Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

2004 Year-End Google Zeitgeist

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the the-end-of-the-year-as-we-know-it dept.

Google 482

krgallagher writes "Google has published their Year-End Zeitgeist. In their own words, 'Based on billions of searches conducted by Google users around the world, the 2004 Year-End Zeitgeist offers a unique perspective on the year's major events and trends. We hope you enjoy this aggregate look at what people wanted to know more about this year.' The number one search for all of 2004 is britney spears."

cancel ×

482 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Britney (4, Funny)

daniil (775990) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169665)

When will it ever end?

Re:Britney (3, Funny)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169737)

There is actually a mistake. She was also supposed to be on the sports list.

I think I saw this in Nostradomus... (3, Funny)

StressGuy (472374) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169814)

"...and lo, a woman-child child shall be born, and she shall wear a head-dress of round plasic globes on her head as a child....upon the maturation of this child, when the platic globes are removed from her head and become infused in her chest....the end of the world shall surely be near...."

I'm parphrasing...but it's something like that I'm sure :)

Re:I think I saw this in Nostradomus... (1)

daniil (775990) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169900)

And lo, verily doth Nostradamus say:

"The day that she will be hailed as Queen,
The day after the benediction the prayer:
The reckoning is right and valid,
Once humble never was one so proud."

(Century X, quatraine 19)

Clearly, this must be a prophecy of Britney topping Google Zeitgeist several years in a row.

Re:Britney (1)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169826)

Britney...when will it ever end?

Well, I don't know about you, but I'm hoping it's "Britney's Anal Adventures 11."

Re:Britney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169867)

Well, I don't know about you, but I'm hoping it's "Britney's Anal Adventures 11."

As a gun-toting, Iraq-bombing, American puritan I find your suggestion highly offensive. If you need me I'll be watching Full House reruns.

Re:Britney (1)

Jazzer_Techie (800432) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169882)

The Britney phenomenon is nothing new, and if history is any indication, she's not going away anytime soon. She was the top search last year [google.com] as well. In 2001 [google.com] and 2002 [google.com] she was the most searched for woman.

Netcraft and now Google... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169671)


Nowhere on that page will you see a single popular search for BSD. You know what this confirms...

All I want for Christmas (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169674)

Is my browser stats.

(No, I don't want stats from some other site. I want them from the Zeitgeist!)

Re:All I want for Christmas (1)

Mathiasdm (803983) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169935)

I TOTALLY agree!

Porn (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169678)

Porn doesn't seem to be in much of the mix. If you look at the 'images', blow-job doesn't even show up.

Re:Porn (2, Interesting)

bigberk (547360) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169896)

That's because their zeitgeist is more of a pop culture / marketing / fun-review-of-trends thing. I wouldn't take it too seriously.

Browser Stats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169681)

Where are they! :)

First (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169686)

Post

And that trend is: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169687)

All people care about are celebs and "who wants to X my Y" shows. No wonder this world is in a death spiral.

hi (-1, Offtopic)

nicolasmendo (672317) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169689)

hi

Britney first ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169696)

What a bad year.......

Re:Britney first ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169730)

Take a look at the previous Zeitgeists, mate. She's been up there ever since 2001.

when will it ever end? (3, Insightful)

midol (752608) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169700)

When the human race evolves into an intelligent species?

How is wallpaper tech stuff? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169701)

printed paper w/ glue? or am I too old for this.

Moderate Safesearch on or off, you think? (5, Insightful)

iopha (626985) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169703)

Actually, the top four queries were all women: Spears, Hilton, Aguilera, Anderson. I think they image search results might be skewing the data. :D

Chat is #5 (1)

Deinhard (644412) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169708)

What they fail to mention is that people were searching for places to chat about Britney, Paris, Christina and Pamela.

SCO (5, Insightful)

basic0 (182925) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169710)

Britney Spears is the top search..and scroll down a bit to "top company searches" to see that SCO is in the lead. This confirms my theory that people are fascinated with stupidity in all it's forms.

Re:SCO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169786)

This confirms my theory that people are fascinated with stupidity in all it's forms.

My theory is that people are fascinatingly stupid in all forms.

Re:SCO (1)

Richie1984 (841487) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169807)

You couldn't be more wrong! Just look at Popular Sports Topics. David Beckham is No.1 What more proof could you need?!?

Re:SCO (1)

logic hack (800754) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169875)

and scroll down a bit to "top company searches" to see that SCO is in the lead

Its OK. Based on the recent events reguarding shares, 2005 will see SCO move one category over to 'In Rememberance...'

Tablet PC #1 Froogle Computer Good? (1)

simdude585 (782096) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169713)

Wow... The Tablet PC... The Microsoft invention... #1 in google's froogle search for computer goodies. What in the world happened with that one? I guess the boys over at www.tabletpcbuzz.com gotta be happy.

SCO (1, Redundant)

confusion (14388) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169717)

Interestingly, SCO came in at #1 on the company queries...

I'm not going to say anything about the Britney Spears bit...

Jerry
http://www.syslog.org/ [syslog.org]

The real top 10 (5, Funny)

oexeo (816786) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169718)

The unfiltered top 10:

1. britney spears nude
2. paris hilton nude
3. christina aguilera nude
4. pamela anderson nude
5. adult chat
6. games warez
7. carmen electra nude
8. orlando bloom nude
9. harry potter warez
10. mp3 warez

Given that pattern... (2, Funny)

Joey Patterson (547891) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169770)

Given that pattern, I was expecting to see:

9. harry potter nude

Re:The real top 10 (4, Funny)

flatface (611167) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169782)

9. harry potter nude

*runs*

Re:The real top 10 (2, Funny)

Ieshan (409693) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169785)

Harry Potter warez?

I mean, that doesn't make any sense, but at least you didn't put "Harry Potter nude", since that would have been really disturbing.

Re:The real top 10 (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169821)

There are several Harry Potter games out, in addition to the movies (though I would guess those are really filez).

Re:The real top 10 (1)

oexeo (816786) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169878)

I actually thought warez meant pirated shit, after looking it up it specifically means pirated software.

Re:The real top 10 (5, Funny)

insomnyuk (467714) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169809)

Actually, it probably looks more like this:

1. brittnay speers nakkid
2. pearis hillton sex
3. crisstina agweelaira boobie


and so on...

Re:The real top 10 (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169824)

I almost read 9. Harry Potter _NUDE_ Wrong, wrong, wrong!

cricket? (0, Troll)

RpiMatty (834853) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169724)

how is cricket in the top 10 sports?

Re:cricket? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169765)

how is cricket in the top 10 sports?

Because no-one understands it and feels like a laugh.

Re:cricket? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169791)

a billion Indians

Re:cricket? (4, Insightful)

vluther (5638) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169819)

maybe because there is a world outside the US ?
And the world series for cricket really does mean world series, not all the teams in the US and 4 from Canada.. North America isn't the world.

So you take the population of India about 1/4th and ask them what their favorite pasttime is.. it's cricket. combine that with sri lanka, south africa, australia, england etc.. and you get a lot of people who have internet access etc, know about google and search for events regarding a sport thats played by more people than who play baseball/american football, or polo :/

Re:cricket? (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169922)

North America might not be the whole world - but think. What proportion of North Americans have a computer and is online, compared to the proportion of Indians? Despite India having a population of 1bn, it wouldn't surprise me if New England alone had more people online than the whole of India.

Google can't study the results of the vast majority of Indian cricket fans that aren't online.

zeitgeist? (1)

jxyama (821091) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169725)

why can't we just say Year-End Summary, which is what it is?

i guess i'm missing some subtle nuance of the word?

Re:zeitgeist? (1)

RpiMatty (834853) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169780)

"the general intellectual, moral, and cultural climate of an era"

the people at google like to rub in the fact they are smart and know these big words

Re:zeitgeist? (2, Funny)

miu (626917) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169931)

Next year I hear it is going to be google weltschmertz.

Re:zeitgeist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169842)

Least they didn't call the 2000 zeigeist Fin de siecle.

Re:zeitgeist? (1)

nicolasmendo (672317) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169915)

why can't we just say Year-End Summary, which is what it is?
why can't we just say zeitgeist, which is what it is?

Here's why linux is 5 on tech searches: (0, Troll)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169728)

google: linux USB redhat "not working"

(or something to that affect, i am not picking on USB or redhat)

Froogle being used for pr0n! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169734)

Check out the Froogle searches - the clothing ones look like people going for soft-core pr0n.

Britney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169745)

And thanks to the story having to link the most popular search term, Briney Spears will be even more popular now..

Bill Hicks (3, Insightful)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169754)

This isn't a perfect quotation but...

We have the ability to keep knowledge of some of the greatest minds, and provide that knowledge to everyone? But no! "What's that little girl singing about? Let's put her on a CD, to be kept forever!"

I wish I had the exact quote, but it felt fitting to find out that this is what people want to know about on the Internet.

Lovely.

There is no hope ... (1)

bushboy (112290) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169759)

in finding intelligent life on earth...

Seriously though, it just shows how many numbnuts there are out there.

It's no wonder there's a monkey in the white house again ...

Re:There is no hope ... (0, Troll)

operagost (62405) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169871)

You just proved your own point with your tired, asinine anti-Bush comment.

Oh please, no, no no.... (4, Interesting)

Prince Vegeta SSJ4 (718736) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169761)

Everyone neither should be or even need be, an intellectual or nerd or scholar or whatever. We need all types of people in this world. But it is kind of scary that the most popular topics on the most popular information 'getter' are:

Geez, everything is entertainment related, with almost no educational value - unless of course the mp3 search is for people looking into how various compression algorithms work. Sometimes, I think I've found the reason why the world is going screwy. Maybe not.

  • 1. britney spears
  • 2. paris hilton
  • 3. christina aguilera
  • 4. pamela anderson
  • 5. chat
  • 6. games
  • 7. carmen electra
  • 8. orlando bloom
  • 9. harry potter
  • 10. mp3

Re:Oh please, no, no no.... (0, Flamebait)

jxyama (821091) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169850)

let's not get snobby or hypocritical here. isn't there a better use of your (and our) time than posting on a tech-centric weblog site?

there are people dying of hunger out there and wars going on too.

Disappointment again. (5, Funny)

caluml (551744) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169771)

I'm rather upset that I don't even appear in the top 10 popular men. When will people recognise me? Maybe I'll have to kill a bunch of people...?

Re:Disappointment again. (1)

flatface (611167) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169873)

I dunno, it's gonna be pretty damn hard to top George W. Bush...

Re:Disappointment again. (1)

DrLex (811382) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169889)

If you make that bunch large enough, that'll certainly work. Just look at the #1 in the "Top Public Figures"...

Browser information (5, Interesting)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169773)

Wow, this zeitgeist really sucks now. It's focused on nothing but search info, which I guess is expected from Google - but demographic information be damned, it seems. They should be looking to gather more information on things like browser, OS, country, etc. Just throwing a load of search terms on a page isn't particularly compelling, especially when they're all so predictable.

Re:Browser information (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169891)

Man my newspaper really sucks now. It's focused on nothing but news, which I guess is expected from my newspaper. They should be looking to show me more porn.

Man, my TV really sucks now. It's focused on nothing but television shows. They should be looking to play more radio channels.

Man, my search engine really sucks now. It's focused on nothing but search info...

Re:Browser information (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169909)

I liked it when they tracked video games. It could be useful in the future to look back and remember what games you were playing at the time. 2001-2002 have video games, but the ones now don't

Re:Browser information (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169947)

I'm sure you can pay Goolge for a more detailed version.

Great (1)

realmolo (574068) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169774)

If there is any hope for Western civilization, then the 11th most popular query is for "suicide".

Remembrance (1)

Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169777)

Nice to see Spalding Gray at #3.

Zeitgeist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169778)

Well isn't that just uber.

In rememberance, Nick Berg... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169789)

I doubt it was really in rememberance of his life, but people looking for that horrible video of his death. I admit to having seen it, and still can't get the screams out of my head.

Nick Berg: in rememberance, my ass (1)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169790)

That was sickos looking for pictures and video. That was no "Oh, I'm looking for a Nick Berg memorial site so I can pay tribute".

women (2, Funny)

clovercase (707041) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169792)

why isnt janet jackson classified into the 'women' category?

Join today! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169793)

at http://www.gnaa.us/

Self Explanatory (1)

eigerface (526490) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169794)

Top Clothing Queries 2004

1. bikini

2. mini skirt

3. prom dresses

4. lingerie

5. little black dress

6. poncho

7. t-shirt

8. sports bra

9. red dress

10. low-rise jeans

In Remembrance... (2, Funny)

outsider007 (115534) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169796)

Where's Rick James, Bitch?!?
/ just sayin'

Potter beats Mp3? (1)

Paiway (842782) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169802)

What i'm interested in is how Harry Potter beat mp3? What's up with that?

Re:Potter beats Mp3? (1)

DrLex (811382) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169946)

Something like an 'iPotter' must be a hole in the market then...

Playstation2 (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169804)

Playstation 2 would have been ahead of xbox if it wasn't also known as PS2. The searches for PS2 + playstation2 would have been ahead of xbox.

Something kind of scary (4, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169812)

The #2 item on local health searches is "hospital". You can just picture millions of people turning to Google before thinking of dialing 911!!

please explain? (4, Interesting)

vida (695022) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169816)

britney spears is the most popular query, but it's 4th on the list of public figures, while paris hilton did not even make the list.

On the tech stuff category, *kazaa* is the first one and *mp3* the third one, yet *kazaa* did not even make it to the most popular queries one, while mp3 is the tenth string most searched for.

There are also other inconsistencies, between for example the *most popular male* category and *most popular male celebrity*. (btw, what's the diff?)

Can somebody shed some insight into this?

Re:please explain? (1)

Momoru (837801) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169886)

I think they cooked up alot of their numbers, for example none of the top news stories in november/october were about the election, but instead about carlo whoever (i didnt even know his name til now) that refused orders in iraq....if i remember google news at the time it was ALL about the election and hardly anything about carlo whats-his-face.

Re:please explain? (4, Informative)

caerwyn (38056) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169936)

google.com queries at the top are separated from the news.google.com queries (next section down), and the results for the two are different.

It's just so sad to see people misuse technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169818)

Come'on world, bazillions of connected systems and the best we come up with is searching for Britney??? That's just so pathetic and sad.

Not to mention the ruin that is Zeitgeist. Google is in the process of proving that excessive greed can and will destroy anything.

Re: just so sad to see people misuse technology (1)

spac3manspiff (839454) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169944)

We simply have to face the fact that most people use the internet for porn. This just shows that people have their priorities.
we put hornyness before everything.

Not many women use Google (1)

Patik (584959) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169823)

Or at least they're not very horny.

The top 4 queries are women's names. The first guy (Orlando Bloom, who was in LOTR) appears after the fifth woman (Carmen Electra, and I don't even know what she did this year that would draw so many searches).

Re:Not many women use Google (1)

PoorLenore (608332) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169865)

Actually, Google is a plaything of the international lesbian conspiracy. But I've said too much...

Re:Not many women use Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169937)

Google is a plaything of the international lesbian conspiracy
sshhhhhh [savethemales.ca] !

Re:Not many women use Google (4, Funny)

jxyama (821091) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169907)

>Carmen Electra, and I don't even know what she did this year that would draw so many searches

do you really have to ask [google.com] ? (NSFW)

Predictions for 2005? (4, Funny)

bigberk (547360) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169825)

It's clear now. We'll be seeing a lot more of britney spears and paris hilton in bikinis, mini skirts and prom dresses... possibly while they watch CNN, the simpsons, or listen to 'YMCA' on their ipods.

Oh baby baby, how was I supposed to know ... (1)

gulfan (524955) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169833)

It's interesting to note that Britney Spears was number one not only this year, but the year before. In 2001, she was the most popular female 'searched' too. Doesn't the world realize that there are better singers and models out there?

tech? (1)

Eric604 (798298) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169837)

i wouldn't call this tech stuff:

Popular Tech Stuff 2004
1. wallpaper
2. kazaa
3. mp3
4. spybot
5. linux

Hilton (1)

Deinhard (644412) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169839)

Interesting that Paris Hilton is #2 in Queries and Women but Hilton Hotels is #4 in Hotels.

It says something...I just don't know what.

iTunes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169856)

Surprised that iTunes doesnt show up anywhere on these lists.

So google answers it (1)

spac3manspiff (839454) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169860)

Apparently the top public figures are:
1. george w bush
2. janet jackson
3. john kerry
Therefore Janet Jackson unfortunatly had a better chance of winning the election over Kerry. :/

Inconsistencies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169861)

In "Top Public Figures", janet jackson appears before britney spears. Since these two are women, why doesn't janet jackson appear before britney spears in the "Popular Women" category?

Harry Potter, MIA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169868)

Just browsing through the US and International statistics I saw a startling lack of anything Harry Potter. Even in the UK!

Oh those french fries! (1)

gulfan (524955) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169883)

France is higher than Iraq...I guess we know our REAL enemies...

Presidential elections (3, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169884)

So since George W. Bush was the number one public figure search, and John Kerry was third, behind Janet Jackson, can we assume that if Janet Jackson had run for president, she would have had a better chance of winning than John Kerry?

Maybe if the elections were held closer to the Superbowl.

The great mystery of PR explained... (1)

stevel (64802) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169885)

Noticed this at the bottom of the page...

PigeonRank [google.com]

nig6a (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11169897)

*BSD has steadily your replies rathe8 = 1400 NetBSD Arithmetic,

Don't hate (1)

kaedemichi255 (834073) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169914)

Don't hate on Britney. Every living male with active hormones on this planet want a piece of that. And I bet you /. readers contributed a good percentage of those searches.

Poor John Kerry (1)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169916)

He lost to G.W. and Janet Jackson!

britney (2, Insightful)

n__0 (605442) | more than 9 years ago | (#11169924)

Popular Queries
2004

1. britney spears

2. paris hilton

Top Public Figures
2004

1. george w bush

2. janet jackson

3. john kerry

4. britney spears

Shouldn't britney spears be the top of every list she qualifies for in the zeitgeist if her name is the most popular term overall?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>