Lenny2 - 6:48 pm on Dec 3, 2011 (gmt 0)
This question/insight might be obvious to some... I've never thought about it until I started seeing it in the serps... and am starting to put the pieces together. Here it is:
First a little background, we were hit in Feb. Panda. And have never recovered meaningfully.
I've got all hand written content on our product site. (the quality is whatever it is... but the fact is that we never copied and pasted mfg descriptions like competitors). The site design is whatever it is also... our customers like it... most people may or may not be turned on by it.
Anyway we introduced a new feature a public Q & A section on the site over the summer... A way of giving consumers a public voice on the site and introducing a sense of community.
I've recently noticed that Google is ignoring the custom content in our descriptions (when they get snippets of the results in their serps) and displaying the customer questions in the snippets in the serps.
Old me would have said... whatever, it works right... we are in the results and I don't care what they put in the snippets... New, post panda me says: WTF, is google ignoring not only whole pages on the site...BUT, specifically ignoring sections of a page?
What I mean is: is google saying: the hand written content/product description you wrote (with the same exact string of key terms) is less important than the question the customer publicly asked on the page?
How this changes things for my Panda'd site:
If google is not trusting SECTIONS of a page... it explains why my deleting/removing ENTIRE (low quality) PAGES is not doing ANYTHING for me. Obviously if the above is true, even the higher quality content is being penalized because of it's geographic location on the code of the site.
Assuming the above is correct it means: the only way to get rid of Panda is to make the potentially panda'd sections of the site more trustworthy... not just write more content in the sections that are already not trustworthy.
Anybody care to give their thoughts/experience on this thought?