You know when someone writes a post entitled ‘On the increasing uselessness of Google‘ that all is not right in Web Land. Citing another blogger who ran into all sorts of junk when searching for a new dishwasher:

Google has become a snake that too readily consumes its own keyword tail. Identify some words that show up in profitable searches — from appliances, to mesothelioma suits, to kayak lessons — churn out content cheaply and regularly, and you’re done. On the web, no-one knows you’re a content-grinder.

The result, however, is awful. Pages and pages of Google results that are just, for practical purposes, advertisements in the loose guise of articles, original or re-purposed. It hearkens back to the dark days of 1999, before Google arrived, when search had become largely useless, with results completely overwhelmed by spam and info-clutter.

Well said, dishwasher-seeker. The first page of Google is no longer the clean, clear landscape it once was. Too many companies have realized that finding consumers with AdWords alone is like fighting a dragon with a dull-tipped sword, face on. Best to sneak around from behind and attack from a better place: hence, the raging popularity of so-called content strategy in online marketing.

It’s not just SEO anymore, clearly. With content farms run by Demand Media and sketchy link-buying techniques, everyone is in a race to own keywords, and they’ll do it any way they can. But what are consumers doing? That’s right, they’re getting wise and giving up. People are no longer looking on Google for answers, writes the Washington Post. They’re using (gasp!) Twitter and (another gasp!) Facebook, putting out queries and requests for recommendations from friends — and getting exactly what they need.

So here’s my proposal. To companies: Follow the consumer; find an authentic way to reach them via social media. To consumers: Know how to filter out the junk in Google results, and don’t rely solely on your “friends” to solve your problems. To that next group of bright-eyed engineers or MBAs leaving school: build the framework for a series of vertical search engines, and put them in a central directory until everyone knows the destinations by heart. Searching for a new dishwasher? Then go to the Kitchen Appliance Search Site. Sometimes it’s better to completely reinvent something — using a tried and true concept — then fix what’s broken.

The Post notes that Microsoft thinks the next big thing is going to be social search — scouring data from user accounts to show up in basic search. Okay, that might work. But I think there’s still a market out there for qualified advice, for “real” articles written by scholars, field experts, and yes even marketers and salespeople.

Last year we saw a enormous amount of deals struck between search giants and real-time data providers, aka social networks and microblogging sites.

• In October, Microsoft signed search deals with Facebook and
  Twitter to integrate real-time status updates and tweets
  into Bing's search results.
• Google followed suit in early December with the announcement that public updates from social media sites Twitter, Facebook and MySpace will start showing up in Google's general search results, a particularly nifty feature for smartphones.
• Even more proof in the pudding, this time from M&A (via TheDeal.com): Real-time search engine developer OneRiot Inc. closed its $7 million Series C, bringing the total venture capital raised to $27 million.

But real-time search is "not there yet," as proven by the magnitude 4.1 earthquake that took place in our ever-shifting city this week. At 10am on Thursday, a small earthquake shook the Bay Area, and within 6 minutes Google search was reflecting the event in the form of Twitter updates, according to Stephen Shankland
at CNET. (Google claims it was just 2 minutes, and Shankland attributes the lag to the fact that he was in Detroit at the time. And clearly, people in Detroit don't give a hoot about California.)

But while we can quibble over minutes, the takeaway here is that real-time search is certainly where it's at for the coming year, but it's going to be up to marketers to figure out how that can work for their brand. To be honest, it's a little scary that a real-time tweet about your company from some Joe in Minnesota can trump your hard-earned spot for your company website, blog, newsletter, video, or special deal — though it does introduce some exciting possibilities, like having access to top sellers and current sentiment data, and eventually, pairing real-time news with real-time ads.

More from "The State of Search" panel at ad:tech NYC…

1. Google spent a ton of time on the function of presenting multiple types of content (i.e., Video, Images, News, Blogs) from
   one search query… and now it's pulling that principle over to paid search. See the blog for recent announcements about rich media options.
   
2. How did the recession and plunge in ad spend affect the search space? Certain sectors that
   were hit hard, like financial services and the auto industry, were big SEM
   spenders, so when they dropped out of the race (having no money left to spend!)
   it left the door open for new players. A recession is the best time for
   marketers — or rather, the smart ones — to step in and capture market share, panelists said.
   
