<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Lies Of Top Search Terms Of The Year</title>
	<atom:link href="http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113</link>
	<description>Search Engine Land: Must Read News About Search Marketing &#38; Search Engines</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:39:12 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Terrababy Zoekmachine Optimalisatie</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-256</link>
		<dc:creator>Terrababy Zoekmachine Optimalisatie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-256</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d be interested in the uncensored results from google.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be interested in the uncensored results from google.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roman Novak</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-255</link>
		<dc:creator>Roman Novak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 16:38:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-255</guid>
		<description>The statistics are interesting. Well, it is not in topic, but I would like to mention that Live.com does not show results correctly. I have not seen any discuss about it, I think it would be useful &quot;push&quot; Live.com to do something with this. Live.com shows results with websites which contains hidden texts, repeated words (many many words...) on a site... If you send them email, trying explain them it, they don&#039;t worry about it. Lets start talk about it (of course, in other discuss). R.N.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The statistics are interesting. Well, it is not in topic, but I would like to mention that Live.com does not show results correctly. I have not seen any discuss about it, I think it would be useful &#8220;push&#8221; Live.com to do something with this. Live.com shows results with websites which contains hidden texts, repeated words (many many words&#8230;) on a site&#8230; If you send them email, trying explain them it, they don&#8217;t worry about it. Lets start talk about it (of course, in other discuss). R.N.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J8 Zoekmachine Marketing</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-254</link>
		<dc:creator>J8 Zoekmachine Marketing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jan 2007 09:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-254</guid>
		<description>Really interesting analysis report!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really interesting analysis report!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: webconnoisseur</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-253</link>
		<dc:creator>webconnoisseur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-253</guid>
		<description>Following up. I poured through Hitwise data on the major engines and came up with a list of what are most likely the actual top 10 search terms of 2006. You can view the list here:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.webconnoisseur.com/blog/seo/actual-top-10-search-terms-of-2006/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Actual Top 10 Search Terms of 2006&lt;/a&gt;

I based it on 12 months of data, weighted by search engine share of total searches performed. Once you see the list, you&#039;ll understand why they massage the data.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Following up. I poured through Hitwise data on the major engines and came up with a list of what are most likely the actual top 10 search terms of 2006. You can view the list here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.webconnoisseur.com/blog/seo/actual-top-10-search-terms-of-2006/" rel="nofollow">Actual Top 10 Search Terms of 2006</a></p>
<p>I based it on 12 months of data, weighted by search engine share of total searches performed. Once you see the list, you&#8217;ll understand why they massage the data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: webconnoisseur</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-252</link>
		<dc:creator>webconnoisseur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 23:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-252</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been waiting for someone to call out these ridiculous top search term lists. I&#039;ve found them all to be heavily massaged. For example, I believe &quot;Google&quot; is the top search term at both MSN/Live &amp; Yahoo, but they won&#039;t admit to it. And those of us who have access to Nielsen, ComScore or Hitwise data know that these lists should probably include sex-related terms.

I don&#039;t mind them massaging the data, I just want them to admit that these lists have been heavily edited.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been waiting for someone to call out these ridiculous top search term lists. I&#8217;ve found them all to be heavily massaged. For example, I believe &#8220;Google&#8221; is the top search term at both MSN/Live &#038; Yahoo, but they won&#8217;t admit to it. And those of us who have access to Nielsen, ComScore or Hitwise data know that these lists should probably include sex-related terms.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t mind them massaging the data, I just want them to admit that these lists have been heavily edited.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: useAPI.com</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-251</link>
		<dc:creator>useAPI.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2006 17:36:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-251</guid>
		<description>These &quot;Top Search Terms Of The Year&quot; are not really the top or most popular but the most trendy search terms of the year. They come and go!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These &#8220;Top Search Terms Of The Year&#8221; are not really the top or most popular but the most trendy search terms of the year. They come and go!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DSarathy</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-250</link>
		<dc:creator>DSarathy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:07:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-250</guid>
		<description>A detailed analysis report on the subject. Good job Danny :~).

D Sarathy.
RankQuest
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A detailed analysis report on the subject. Good job Danny :~).</p>
<p>D Sarathy.<br />
RankQuest</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ★ ★ Search Engines WEB ★ ★</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-249</link>
		<dc:creator>★ ★ Search Engines WEB ★ ★</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 03:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-249</guid>
		<description>It would be fascinating to discover how many searches:  Yahoo, MSN and Google - actually get for the term GOOGLE....

Using the Overture keyword Tool:&lt;blockquote&gt;
25791535 Myspace
19687569 Google
7574647  sex
4887898  Britney Spears
4575910  Yahoo &lt;/blockquote&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be fascinating to discover how many searches:  Yahoo, MSN and Google &#8211; actually get for the term GOOGLE&#8230;.</p>
<p>Using the Overture keyword Tool:<br />
<blockquote>
25791535 Myspace<br />
19687569 Google<br />
7574647  sex<br />
4887898  Britney Spears<br />
4575910  Yahoo </p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny Sullivan</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-248</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny Sullivan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:13:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-248</guid>
		<description>Can you give me some examples of this? And I assume you mean 2004? Google wasn&#039;t running in 1994 :)
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can you give me some examples of this? And I assume you mean 2004? Google wasn&#8217;t running in 1994 :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CaptainObvious</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113/comment-page-1#comment-247</link>
		<dc:creator>CaptainObvious</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 13:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/the-lies-of-top-search-terms-of-the-year-10113.php#comment-247</guid>
		<description>Danny,

I agree that they&#039;re filtering these results.  I&#039;ve often thought these reports didn&#039;t ring true; however, I&#039;m a little skeptical of Google Trends data being used to prove this.

I&#039;ve done some comparisons of Google Trends data on some key phrases I&#039;m very familiar with and have found the Trends data to be very inaccurate.  Specifically, Trends was reporting a reduction in searches since 1994 where I&#039;ve seen significant increases in searches since 1994.  Do you have any thoughts on this?

-David
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Danny,</p>
<p>I agree that they&#8217;re filtering these results.  I&#8217;ve often thought these reports didn&#8217;t ring true; however, I&#8217;m a little skeptical of Google Trends data being used to prove this.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve done some comparisons of Google Trends data on some key phrases I&#8217;m very familiar with and have found the Trends data to be very inaccurate.  Specifically, Trends was reporting a reduction in searches since 1994 where I&#8217;ve seen significant increases in searches since 1994.  Do you have any thoughts on this?</p>
<p>-David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
