( Fast Company ) -- Demand Media burst onto the public markets last month , quickly earning itself a valuation of $ 1.5 billion -- and a tidy payday for its chief investors and founders . But it 's possible they got into the market just before the getting stopped being good . There 's a rising backlash against `` spam '' search results and other low-quality content , and that could spell the death knell for content farms like Demand . The problem : Google used to be an efficient way to find what you needed . Enter a search term , and , presto , the results served up the very thing you were looking for . But increasingly , that 's not the case . Investor and business commentator Paul Kedrosky recently vented his outrage at the pile of garbage he found on Google when he went looking for tips on buying a dishwasher . UC Berkeley professor ( and tech commentator ) Vivek Wadhwa threw up his hands when Google could n't help his students find the information they were looking for . And at a panel on the future of search earlier this week , Loopt co-founder Sam Altman said : `` Three times in the last month , I searched for things on Google , and the result was n't on the front page . That 's the first time it 's ever happened . '' A major source of the problem is the entire industry that has emerged to game the Google system , producing content that looks promising within the results , but that when clicked on , serves up a mishmash of text that looks like sneezed-out alphabet soup . The material produced by Demand Media -- and other content farms , like AOL 's Seed -- is usually not as egregious as the example above , but it 's often not far behind . Demand and AOL both employ humans , but make thousands of assignments a month -- and there are minimum quality requirements . The payment structure at both companies is such that very few freelancers can afford to devote the time necessary to produce the kind of reliable take a reader might be looking for . For example , a Wired story about Demand described the efforts of a videographer to shoot , edit , and post 10 videos on kayaking techniques in under two hours , because he was only getting paid a total of $ 200 . Search engines , whose entire value proposition rests on the quality of the results they produce , are starting to take notice . Blekko , a new engine launched last year to fight this very problem , is already crowdsourcing quality by letting users mark results as spam . Earlier this week , Blekko announced that , based on feedback it received through its spam-watch program , it had decided to ban material from 20 sites produced by content farms , like Demand Media 's eHow . The sites `` are literally responsible for millions of pages on the Web that our users say are just not helpful and they 'd prefer they were banned permanently , '' Blekko CEO Rich Skrenta said . `` So we 're going to do that for them . '' Google has also responded . `` In 2010 , we launched two major algorithmic changes focused on low-quality sites , '' Matt Cutts , Google 's leader for search quality , wrote on The Official Google Blog last month . `` Nonetheless , we hear the feedback from the web loud and clear : People are asking for even stronger action on content farms and sites that consist primarily of spammy or low-quality content . ... We can and should do better . '' What Google will actually do remains to be seen . At Farsight 2011 this week , the conference at which Loopt 's Altman appeared , Cutts indicated that the search giant is looking for algorithmic ways to improve the quality of search results . `` We care about the long-term loyalty of our users , '' he said . All of which means , if the search business gets serious about weeding out spam and low-quality content , Demand 's days could be numbered . Its business model was designed to exploit -- and reap revenue from -- the specific ecosystem into which it was born . But if that ecosystem changes , it 's anyone 's guess whether Demand will be able to retool and find a new strategy . The `` Risk Factors '' section of its pre-IPO S-1 filing says as much : . `` Internet search engines could decide that content on our owned and operated websites and on our customers ' websites , including content that is created by our freelance content creators , is unacceptable , '' the filing says . `` Any reduction in the number of users directed to our owned and operated websites and to our customers ' websites would negatively affect our ability to earn revenue . If traffic on our owned and operated websites and on our customers ' websites declines , we may need to resort to more costly sources to replace lost traffic , and such increased expense could adversely affect our business , revenue , financial condition and results of operations . '' Fast Company reached out to Demand for comment , but they declined because they are still in the `` quiet period '' required by the SEC , which prohibits companies from talking about themselves in the period surrounding an IPO . Copyright © 2010 FastCompany.com , a unit of Mansueto Ventures , LLC . All rights reserved .
Demand Media was recently valued at $ 1.5 billion at its initial public offering . But a search - engine ban could spell trouble for content providers like Demand . Google 's Matt Cutts says the search giant plans to crack down on low - quality content . Google , a startup search engine , already bans content from Demand Media .