3. More about PPC…learn a lesson from startups, they said. They have virtually
   no budget for marketing, yet they all have PPC campaigns. There's a reason for this! However, everyone, including the guy from Conde Nast Digital, agreed that it was best to stick with Google and to stay away from Facebook Ads because the keyword and targeting options are so limited.

With search advertising predicted to hit $21 billion by 2012, everyone is jumping at the bit to find out exactly how the industry is going to take form: new products, innovations, strategy, etc.

At "The State of Search" panel here at ad:tech NYC, panelists from Google, Conde Nast Digital, Newsforce, and SEMPO shared their thoughts on SEM.

Highlights!

Sara Holoubek from SEMPO, a nonprofit that serves the SEM industry shot us some stats from their research report.

• Senior marketing executives consider SEM a high business priority – over half of respondents said that they were "very involved" in SEM programs.
• The shift in marketing dollars to SEM is coming from (surprise surprise) print and direct mail.
• Recognizing the integrated nature of search, or intent, 79% of advertisers are coordinating SEM iwth other marketing tactics – only 7% are not doing so at all.
• 3 out of 5 marketers are willing to pay a premium for local targeting.
• Video and mobile are poised to take off, but respondents were split on their real interest in pushing a lot of dollars into these mediums.

Video and mobile were certainly hot topics. Jim Lecinski from Google explained that smartphones are increasing the volume of mobile search queries — up to 50 times more. Holoubek noted that it goes even beyond search, because smartphones are allowing marketers to not just "retrofit ads to fit a mobile screen" and instead use customer data (e.g., location) to offer useful information — partnered, of course, with a brand message.

Observant blogger Louis Mason points out a biting little detail that Google has included in their Auto Complete feature: trash talk. Apparently, when you type in "Facebook is" or "Twitter is," the dropdown options are, well, funny/insulting, with choices like, "Facebook is for old people" or "Twitter is retarded." And so on and so on – for Microsoft, MySpace, etc. Okay, okay, we get it. You don't like the other playa's.

Of course, when you put in "Google is" you get phrases like, "Google is your friend" and "Google is always right." More aptly, "Google is taking over the world." I'd like to meet the cunning engineer that came up with that one.

 But there's one little problem – I think they forgot about YouTube. Type in "YouTube is" and the dropdown choices are "YouTube is so slow," "YouTube is broken," and "YouTube is upside down." (What?) Either Google forgot about that money acquisition a few years back, or it stopped at MySpace. Of course, there's that other option – that Auto Complete accurately reflects what people are typing in.

Try your name – it's fun. Apparently, I (Ana) am beautiful, positive, love, and perfection. I am also someone's life, and "in their DNA." How lovely.

And the common "I"? Well, I can't even write this, so I'll just have to share it via screenshot. That way you'll know, too, that I'm not making it up. But believe me, you can't make this stuff up. It's just too good.

Which is your fave?

Facebook and Twitter are now driving a significant amount of traffic to web sites. Enough to make Google and Yahoo just a teeny bit nervous. Heck some sites are seeing more traffic from Facebook than from Google. Google and Facebook are still complementary, but that may be shifting. We call this shift “Search 3.0.”

Peter Hershberg broke down Search 3.0 in AdAge recently, defining three levels of social connections: personal/real-life, shared interest (such as those you follow on Twitter), and shared experience (an Amazon or eBags reviewer). People are using these connections to assess the value of their search results. A straight Google search just doesn’t cut it when you can ask your friends,
their friends, a few professionals you respect and maybe someone who has tried the product. All in one easy inquiry into the hive mind.(Ok, maybe not all queries are best suited for this kind of search.)

On top of that, people can’t seem to stay away from social networks (time spent is up 93%). Which means that their social connectivity is growing and
strengthening. There is a new kind of relevance: personal — defined by your personal network. So you, dear marketer, are going to have to approach things just a little differently.

We also learned that people filter content in a way that Google just can’t. A recent study showed that 25% of posts through the social bookmarking site Delicious have yet to be indexed by search engines. And the tags are 93% relevant. That is high value: relevant AND timely. No waiting for spiders to catch up.

What does this mean for you? Social media is critical, like it or not. Twitter or something like it won’t go away (as much as you might want it to). And Search as we know it has changed. Nervous yet? It’s time to start experimenting. And make a few mistakes while you’re at it — the risk-taking window is wide-open.

