dvduval - 9:08 pm on Jun 2, 2011 (gmt 0)
In my opinion one of the biggest mistakes regarding the Panda update is the idea that an entire site is either of low quality or high quality.
My personal view is
- there can be high quality sections of sites. For example there might be one section of a site that is maintained by a good writer.
- there can be high quality pages like well written user submission intermixed with some other submissions that were less worthwhile
- some content can have an appeal to a group of people that doesn't fit the mold. They don't care about trusting the people on the site for example.
It seems to me that google has decided to use a "broad brush" and make a decision about an entire site.
To draw a comparison, Consumer Reports for years in their ratings said that all Volkswagons were not worth buying.
- Does that mean that mean that all customers who bought VWs were unhappy with their experience?
- could there have been specific features (eg pages) that a subset of consumers were especially interested in having in their car?
It almost seems that google's goal now is to JUDGE which content people will like the most, rather than be the best locator of said content.