Come to think of it, doesn't Google aspire to personalized search? But in any case, at least I'd like old-fashioned quoted search -- i.e. I want "this phrase" exactly -- to give useful results.
For example, "twenty-four" will return results about the TV show "Twenty Four" as well as results for "twenty four" and "twenty-four".
There's some other maddening exceptions for those who would prefer exact string matching, but I can't remember them all and it's changed over the years too.
(Sidebar: Paul Rand)
Paul Rand
Paul Rand
Rand Paul
Rand Paul
(News: Rand Paul)
Paul Rand
Paul Rand
Paul Rand
Paul Rand
Rand Paul
Paul Rand
Rand Paul
That's seriously not a disservice.
Even in quotes—where the exact phrase is supposed to show up—most of the articles are about Rand Paul. That points to algorithmic issues.
But at the same time, it's worth noting that the other examples of this issue I cite—in the case of Siri and Bing—are even more troubling, because they seem to drown out the figure entirely. Based on a search of Bing in incognito mode, no searches, I found that "paul rand" in quotes brought up 80 percent Rand Paul. Siri only brings up one result for "Who is Paul Rand," and it brings up the Wikipedia page for Rand Paul.
I realize people are going to disagree about the thesis of the article, but I think my goal here was to point out that problems like these exist—and are likely to become more common over time. Thanks for engaging.
I was watching one of those 'investor pitch TV shows' on TV, and a young girl was pitching her site, which was named using a misspelled word (presumably to secure a domain name otherwise unavailable). If I was on that panel, I would have told her to go back to the start and find a new name and branding. She even admitted on the show that she wasn't turning up in results because of auto-correct spelling.
These days, you can't pick company names or brands that closely match something else. You are better off starting with a completely new word than trying to misspell something slightly.