It's not the sexiest topic, but it's got to be addressed. Search marketing is the rising star of this century, but it's also one of the most poorly misunderstood online marketing tactics. Without naming names, or should I say taking names, clients sometimes just don't get what it is, what they want to do with it, and what they can (reasonably) expect from a search marketing campaign.

Along comes Josh at Search Engine Watch, to unravel the mystery of how to discuss search with clients.

Some of the highlights:

• Develop a unified search strategy. Don't compartmentalize your approach
  because you have a paid search team and an SEO team. Many clients and
  agencies still try to keep these strategies separate…Begin with meetings, status calls, and sharing keyword lists. This gets
  the conversation going and forces the groups to work together
  cohesively.
• Local search is important for everyone. Locations, phone numbers, services offered, hours of operations, and reviews add relevancy to your listing for brand searches and
  service-related searches.
• Social media strategies definitely can be used for SEO benefit, so don't be afraid to
  poke around your client's social media plans and ask to be included…As long as you're thinking about it from the context of search and not
  as a way to steal business, this is a valuable conversation to have,
  and your client will welcome it.

Okay, this is weird. Google is using its search keyword tracking technology to find out which regions of the US are hotspots for "flu activity."

From the The New York Times:

Tests
of the new Web tool from Google.org, the company’s philanthropic unit,
suggest that it may be able to detect regional outbreaks of the flu a
week to 10 days before they are reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (Of course, the CSC doesn't agree, saying that they don't have any evidence that the system is more timely than the emergency room data of individual health departments.)

How do they do this? Well, say you're coming down with something, but you're not quite sure what it is. Are you likely to Google "flu symptoms" or something more specific like "muscle ache" or "congestion?" Yeah you are. What they do is figure out where the people who are typing in these terms are geographically located and voila: Flu tracking.

Here's an interesting marketing take on the tool, from Rich Godwin of Industry CPG West. "Consumer packaged goods brands that are helpful to someone suffering from the flu can geographically target to regions that are likely seeing a sharp rise in flu suffers." Bam.

You'd think that with retail sales plummeting and the Donnie Darko economy rearing its ugly head that the retail sector would be the first to embrace search engine marketing – outside of paid search, that is.

But according to a study by Conductor (which is, however, an SEM company, so take some salt) the vast majority of retailers and consumer facing brands in the Fortune 500 have little to non-existent visibility in natural search results for their most advertised keywords.

I did a little search for "smartphone" and found the only mention of a retailer, or manufacturer for that matter – outside of Shopping results – on the first page was from Microsoft Windows Mobile, and Palm. What is wrong with this picture? I know it's complicated, and it takes a little bit more time to get your product in natural search, but really kids – Microsoft? Palm?

A few more tidbits that Retailer Daily picked up from Internet Retailer's coverage:

• Within the retail category, accommodation and food service companies had the highest
  score; mining and oil exploration companies had the lowest score.
• Gap Inc., which focuses its paid search campaign fairly on about
  3,000 terms, was the highest scoring company. Office Depot, which bids
  on about 33,000 terms, trailed closely.
• Retailers generally bid on far more paid search keywords than other
  companies, averaging of 24,700 versus 5,100 for all companies in the
  study.
• A few online-only retail companies (e.g., Amazon, eBay) bid
  regularly on 250,000 to 750,000 terms.

 Among all of the things that are the LEAST LIKELY to happen – including the IAB saving online advertising from plummeting along with the rest of the country, Palin actually helping McCain get votes tomorrow – who would have though it would be the "merging" of two Internet giants?

The deal, which caused a lot of concern – and open mouths – last spring when it was announced, may be thwarted by the US Department of Justice as the two companies fail to convince it that it won't have anticompetitive effects on the online search advertising industry. In fact, they are failing so badly that the chances that the alliance will actually be formed are looking "increasingly slim," according to the Financial Times.

Maybe the letter that ANA sent last month to the DOJ – stating that the deal will likely diminish competition, increase
concentration of market power, limit choices currently available, and
potentially raise prices to search advertisers – had some effect. Or maybe that strong, surly Texas Congressman bringing up privacy issues did the trick.

Either way, apparently this dance isn't for everyone – only the sexy people.

If the deal does fall through, Yahoo's going to have to do some serious soul-searching and maybe even consider acquiring Time Warner's AOL or think about going back to Microsoft – if they'll have them, that is. And Google? WWGD?