Why one in two people still don't search the web

Ask most people who live an even vaguely computer-dependent life the effect of suddenly snatching Google away and they would say, one imagines, that it would be crippling.

Only, it seems, to half of us. According to a report by the Pew Research Centre, only 49 per cent of people who use the internet use a search engine every day.

In fact, in the last six years - which have witnessed the rise of high-speed broadband, social networking, and the mobile internet, the percentage of daily internet users who use search has risen only from a third to just under half.

E-mail remains by far the most popular internet application, used by 60 per cent every day, according to the survey. (Even in 2002, it was used by 52 per cent.) The third and fourth most popular uses are checking news (39 per cent) and weather (30 per cent).

Perhaps less surprising, though still worth noting, is that the use of search engines corresponds with other social factors, such as education and wealth. Two thirds of all university graduates who use the internet every day use a search engine, in comparison with 32 per cent who ended their education after high school.

Of those who earn more than $75,000 (£38,000) a year, 62 per cent search the web every day, whereas only 36 per cent of those who earn less than $30,000 do.

The report - which surveyed 2,251 American adults - suggests several reasons for the rise in the popularity of search, among them that there are now site-specific engines on most sites, and that high speed broadband is now used by 55 per cent of households.

More important to Google, of course - which performs three in four searches done in the UK, according to comScore - is how to coax in those 51 per cent of people who do not search every day.

Last quarter the company reported revenues of $5.37 billion - the vast majority resulting from people clicking on ads that appeared next to its search results.

The Pew report suggests that figure - which was up by 39 per cent on the previous year - may have a good way to grow yet.

Comments

[kate corwyn]

I deal with email queries which come in to our company and I long to send them the link to www.justf***inggoogleit.com since I frequently asnwer their queries by using a search engine that they could just as easily have done themselves.

[Harry Kennard]

For me, having Google is the main reason for owning a computer. I retired in'86 at age 60 and bought my first PC through a Government sponsored scheme for £25 and have never looked back! Terrestial TV is patchy in content but I can always find something to interest me on the Web,from the freezing point of wine to the workings of a nuclear power station.
I'm a dedicated climate change and CO2 emissions sceptic and the technical information I find is invaluable to me for my lectures.

[Em]

I have yet to see a single ad telling non-internet types how much easier life would be if they got online. Web savvy types see it as a trend they need not promote or explain, but non-internet types see it as a hassle.

[Julie Robertson]

I totally agree with Kate, people don't seem to realise they have the world at their finger tips, as long as you are looking in the right places you can get info on anything you need to know. There are ALOT of people still living in the dark ages...

[Doug Higley]

But Kate, you are getting Paid to do so, to have answers regardless of where they conme from, like any Lawyer or Doctor that provides info a person could in most cases find themselves.

[rhelynn]

If you aren't searching for something at least once a day - you either know everything or don't want to learn anymore.

I wonder if they should make Wikipedia count as a search engine too, and then see their results.

[David G.]

Part of the problem with the search engines from a small business perspective is the cost incurred to get to those envied first or second pages. In my business, to bid on a keyword that would put me on that first page would cost me about $50,000 USD.

And to Kate, thank you for your self restraint in dealing with your customers, believe me I know the feeling.

[Mike]

Sounds like either a poorly crafted pole or poor analysis. There should have been some categorization of user sophistication or something. Think about it, if all you do is check your email, then a search engine is of no use to you at all. But if you use the internet to actually investigate topics (even different news articles on the same topic) then a search engine is a must. This article is a bit like saying "80% of Swiss Army Knife owners never use the toothpick or screwdriver". While probably true, there isn't a whole lot of insight in the statement.

[Mike]

Sounds like either a poorly crafted pole or poor analysis. There should have been some categorization of user sophistication or something. Think about it, if all you do is check your email, then a search engine is of no use to you at all. But if you use the internet to actually investigate topics (even different news articles on the same topic) then a search engine is a must. This article is a bit like saying "80% of Swiss Army Knife owners never use the toothpick or screwdriver". While probably true, there isn't a whole lot of insight in the statement.

