Home / News / Software News / Google & Bing Reveal Hottest Trends of 2009

Google & Bing Reveal Hottest Trends of 2009

Gordon Kelly

by

Google & Bing Reveal Hottest Trends of 2009

It's not even December yet (just), but if you'd like to know what are the hottest trending topics of 2009 Google and Bing are keen to tell you...

Perhaps most interesting from the Google side is 'Michael Jackson' wasn't the hottest rising search of 2009, neither was 'swine flu' instead it went to Windows 7. Perhaps unsurprisingly the rest were dominated by variations on Facebook!

1) windows 7 +1,250%

2) michael jackson +900%

3) facebook login +750%

4) facebook.com +250%

5) facebook +200%

6) youtube.com +130%

7) tuenti +120%

8) yahoo mail +100%

9) face +100%

10) hotmail.com +50%

Google should announce .com lists within the next few days and we'll update the article.

As for Bing, it has released its top 10 trending topics These were more straightforward, though I'm amazed to see Twitter ahead of Swine Flu:

1) Michael Jackson

2) Twitter

3) Swine Flu

4) Stock Market

5) Farrah Fawcett

6) Patrick Swayze

7) Cash for Clunkers

8) Jon and Kate Gosselin

9) Billy Mays

10) Jaycee Dugard

Interestingly, with the so-called 'noughties' also drawing to a close (what will we call the next decade? 'Decties'?), Google has also shown off the hottest topics for each year and in the UK again Stephen Gately was apparently our primary obsession. The full list for the UK is below and I find 2005 particularly depressing...

  • 2000: omitted since the data recording hadn't begun

  • 2001: notradamus

  • 2002: spiderman

  • 2003: prince charles

  • 2004: big brother

  • 2005: james blunt

  • 2006: steve irwin

  • 2007: iphone

  • 2008: iplayer

  • 2009: stephen gately
This being the analytical monster that is Google it also broke down dozens more which you can see on the next page.

So any speculations as to what will be the number one trend or term in 2010? In the meantime here are the Google Top Searches of 2008.

Links:

Google Insights for Search Beta

Bing Press Release

OldTimer

November 30, 2009, 9:24 pm

'2005: james blunt'





Was that people researching rhyming slang?

smc8788

November 30, 2009, 9:30 pm

I can't believe Billy Mays only just scrapes into the top 10. And do people really still search for Facebook and Youtube? The mind boggles.

Gordon394

November 30, 2009, 10:05 pm

@smc8788 - are you from the US? I had to Wikipedia him just to know who he was!

Tim Sutton

November 30, 2009, 10:25 pm

I imagine that none of these were in fact anywhere close to the most searched for things.





'*actress/singer name* naked' and 'boobies' will have been #2 and #3, while if my search history is anything to go by, #1 most searched will have been 'Radeon 5870 in stock ANYWHERE, ffs?'

smc8788

November 30, 2009, 10:29 pm

Nope. Every time a Billy Mays commercial is shown in the US, it is heard around the world.





I'm sure Youtube will reveal more for the unenlightened.

Tony Walker

November 30, 2009, 10:31 pm

1973: James Blunt





I'll get my coat...

Nicholas Name

November 30, 2009, 10:40 pm

Dear God, those were the most pressing things on the minds of my kinsmen for the last 10 years? I'll get my coat.

lifethroughalens

November 30, 2009, 10:53 pm

@ Tony Walker -"1973: James Blunt. I'll get my coat..."





For that, you can walk home without it! :)





1999: Prince? (legs it out the door...)

Jmac

November 30, 2009, 11:24 pm

@Nicholas Name - my thoughts exactly. Makes me want to run screaming from what passes as modern civilization. Will the last one to flee the Earth please turn out the lights.

Jay4d0

November 30, 2009, 11:50 pm

@smc8788: nope never heard of him and cirtainly never heard anything at all about him anywhere on the news or even the internet.





infact the hit count will likely go up just from people trying to google him to find out who he is now





nope just googled him and he is some advert person and never heard of him certainly never seen him before, but perhaps it's just me

Gordon394

November 30, 2009, 11:53 pm

"Every time a Billy Mays commercial is shown in the US, it is heard around the world."





