homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.237.71.86
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 140 message thread spans 5 pages: < < 140 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 > >     
Matt Cutts About the Next Penguin Update
abhishekmishra




msg:4485417
 10:27 am on Aug 16, 2012 (gmt 0)

Matt Cutts discussed at SES San Francisco to talk on stage and answer questions...

When people asked Cutts about the next Penguin Update he thought: You donít want the next Penguin update, the engineers have been working hard.


For Penguin:- The updates are going the be jarring and julting for a while.


Webmasters who want to get as much visibility as possible should look at the spectrum of value youíre adding.

 

Brett_Tabke




msg:4486749
 12:21 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

> For Penguin:- The updates are going the be jarring and julting for a while

There are some people with audio recordings of our session, and I will see if I can hunt them up or ask Matt for clarification. https://twitter.com/BruceClayInc/status/235769055385112577/photo/1

The above 'quote' is not what I heard. I heard, "They CAN BE jarring and jolting". It was a statement - not a prediction.

seogenx




msg:4486768
 1:42 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Obviously, I don't if it is going to kill the SEO. This field has been already affected on large scale by Penguin and Panda update. If it's a Penguin update then it can be associated with the inbound links and anchor texts and if its a Panda attack then ready for refreshing the content to your website to check the duplication and implementation of canonical tags.

TypicalSurfer




msg:4486772
 1:48 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

I suppose it can become similar to theology, pondering the google scriptures to discern their true meaning. What did apostle Matt REALLY mean when he said that?

BaseballGuy




msg:4486813
 2:31 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)


I suppose it can become similar to theology, pondering the google scriptures to discern their true meaning. What did apostle Matt REALLY mean when he said that?


Well, like many false prophets over the course of history....I would presume Matt Cutts wishes that you gather in his compound and "build great quality websites" ("and the traffic will come").

Over the past 5? months since Penguin has decimated the lively hoods and incomes of tens of thousands of white hat webmasters (myself included), I have seen many people working hard at cleaning up their inbound links....Matt Cutts has even suggested that you do so.

How's that punch taste, fellas?

SevenCubed




msg:4486819
 2:38 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

If I could point to ONE single aspect of what I do differently, almost no inbound link hunting. Whatever links I have to sites have come naturally over years and they are VERY few. Maybe that is what has granted me stability because obviously that's what these algorithm changes are all about.

netmeg




msg:4486826
 2:44 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Same here. Not because I had any kind of crystal ball, but because I just plain don't have the patience for linkbuilding.

TypicalSurfer




msg:4486827
 2:46 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)


How's that punch taste, fellas?


The goolaid?

Well, this will probably become more of a social issue as google continues to tweak the web economy. I know we like to keep the focus on the technical but the rise of google was a near perfect blend of technical and social convergence. I see they are still holding the fort so to speak in the social realm as main stream has not yet picked up on just how destructive google can be but I don't know how long they can keep a lid on that. As far as a superior search product, not so much. The search results just aren't that good. They have been better, much better.

BaseballGuy




msg:4486828
 2:46 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)


If I could point to ONE single aspect of what I do differently, almost no inbound link hunting. Whatever links I have to sites have come naturally over years and they are VERY few. Maybe that is what has granted me stability because obviously that's what these algorithm changes are all about.


Yes, however...with SEO each niche is completely different than the next. John the Plumber (who owns a small business) really can't attract "natural" links because when was the last time you went on your Facebook/Twitter page and bragged to the world about the bangup job John did when he unclogged your toilet?

So when someone searches for a plumber, John's website doesn't show up. What does show up is a bunch of conglomerate companies and EMD's....nothing but lead gen and guys who spend $$$$$$ on adwords.

What's John to do?

Well according to the "rules", he's supposed to "build great quality content".

When's the last time you engaged your local plumber (who did work on your house) on Facebook? When's the last time you sat down and wanted to read a great quality article and thought-provoking discourse on how to install a sprinkler system or unclog a toilet?



/edit

Someone needs to start a search engine for local mom-and-pop companies. Something that doesn't include the Fortune 500 brands that dominate the SERPS nowadays.

I know by hiring a local guy to do install/fix/repair my _______ , I'm most likely going to get better, more personalized service than I would with Corporation "X". I would probably get a better quote/price as he doesn't have as much overhead as the big guys do, and can afford to undercut their prices.

SevenCubed




msg:4486839
 2:58 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

The search results just aren't that good. They have been better, much better.


That is very true. It's no secret here that I'm not a fan of google at all. But it wasn't always that way. In fact part of my decision to to venture out on my own as a developer was because I realized how much I thought like google or they thought like me (years ago). They used to produce very accurate results, amazingly so even. I realized I could work within their philosophy easily and build effective sites while relying on them to bring seekers of knowledge to meaningful content.

But then something changed drastically, probably a number of things, some of it motivated by $$$, some of it political, but I think mostly EGO.

