In fact, artificial intelligence in research leads more inquiries and high -quality clicks

Last month, Pio Research Center a report Sheds light on the effects of Google’s artificial intelligence on the web spreading. In short, the analysis drew a level equal to anyone dependent on web traffic. But on Wednesday, Google Liz Red Blog post This puts a different rotation on things. Google VP claims that traffic from searching to web sites is “relatively stable”, and the quality of click has increased.

Red framing is to Everything is peach, and Amnesty International makes things better – even for web sites! I wrote that Google Search’s overall organic click size to web sites was “relatively stable” on an annual basis. Reed also claimed that Google sends more “quality clicks” (visitors who do not wear quickly) to web sites more than last year. The company says people are also happy with the search experience.

The company did not share any numbers – the post has no data at all – to support its claims.

Google explanation of pink expectations? “With an artificial intelligence overview, people search more and ask new questions that are often longer and more complicated,” he wrote. “In addition, with an artificial intelligence overview, people see more links on the page more than before. More quarrels and more links mean more opportunities for websites to the surface and get click.”

Red highlights the changing scene. She says the user trends lead to a decrease in traffic for some sites and increased traffic to others. Of course, Google’s search head did not call any specific web sites. But she claims forums, videos, podcasts and publications with “original voices and direct views”. Red added that the content such as “an in -depth review, original post, unique perspective or analysis of the first thoughtful person” works well.

Google Vice President said that people looking for simple research types of searches tend to artificial intelligence. “For some questions in which people search for a quick answer, such as” when the next moon is complete, “people may be satisfied with the response of an overview of the initial artificial intelligence and do not click.” “This was also true with regard to the other answer features that we added, such as the graph of knowledge or mathematical grades. But for many other types of questions, people continue to click, because they want to search deeper into a topic, explore more or make a purchase. For this reason we see an increase in clicking on the quality of clicks – Amnesty International’s response may provide the Earth, but people click deeper and learn more, and when this is this A more valuable click. “

It is completely contrary to the Pew report. It was found that visitors who saw a summary of artificial intelligence have clicked to criticize traditional research into eight percent of all visits. Those who do not have AI summary? Click on a traditional result in 15 percent of their visits. As for those links, in the abstracts of artificial intelligence? Pew found that only one percent of people acknowledge these. Users were also more likely to finish browsing them after visiting a page with an artificial intelligence summary.

That is in line with the comments The CEO of Cloudflare Matthew Princess worked in June. He said that the search transfers continue to decline. “The future of the web will be more and more like artificial intelligence, and this means that people will read your content summaries, not the original content,” he said. The prince said that a decade ago, Google sent one visitor to each two pages they crawled. Early this year, he decreased to one visitor for every six pages. He said, in June, it was due to one for every 18 years.

I cannot tell you who you believe. But this is what the final source said: