Last week, there was a little storm in the Tech teacup when The Verge, a popular tech magazine, wrote The people who ruined the internet.

Then, Danny Sullivan wrote a response to the piece, Some thoughts about The Verge article on SEO, on his personal blog. Sullivan works for Google, and according to the bio on his personal website, “educates people on Search.”

The HackerNews folks had a lively discussion of both articles in this comment thread.

And then The Verge team put out a response to (waves hands around) all of this in their podcast, The Vergecast, Apple events, SEO, and other fights. (Fast forward to minute 30.)

All in all it has been an entertaining week for tech professionals and enthusiasts like me, watching these folks battle it out.

What they’re saying in a gist

The Verge is arguing that Google has a created an environment where people (namely, SEO professionals), are trying to game the system to get to the top. It’s an endless loop that we are all trapped in, and it’s cluttering up the Internet with junk content and burying the good ones. Search is suffering as a result.

Sullivan is saying that Google search is better than ever, and it says that it is ironic that The Verge is saying what they are saying about SEO and Google when they themselves are using SEO tactics. He is also saying that he and his team are working hard to improve search all the time and put in a lot of work to communicate with the community to improve it.

HackerNews folks, who are mostly IT professionals: Some agree with The Verge, some call Sullivan a corporate shill who has betrayed his journalism roots, others are SEO professionals who says that The Verge don’t know what the hell they’re talking about and are being sensationalist.

My thoughts about the coverage

Note: I work in tech, but I’m not techy. I’m not a software engineer though I do dabble in coding. I exist in this weird zone between the user and the engineer, which is why I love being a technical writer. I’m the bridge between the user and the software engineer and as such, I can see both sides.

So, I’m writing from that perspective. Here are my thoughts about the whole thing.

• When you’re working for a corporation, especially in tech, you tend to exist in this place where you’re trying to help the ordinary person, but you still have to make your company that gives you your paycheck your priority. Not everyone can manage this balancing act, and there’s a reason why some journalists can’t fully transition to being a corporate worker and return to journalism. The ideals that drove them to journalism has to be smothered in corporate settings as there’s no room to be idealistic in shark-like corporate environments. If you don’t adapt, you’re out. Danny Sullivan gives me the impression that he has not only adapted, but is a loyal corporate man. As such, Google’s priorities are his priorities.
• That said, I found The Verge’s use of emotive language to describe Sullivan disturbing. As a former journalist myself, I better back up my statements with solid proof and receipts if I describe someone the way they did. Perhaps they do have receipts, but I’m not sure if talking about a man’s personality that way helps their cause because we simply don’t know him, even if The Verge folks claim they do. These are all assumptions, not facts, and betrays their bias.
• That said, this is an article about the SEO business culture, so perhaps it was the right thing to do to portray the dynamics between the SEO pros and the man responsible for all the dancing they have to do.
• I call The Verge entertainment journalism. It’s a gossip rag for those who are American, upper middle class and dwell in the IT bubble of Sillicon Valley. It doesn’t speak to ordinary schmos like me who are not American, not upper middle class, and whose lives are controlled by tech in ways they don’t experience.
• American tech journalism: Tone wise, I’ve often found them a little too sure of themselves and arrogant in that Sillicon Valley Bubble libertarian way. Tech journalism’s coverage of Mastodon has been particularly eye rolling because they didn’t bother to come down to the level of an ordinary user to find out what it’s like for them. I still remember one tech journalist claiming that it was the journalists who makes Mastodon more vibrant. Big headed, much? Hey, I was a journalist but even I don’t think we’re that important. Their coverage betrayed their insularity; they literally need to get out of San Francisco more.

Is the Internet sucky? As a writer and a user, hell yes

I don’t know any class of user more abused by SEO and Google search than the writer. Whether they’re working for their bread butter or are just writing for fun, writers have to write the way Google wants them to just to get seen.

I wrote extensively about this in Google’s Helpful Content Update isn’t kind to nicheless blogs and How I’m Healing from Algorithms where I said: “Algorithms are forcing us to create art that fits into a neat little box — their neat little box.”

So, despite Sullivan’s claims to the contrary, the Internet has sucked for me in the last 10 years. Not only because I was forced to create content in a way that pleases their many rules, but because I have to compete with SEO-optimized garbage fuelled by people with deep pockets and desires for deep pockets.

However, this year, I regained more joy as a writer when I gave upon SEO and decided to become an imperfect gardener of my digital garden. So there’s hope for us yet.

Despite all this, I’m not surprised with Sullivan’s claims that Google search has improved. From his perspective, it totally has because the users he’s aiming for are not ordinary people like you and me but corporations. For corporations and businesses, it has been great, though with the rise of AI content, that enthusiasm may be dented somewhat since they have to shell out even more money to get their page rankings.

So, even if The Verge was being super sensational about the issue, I have to agree with them. The Internet hasn’t been a pleasant place for people like me, a writer for a long time. The fact that we are the prime generator of content for the Internet is ironic. There won’t be the Internet without us.

However, I don’t think it’s right to say that Google search completely sucks. A lot of things we search for now, we take for granted. For example, searching for the nearest cafe that is open right now, getting directions to an unfamiliar place. As the Yellow Pages, Google is great. I often jump off Duck Duck Go if I want to find more information about those topics because Google is still superior.

But it has been difficult to find authentic content. You know, content about the human experience, written by humans with actual experience. As a result, I append “Reddit” to everything I search for these days. Sometimes I give up entirely and just wander through the maze of forums to find the answer.

Finding personal blogs is nigh impossible now, which is why I said in my article. Google’s Helpful Content Update isn’t kind to nicheless blogs, “…the world wide web no longer belongs to the common people; has not for a long while. This update only strengthens the grip corporations and influencers have on content online.”

Still, as much as I agree with The Verge’s conclusions, I feel that pointing fingers is useless. The bigger question is, How do we fix the Internet for the ordinary person?

The big wigs don’t seem to want to answer that question thoroughly, perhaps because there’s no big money in this, so people have been trying to find solutions on their own.

We have the Indieweb movement, the Fediverse like Mastodon and Substack rising to fill the gap. It’s a ragtag ecosystem humming beneath Google’s layer on the Internet. And I welcome its growth.

Perhaps quiet is what the movement needs, because the last thing it needs is be tainted by greed and avarice.

Mariya Delano, who brought The Verge article to my attention, is planning to write a response on her wonderfully authentic marketing Substack Attention Deficit Marketing Disorder and I can’t wait. She’s one of the rare marketers who not only love marketing but markets for humans and is nice human while doing so.