It seems reasonable that Google's algorithm is listing those photos because it's finding that a number of people searching for "Camping Alfaques" are looking for photos of the explosion. So it's just giving those users what they are looking for.
That could be, but it could also be biased. For example, people looking for the camping site for a vacation might see those pictures and then click on then, not because they were looking for those pictures, but because OMG what is that in those pictures?! As a result, though, it would appear that people are searching for the pictures in the first place.
I'm sure it's much more complicated than that. But we can't tell if the pictures are shown for good reason or not.
That's one thing I never understood about Google: just how does it decide that something I clicked on was really what I was looking for?
For every person who was looking for photos of the explosion, there are most likely many more who were looking for general information about "Camping Alfaques" but clicked on the thumbnails out of arguably morbid interest. I know I wouldn't resist clicking on that stuff to see what it's about, it seems to be human nature.
So, in the end, how does Google distinguish people's objectives from their curiosity?
If you see someone on the train reading Twilight, how do you distinguish between someone who likes Twilight and someone who is taking seriously the idea "don't judge a book by it's cover" and giving it a fair reading before deciding?
No matter the reason, reading the entire book is a fair endorsement of prominent twilight placement in the bookstore. It doesn't matter if you hate it, you wanted to read it. But picking it up, looking at the description in the back jacket, and putting it back down is most definitely not.
Going to a site for 10 seconds is not an endorsement.
I believe Google does track "click through - click back" timing, specifically to limit the impact of this effect. Whether or not it's effective is another question.
I don't know whether your comment supposed to restate my question or answer it. If it's the latter, the difference is not that I'm not the one offering a service that classifies books by popularity based entirely on what I see people reading on trains. My question still stands.
Well, there's the echo chamber effect. You search for something previously unknown to you, you click on something that catches your eye, thereby suggesting it for the next person.