@smc8788 - errrr, a US tele sales man? Ok! Sorry to read he died though.

hankb6d

December 1, 2009, 1:37 am

What about the infamous Claire Waxman? I don't know who she is but surely her search has gone up 250%.





http://news.sky.com/skynews/Ho...

ilovethemonkeyhead

December 1, 2009, 11:52 am

2001: notradamus





ever the pessimists, we are...

JohnH

December 1, 2009, 7:52 pm

Google is an analytical monster and yet they can't filter out "youtube.com" type entries from their results?





The majority of their top 10 is wasted with spurious searches made by people who don't know how to type into the address bar.





Meaningless.

Jay4d0

December 1, 2009, 9:41 pm

@ JohnH: it is most of the time safer to access a website through google as if it had been affected by malware google stops and warns you as opposed to being taken directly to the site and being infected, what i dont understand about the results is why people search for "facebook login" as opposed to just "facebook" :S

JohnH

December 2, 2009, 12:46 am

@Jay: lol. Good job we don't have shortcuts or bookmarks or links or browser history.





And how do you access Google in the first place if it's safer to access sites via Google?





Even if you were right (especially if you are right) those searches should still be filtered out.





When is a search not a search?

Jay4d0

December 2, 2009, 8:27 pm

nah your missing the point, and I did say most of the time, trusted sites that you've bookmarked are sites that you will probably use regularly so are likely to be fine eg iplayer, google ect, but if you see an advert and they want you to go to some website and (especially) if it's something that you don't recognise then it is safer to give it a quick google search as googles blacklist is updated quicker than firefoxes or IEs, for me google is my homepage and it is often quicker to search than it is to click into the address bar to find a bookmark

JohnH

December 2, 2009, 9:50 pm

Because you wouldn't recognise youtube, facebook, twitter now would you Jay? Who's heard of them?

Jay4d0

December 2, 2009, 11:58 pm

I have no clue what your talking about, of course I recognise popular sites, a good forgery site on the other hand, it is hard for anyone to tell the difference unless you look closely at the url, if that is the point you're making?


A person not as internet savy as ourselves if they were given a website to visit it could redirect them to a forgery site where they then have their logons stolen or malware installed, if they had have gone through google it would have the opportunity to stop and warn them.


I'm not telling you to change you ways or that you would not notice a forgery site but this is the way I would recommend people help protect themselves better whilst online.

JohnH

December 3, 2009, 1:10 am

Good for you Jay. Not really relevant to my point though. You're not getting it so I'll spell it out.





People type into Google instead of visiting the site directly though a bookmark, or the address bar or whatever, even thought they are return visitors. I see this day in day out. So when Google says Facebook is the 3rd, 4th and 5th most searched for site that's not really true, or at least not in a meaningful way.





People are not searching for Facebook they are Googling because they don't know how to use a browser properly. Not everyone but I'm wagering a significant enough proportion to skew those stats.





When you visit hotmail, youtube, facebook or whatever every day (or many times a day) via Google you are not cleverly checking a mysterious site for malware you are just not using the technology efficiently.





I agree though that I would recommend your method for people looking at suspect sites.

Geoff Richards

December 3, 2009, 5:28 am

Gentlemen - the phrase you are looking for is Navigational Search. This is the term used to describe the behaviour detailed in JohnH's post (above).





You can read more about it via Robin Goad @ Hitwise here


http://weblogs.hitwise.com/rob...

JohnH

December 3, 2009, 1:46 pm

Thanks for the link Geoff. Interesting to see the marketing perspective.





So in a nutshell I think Google should separate the branded navigational searches from the informational. Both top 10's then have meaning.

Jay4d0

December 3, 2009, 8:10 pm

oh I get it, and I agree they should filter out the navigational search and separate them. - it's been a long couple of days

Jay4d0

December 3, 2009, 8:59 pm

and just in the metro today: http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/80...

comments powered by Disqus