T contributes to the overall improvement of search results, while others perceive it as a form of censorship disproportionately affecting conservative viewpoints. Notably, not every search query takes E-E-A-T into account. Google has expressed heightened concern for sites that could jeopardize safety, happiness, or the ability to stay informed as a citizen. However, what resonated with me was the realization that, for particular types of information, Google has forsaken one of the fundamental aspects that initially made its search results compelling—the wild-west ethos of crowdsourcing. Instead, search results now often reinforce institutional authority.

This appears convoluted at best. In matters concerning health and wellness, for instance, the perception of quackery often varies from one individual to another. It is not uncommon to know someone who has faced the limitations of Western medicine. Initially, the internet provided an avenue for marginalized voices to coexist with established experts and elites. Reflecting on the changes that have transpired since Google's inception, such as the proliferation of advertisements and efforts to retain users within the realm of Google products, it feels like the last straw.

The second primary factor contributing to the recent disparity in Google search results is SEO – specifically, the disruptive and rebellious nature of SEO. 

Ray elaborated that SEO practices contradicting Google's guidelines are not a new phenomenon. A decade ago, they were labeled as "black hat" techniques, contrasting with the search engine-approved "white hat" strategies. Over time, Google has become more adept at identifying and thwarting attempts to manipulate the algorithm, as confirmed by Sullivan and numerous SEO experts. Although many hold nostalgic memories of Google's early days and its enchanting appeal, most SEO professionals consider the period from 2003 to 2011 as the heyday. During this time, it was possible to elevate a counterfeit corporate website above the legitimate one, or manipulate search results related to prominent political figures to display explicit or racist content as the top results.

Google has become increasingly challenging to manipulate – that is undeniably true. Nevertheless, the sheer volume and complexity of SEO-driven content have overwhelmed Google. Ray stated, "It has exponentially worsened." She continued, explaining that people now have the ability to generate vast amounts of content automatically using AI and other tools, often requiring Google's algorithms some time to recognize and respond to these tactics. 

The foresight Babin gleefully discussed at the alligator party had already arrived. We, as humans, and our mundane inquiries have inadvertently become pawns in a battle between automated systems, as Google's algorithms endeavor to identify and counteract AI-enabled websites programmed by SEO experts from contaminating our online experience.

Ray expounded that although sites flooded with computer-generated gibberish aimed at maximizing SEO eventually get delisted from search results, their creators can earn substantial amounts of money while they are active. Some of these individuals reside in affordable locations overseas, such as Bali and Chiang Mai. Ray outlined the pattern: "They make a significant sum, the site disappears, and they repeat the cycle." She emphasized the frustration experienced by users when faced with such outcomes, stating, "It's dreadful."

Despite despising the impact of this type of SEO on the internet, Ray hesitated to condemn the practitioners themselves, admitting that she had once resorted to similar tactics. She said, "I used to utilize these tactics, so I can't personally hate on anyone." Ray proposed that those who hold grievances against Google's search results must introspect and ascertain whether it is the SEO experts or Google's evolving behavior that is at fault.

Sullivan attempted to persuade me that Google's behavior had not changed, and the search criteria remained largely unchanged for the past two decades. Google's expectation was for webmasters to create high-quality websites, and any attempts to manipulate the algorithm would result in penalties. Furthermore, Sullivan vehemently expressed that these rule-breakers should not be classified as SEO practitioners; he labeled their actions as "spam." But the boundary between approaches that infringe on Google's terms of service and those that do not has always been blurry and inconsistently enforced. Ray noted, "I have never witnessed such tension within the industry regarding the discrepancy between Google's recommendations and what people actually do and get away with." She implored, "If you claim that these tactics are ineffective, make them truly ineffective!"

Among the individuals I had spoken with, Ray seemed the most rational. While she referred to herself as a "thought leader" and had changed her surname to enhance personal branding by associating herself closely with her grandmother's uncle, the artist Man Ray, some may view such behaviors as absurd and deserving of an alligator attack. Nevertheless, I found myself leaning towards the SEO professionals, who, it seemed, possessed less control over their actions than initially presumed.

Google embarked on its journey with a noble cause: to enhance the accessibility of the internet on a large scale. While the company succeeded in achieving this objective, it unintentionally and significantly transformed the very fabric of the online realm. The underlying issue stemmed from Google's pursuit of objectivity and neutrality in curating an information landscape that intended to appear nonexistent. However, it is impossible to design a free and automated system for information retrieval without some individuals attempting to manipulate the system. Being the most influential observer in the world for over two decades inevitably led to a profound distortion of the online domain.

