---- Are unstable Google rankings a sign of fundamental Google problems?
austtr - 6:29 am on Nov 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
the tweaking has at least three foci:
I'd suggest that the move to "authority" might outweigh the others. Gifting top positions to big brands does not make for more relevant results, or a better interpretation of concept, it just locks in a lack of diversity. (There was a recent thread on just that subject)
Fighting spam does not make the SERPs any better. Right?
Spam is whatever Google deems it to be on any given day. One day it's "poor quality" pages that needed a Panda to remove them, then it's "unnatural link patterns/profiles" that need a Penguin to return order to the world, or maybe it's sites that dare to link to affiliate pages without a rel="nofollow".... or some other piffling infringement that sees sites condemned to a post Penguin oblivion.
I suspect that Google is under such heavy bombardment from spammers that they see themselves at war and as with most wars, its the non-participants who suffer the most losses. It's called collateral damage and I think the fact that Google was prepared to accept such a ground-swell of ill-will post Penguin gives us an insight into just how down and dirty this battle has become.