This paper presents an empirical case study examining how a single metadata element—a Zenodo DOI—altered the indexing behavior of an Academia.edu essay across major search engines. By comparing the visibility of the same document before and after the DOI was added, the study reveals how Google and Bing apply different infrastructural logics when determining what becomes discoverable. The findings show that Google’s scholarly‑aligned crawl pathways respond directly to DOI‑linked metadata, while Bing’s indexing architecture does not, resulting in divergent epistemic access to identical content. The case demonstrates that online visibility is not a neutral outcome of publication but a governed effect of metadata interpretation, crawl‑path design, and platform‑specific priorities.
Signal Rupture (Thu,) studied this question.