walkman - 12:57 pm on Sep 22, 2011 (gmt 0)

That means that most of my pages contain text that simply recites known facts, facts that are available on a lot of sites. Doesn't seem to matter how many facts or words are involved, just that they are available in a lot of places on the net. Those facts only play a supporting role on the pages. They support the unique content on the page.

Let's analyze this line of reasoning that comes from the Google people, to justify Panda.

First, this rule doesn't seem to apply to big brands. Surprising, right?

Second, if you were writing about "Frog habitats in planet Jupiter" you'd be #1 of course, Panda or no Panda. So if your site has info that is found nowhere else, Panda does nothing to you since there's no site to outrank you. Google forgot to mention this.

In real life through, BMW's latest car has four tires, Obama is the US President, Germany lost WWII, Google supports big brands stifling small businesses, sun rises from the east, Canada is north of USA and so on. Obviously more than one site will have the same facts or write about today's news.

Even if you sell jeans and place Levi 590XCSE on sale for an unheard of price of $15 for example, under that reasoning you'd be penalized. Why? All the words are found somewhere else and Google cannot tell the difference in price. You can argue that maybe you'll get links and this and that but we don't know the details, I'm talking content wise.

But since the major sites and the famous ones have been pretty much whitelisted for Panda, they can afford to throw all these nonsensical theories at us. They have zero pressure, since mostly small sites that don't have the money to be brands or as big brands as those liked by Panda, are hurt. Those sites also have very little voice in Twitter and media. If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it...