System: The following message was spliced on to this thread from: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4298265.htm [webmasterworld.com] by tedster - 11:46 am on Apr 15, 2011 (EDT -4)
|Google has defended recent changes to its search system that reduced the prominence of some popular websites. |
One of the worst hit by the "Panda" update was Ciao.co.uk, a Microsoft-owned company that had been leading an EU competition case against Google.
Its web visibility fell by 94% according to analysis by Searchmetrics.
Google's head of search evaluation, Scott Huffman, said it was "almost absurd" to suggest that the results were rigged.
Funnily enough, that "almost absurd" quote pops up elsewhere [msn.finance.com.my], without reference to ciao, as noted in the New Interview with Google Engineers about Algo [webmasterworld.com] thread
I'm using Ciao as an example for my clients about what not to do.
For example don't republish reviews on multiple pages & sites. Ciao is regurgitating massive amounts of content. One of the reviews I checked was republished in its entirety on over 38 pages and at least 3 other websites. That is not good for the user experience or for SEO.
Is it just me that finds this BBC article poorly written and misleading? The supposedly independent BBC pretty much spend the entire article trying to draw out the conclusion that Google did Panda to harm Microsoft.
Well , perhaps we'll let the courts decide on this one heh
I will most certainly be getting in touch with ciao on monday to join the EU anti competitive case against Google. They have basically banned all price comparison sites but have managed to leave their price comparison results sitting nicely at the top. IM SHOCKED! that they think this is not anti competitive. I would love to see googles price comparison section live out in the wild, it would most certainly get smashed by the BIG panda.
I think the EU is going to come down hard on Google for this one just like they did on Microsoft.
The stock discusion belongs in another section, but let me point out that it has nothing to do with Panda- its to do with its financial performance in 2010. Panda launched in 2011.
That said, you cant claim positive feedback without showing the evidence, particularly in the face of such ubiquitous criticism.
If you want to discuss Google business practices, anti-trust issues or stock prices please post in the Google Business & Finance section ( [webmasterworld.com...] ). Let's keep this thread focused on the Google algorithm & SEO.
|For example don't republish reviews on multiple pages & sites. Ciao is regurgitating massive amounts of content. One of the reviews I checked was republished in its entirety on over 38 pages and at least 3 other websites. That is not good for the user experience or for SEO. |
That's GREAT for users, horrible for Google maybe. I can think of many reasons why reviews would show on more than one page of the same site.
The Google v. MSN war is heating up. Besides the litigation and recent allegations of cheating/copying search results, MSN has started to eat into G's search pie (for the first time?). Things could get very interesting in 2011. We've waited so many years for real competition for G... There is hope.
There may be hope UNLESS the engineers at Microsoft fail to innovate and instead settle on copying the leader. In that case, to quote Pete Townsend, "Here comes the new boss / same as the old boss".