[Mike]

Hmm. My previous comment seems to have been removed :(

[SFG]

'SFG'. - It is truly amazing the pointless, moronic and docile questions posted on most forums.

Other uses for Google include; finding music; games; books.. etc. Unfortunately the 'googlebots' don't necessarily find anything very up to date.

[michael]

Agree with Kate. And Doug, the difference is that lawyers and doctors have access to Google, whereas an IT professional don't have medical journals etc.

[Dave]

This isn't like saying someone doesn't use the toothpick on their Swiss Army knife. Not using a search engine means that they are going to the same sites every time they use the web. It's more like someone who only carries two things: their front door key and their driver's license. Any problem they have that can't be solved with their front door key and their driver's license is simply unsolvable, if such a problem occurs.

[Manuel Mejia]

As a school teacher, I find it intriguing that students will waste valuable time trying to get basic information like the height of Mt. Everest through web surfing. Common facts can be found using something faster--an encyclopedia that is made from paper. There are still many people using the encyclopedia for basic research along with other topic specific journals. The book and the computer actually work better together.

[Lance Miller]

Cyber means helmsman, implying steering, which should make obvious that Cyberculture is a group of people capable of steering through the web.

A search engine is the steering wheel.

So this report is mentioning the Neanderthals wondering about our village market as if they are equals, when they are not at all. They do not know or care about steering themselves through the web.

Dustbin of history, here is another class that did not evolve.

[Gaucho]

Google? Try www.dogpile.com instead. This search engine combines Google, yahoo, MSN and ask.

[mmadink]

@"Manuel Mejia" Are you seriously implying that flipping through an encyclopedia is faster then googling something? I bet someone googling "basic information", 9 times out of 10, would have their answer before you even got to the book with the right letter. I really hope you aren't imposing your preferences on your students since it will only hurt them in the long run.

[Ray Dickenson]

David G wrote: "a keyword that would put me on that first page would cost me about $50,000 USD" - which was news to me, and seems a bit shoddy: just another way of tricking the public to waste time on a page they might not want.

Seems to me a more honest route is to provide interest and value on your page - and rely on happy readers referring it to others, via the Net.

OK, that might be a bit slower, yet it has a great side-effect: you'd know your page's ranking was based on its readers' valuation.

Or would that be unwelcome news?

[James]

Most of the time you need to be able to spell to use an encyclopedia. You don't have to be able to spell to use google.

[Anonymous]

The study only says that they don't use search daily. That is not the same as saying that they don't use search at all.

I guess that there are a lot of people who don't spend their entire days in front of the web. They read their email and a few web sites and does other things with their life. They only search when they need to.

I work as a developer for a internet company and spend a lot of time online both on and off work. Even I have days when I don't search...

[Paul]

I have to agree with Mike on this, and I'd like to add that I think the study group is far too small for this research to be of any real use.

[Rob]

Snatching Google away wouldn't be crippling. There are loads of other search engines available. 10 years I was using Alta Vista - not Google. In 10 years, or less, I'll probably be using something else.

[Jon]

@Gaucho: taking the consistently good results you get from Google, and mixing in the badly-targeted fluff you get from Yahoo, MSN, etc., making it harder to find the good results...

@Manuel Meija: I don't think you realise how fast you can find something with Google if you just type a couple of simple keywords. Try googling "height everest" - both Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britanica in the top results, and it takes about 2 seconds for me to type it, hit enter, and choose from the results (only 0.05 secs to actually do the search). I would have that information from the online version of the encyclopedia before you even got the paper one off the shelf :)

[peter c]

i never bother type in htttp bla bla i just google the name and follow the link the internet without google would be hell

[Andy]

I can't really be bothered with search these days if you type a request into a search engine most of the time all you get back is somebody wanting to sell you something