Over the past 25 years, Google has predominantly defined and controlled the internet as we know it today. The actions of search engine optimizers (SEOs) hold great significance, as they shape our daily perceptions, often distorting our understanding of the world in unimaginable ways. Nonetheless, it is crucial to acknowledge that any gains made by SEOs pale in comparison to the immense profits generated by Google, which amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. These profits inherently influence Google's choices and priorities, as the company's founders aptly predicted in 1997 when they stated that advertising-funded search engines would inherently favor advertisers over consumer needs.

The reason behind the prevalence of public institutions such as libraries in most countries becomes evident: Information controlled by private enterprises is inevitably subject to the priorities of those enterprises. Initially, the internet was envisaged as a medium that would improve upon the democratic principles espoused by public libraries. It presented an opportunity for mankind to transcend the control exerted by gatekeepers over the publishing world, facilitating the free exchange and dissemination of knowledge. Unfortunately, we now find ourselves in a situation that can arguably be perceived as worse than before, with almost all online information flowing through a single company that assumes an air of civic utility and impartial authority, even though it is far from being a neutral entity.

According to Cutts, who was intimately involved with Google during its early stages, there existed numerous individuals who wholeheartedly believed in the company's mission. However, as corporations grow larger, they inevitably encounter difficulties in accomplishing their objectives. Profits and quarterly financial achievements start to occupy the minds of employees. Cutts asserts that, at least during his tenure, search quality always took precedence over financial goals. Nonetheless, he emphasizes that the general public underestimates the extent to which Google influences their online experiences. Cutts firmly believes that search engines resemble newspaper-like entities, as they invariably make editorial decisions. He speculates that Google purposefully discourages deep contemplation on how search functions, as heightened awareness could lead to increased regulatory scrutiny and public realization of the immense profits involved.

While deceitful advertising, polemics, and fraudulent claims have always existed, the present predicament involves the coexistence of these misleading elements alongside truth, making it increasingly difficult for individuals to discern between them. Consequently, we traverse our lives with heightened distrust, fear, and insecurity. Ultimately, it is Google that reigns supreme in this digital realm, with SEOs merely existing within its domain. Although I may harbor resentment towards SEOs who disregard Google's rules, it is crucial to recognize that most business owners are prone to breaking any rules that yield advantages. While Ray herself claims to have abandoned her previous guideline-violating tactics and chosen to abide by Google's requirements in order to contribute to a better internet, it is indeed a demanding moral standard to impose on individuals running commercial enterprises.

"they desire an idyllic concept, and I can empathize with that sentiment," expressed Cade Lee, an SEO professional. "However, such a scenario exists only in a world free from the influence of money and greed, you know?"

Lee, the individual with whom I conversed over the phone prior to attending the alligator party, was the one who cautioned me about the dubious nature of SEO, which he likened to "modern-day pirate shit." He belongs to the group of SEO experts who have openly discussed their defiance of Google's guidelines during panel sessions. Besides his scandalous SEO background, Lee has a checkered past as a former convict involved in penny stock trading, serving prison time for securities fraud. Notably, his body is entirely adorned with tattoos, from his scalp down to his legs and fingers. During our casual meeting over beers at a Denver bar adjacent to an escape room, he disclosed that his probation officer assigned to the economic crime offenders unit has never attempted to prevent him from violating Google's terms of service.

"I was forthright about my actions, and they granted approval," he disclosed. He even received endorsement for "some rather contentious matters, particularly in relation to adult websites," he divulged to me, specifically regarding what he initially believed to be advertisements for consensual sex workers. However, a later encounter with an activist enlightened him regarding certain websites he had constructed, which were, in fact, facilitating human trafficking. Appalled by this revelation, he promptly shut down the entire operation and even assisted the activist with her website.

Presently, Lee operates a construction company. Although his probation officer disapproves of his chosen portrayal, he believes that any means of generating income essentially involves an element of deception or fraud. "A successful scam entails actually delivering on your promises and reaping a profit," he exemplified. To illustrate, he expounded, "We might accept payment from an elderly lady to construct a splendid new patio for her—there lies the "scam"—yet distinct from the alternative of dishonestly collecting a deposit and absconding." Lee is an individual who has dedicated considerable time to contemplating his role in the world: discerning what holds significance and what does not, and understanding the impact of his actions on others. Having served in the Marines, sold mortgages leading up to the 2008 market crash, endured imprisonment, and pursued a career in SEO, he comprehends the necessity of earning a living but aspires to do so with minimal harm. Consequently, he favors participating in the aforementioned "good kind" of con.

"That's how I perceive the state of SEO—a rapidly deteriorating field," he confessed. "My customer interactions left me feeling uneasy, realizing that I should not be involved in this line of work."