If they would clean up their sad act and stop chasing people around to figure out if they had corn for dinner yesterday I would probably warm back up to them. But that's not likely to happen so instead I would rather be in a position to buy them out and shut them down. And that's not likely to happen either :)

[edited by: SevenCubed at 3:01 pm (utc) on Aug 21, 2012]

TypicalSurfer




msg:4486840
 2:59 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

John the plumber can have "great quality content" but history shows that link building by lead gen networks keeps him invisible in results. You want John, you go through them.

nomis5




msg:4486843
 3:06 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Not because I had any kind of crystal ball, but because I just plain don't have the patience for linkbuilding.


Me too, I can't tell the wheat from the chaff when trying to link build so I gave up eons ago. It's also one less thing to worry about. If my back link profile appears to G as false then I truly do know that they are heading for a fall.

TypicalSurfer




msg:4486844
 3:08 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

@ SevenCubed

Yes, at one time there was what appeared to be a cooperative type atmosphere with google, a lot of webmasters had the warm fuzzies and maybe thought the feelings were mutual but I think the shine is off that apple now.

I don't think it will take much time for the market to fill that void.

SevenCubed




msg:4486859
 3:26 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

...but I think the shine is off that apple now


That's what a black hole will do to an apple, every apple in the garden gets it's luster stripped off as it goes through a double torus dynamic generated by black holes like google. The good news is that they are closest to their own black hole and will therefore implode before we do! Hope I'm around to enjoy it when it happens :)

SevenCubed




msg:4486868
 3:45 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Here's something else worth considering. Why is it that their results were so good years ago but trash now? Probably because their earlier algorithm had a mostly uninterrupted logical flow to it whereas now with every change they are probably writing exceptions to handle them. So now they probably have a mountain of objects colliding and conflicting with each other. It wouldn't surprise me if some of them even enter into endless loops with each other in ways the QA team didn't test for prelaunch. It only becomes apparent after it is set loose in the wild.

tedster




msg:4486882
 4:48 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Yes, I'll bet the algorithm does have its own version of spaghetti code going on. Seems unavoidable at this point. For instance, one of the conflicts I see is between quality measures like Penguin or Panda and freshness concerns.

I'd say another problem with Penguin is it assumes that quality and technical SEO can't exist for the same page. If Penguin just wiped out any advantage that "artificial" steps might be giving the URL, that would be one thing. But it seems to me that Penguin hands out stronger demotions than that - and good content can become almost unfindable.

I do know this for sure - as a user, not as a webmaster or SEO. For a while, Google Search was so good I barely bothered with bookmarks. But today when I find a gem I know I need to record it somehow before it becomes unfindable. I give Penguin the credit for that.

SevenCubed




msg:4486895
 5:22 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

..."artificial" steps...


And that, is the primary problem with google results right now...they are artificially induced.

All of the information on the internet across all sites (mostly) is natural. Links flow naturally (mostly) from one site to another because they are inter-related as determined by the millions of publishers of countless sites. Not every site attempts to manipulate SERPs. But in google's unnatural attempt to craft results to meet their manipulative agenda they have to go against the natural flow of info. Hence so many exceptions in the code.

Yes spammers are a problem but in an attempt to be seen as "the bigger man" they egotistically go after spammers with nukes and wipe out all the legitimate sites along with them.

From what I see Bing returns very natural results with very little spam and in most cases it's highly relevant to the query -- of course there will be a few exceptions. So why has Bing surpassed google with good results? My guess is they aren't attempting to micro manage results to maximize profits. Google is digging their own hole but because they have become so dominant they are so large that it is going to take a real big hole to swallow them so we are stuck with them for a long time to come -- unless we stop catering to their crafting. We only have ourselves (webmasters) to blame for this ongoing nonsense by placing them on a plateau and stoking their ego by thinking that they are better than the collective sum of us -- they are not and never will be.

tedster




msg:4486900
 5:29 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

OK - but let's not go far too off topic or into completely general territory. After all, this thread is about the next Penguin update

I hope Brett's memory of that conference session with Matt is accurate. The last thing webmasters need right now is another major Penguin disturbance. An obvious improvement, however, would be quite welcome!

SevenCubed




msg:4486903
 5:40 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

OK - but let's not go far too off topic or into completely general territory


Ya...pent up frustrations bubbling to the surface...I'll crank the knob a bit more to the right.

Zivush




msg:4486905
 5:43 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

The last thing webmasters need right now is another major Penguin disturbance. An obvious improvement, however, would be quite welcome!

Of course.
I hope they will find more signals to evaluate quality content.
People want diversity of search results. (Not 7 out of ten top results from one single site).
Chasing websites for unnatural links and over optimization (no matter how bad it is) must not become the main factors of the algorithm.

bwnbwn




msg:4486906
 5:43 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

If this would have been said in the text it was posted Brett would have tweeted about if before it was posted here that I am sure.

timwilliams




msg:4486910
 6:08 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

I don't think it will take much time for the market to fill that void.


That's assuming that there is a void to fill. Penguin has been good to google, we will see more penguin as google continues to purge the garbage know as third party websites from their "information/answers engine". The Star Trek computer never once told anyone what book to read to find the answer to their question, it gave them the answer. As long as searchers are getting the answers to their questions, whether it be in adwords, the knowledge graph, g-shopping, or some other g-property there will be no void to fill.

jimbeetle




msg:4486921
 6:30 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

The Star Trek computer never once told anyone what book to read to find the answer to their question, it gave them the answer.

Posted just yesterday: [youtube.com...]

"Google's search engineers and product managers present on how we're moving toward building the Star Trek computer of the future."

backdraft7




msg:4486931
 6:54 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

I realized how much I thought like google or they thought like me (years ago). They used to produce very accurate results, amazingly so even. I realized I could work within their philosophy easily and build effective sites while relying on them to bring seekers of knowledge to meaningful content.


Amen to that brother!
I feel the same way. When Cutt's makes a comment like he did, we know the dark days of oppression are upon us. I used to feel like Google was a partner too and they sure did produce great results back then.
We made our brand, earned the trust, we played the game right and were ranked accordingly, but suddenly, perhaps because a few bad apples ruined it for us all, we are now all thrown into the same "bad" basket and have to start over with a completely new set of rules. Google seems to be paranoid of their own users, including the ones they "used to like", so it's hard not to feel betrayed and definitely hurts the pocket book.

I guess it's Google's playground now and if you don't bring enough marbles, you're out. Bring on the next iteration of Penguin and put us out of our misery already.

As far as keeping it on topic...how do you do that when you don't even know what the topic is? Nobody really understands Penguin, so why speculate? Matt implies it's doom, so doom it is.

Brett_Tabke




msg:4486939
 7:09 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

The Star Trek reference is interesting.

In fact, Matt had a brilliant example about Google and competition: "Suppose we had a competitor that build a search engine, you could ask questions of and it would tell you answers. Lets suppose they called it SIRI..."

Which is honestly, a pretty good example of heavy and competent competition.

(sidebar) I was a bit nervous when the star trek reference came up in questions, because I was wearing a red shirt on the panel. (/sidebar)

TypicalSurfer




msg:4486949
 7:31 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Eric Schmidt also brought up SIRI in response to a US Senate antitrust subcommittee investigating googles abuse of power in the search space. Plausable? kinda Probable? not so much.

He also testified in earlier hearings that Apple and Facebook were not serious competitive threats. I suppose he later realized he needed to find some "competition" in order to shake inevitable antitrust actions.

Panthro




msg:4486984
 8:38 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

In regards to Penguin -

Has anyone noticed that "branded" sites have been able to get away with more link manipulation than the average joe's?

backdraft7




msg:4487001
 9:21 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

I'm going to take a step off topic for a moment, but it may connect with the topic in the end...
One major flaw I see with today's search is a terrible waste of screen real estate and the "king of the hill" structure where everyone fights for that single coveted spot. This is pretty much a throwback to the old, small low resolution CRT monitors and we have not really advanced yet.

Anyone remember "penny pixels"? thousands of ads on a single page. Now that was a bit extreme, but a future search engine layout, designed for modern widescreen monitors, could pack at least three to four times the results on one page, perhaps in a grid format with 120 x 60 graphic ad units. In the end, by allowing for more usable space, perhaps this could take some of the "bite" out of drastic updates, like penguin.

There is rarely one good answer and I'd hate to see a Star Trek Computer giving me only one result as it's answer.

Other bonuses would be adding the use of color and company logos. Ya gotta admit, the current SERP format is rather antiquated.

Leosghost




msg:4487004
 9:30 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

The future is mobile, the future is now..

it sure as hell ain't widescreen*, not for joe and jane six pack* not until wide screen "google's goggles" get here..

*they use that for watching pron..gaming, netflix and movie torrents..

mirrornl




msg:4487031
 10:39 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Tedster-
Yes, I'll bet the algorithm does have its own version of spaghetti code going on. Seems unavoidable at this point. For instance, one of the conflicts I see is between quality measures like Penguin or Panda and freshness concerns.

I'd say another problem with Penguin is it assumes that quality and technical SEO can't exist for the same page. If Penguin just wiped out any advantage that "artificial" steps might be giving the URL, that would be one thing. But it seems to me that Penguin hands out stronger demotions than that - and good content can become almost unfindable.

I do know this for sure - as a user, not as a webmaster or SEO. For a while, Google Search was so good I barely bothered with bookmarks. But today when I find a gem I know I need to record it somehow before it becomes unfindable. I give Penguin the credit for that.


Good to see you are not brainwashed :P

backdraft7




msg:4487037
 11:17 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

Here's another thought...throw out the algos altogether, then hire reviewers from the the millions of unemployed people out there to manually review each site - ;^D

I for one would pay a handsome extra fee to have a pair of human eyes and a brain review my site. Anything is better than a Panda or a Penguin.

tedster




msg:4487047
 11:37 pm on Aug 21, 2012 (gmt 0)

I don't see how that approach scale, because a "site" cannot be reviewed in isolation. Its individual pages would need to be reviewed with reference to a particular query phrase.

At the scale of today's (and tomorrow's) web, it looks to me like algorithms are a necessity. Penguin is an early attempt at a new kind of algorithm (the ground was first broken by Panda) and it's only a beginning, I'm sure.

This 140 message thread spans 5 pages: < < 140 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved