Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Google’s announcement did not mention content farms. But Mr. Cutts has spoken in recent weeks about the problem and said Google was working on algorithm changes to fix it. “In general, there are some content farms that I think it would be fair to call spam, in the sense that the quality is so low-quality that people complain,” he said in a recent interview.
in the last day or so we launched a pretty big algorithmic improvement to our ranking—a change that noticeably impacts 11.8% of our queries—and we wanted to let people know what's going on. This update is designed to reduce rankings for low-quality sites—sites which are low-value add for users, copy content from other websites or sites that are just not very useful. [googleblog.blogspot.com...]
Demand Media Response:
[demandmedia.com...]How our content reaches the consumer – whether it’s through direct visits, social media referrals, apps or search – has always been important to and monitored closely by us. We also recognize that major search engines like Google have and will continue to make frequent changes. We have built our business by focusing on creating the useful and original content that meets the specific needs of today’s consumer. So naturally we applaud changes search engines make to improve the consumer experience – it’s both the right thing to do and our focus as well.
Today, Google announced an algorithm change to nearly 12% of their U.S. query results. As might be expected, a content library as diverse as ours saw some content go up and some go down in Google search results.This is consistent with what Google discussed on their blog post. It’s impossible to speculate how these or any changes made by Google impact any online business in the long term – but at this point in time, we haven’t seen a material net impact on our Content & Media business.
I've just got to share a bit of satire from The Content Farm [thecontentfarm.tumblr.com].
[edited by: netmeg at 12:22 am (utc) on Feb 26, 2011]
[edited by: indyank at 1:03 am (utc) on Feb 26, 2011]
joined:Dec 29, 2003
I don't see normal search users downloading and using the extension in bulk in a short period of its release.Almost none of those real user community would have known about this extension.
If google is using it to validate their algo changes that include what is said above, it is poor.Whatever data that they would have received so far through this extension would be from users with malicious intent
Every recent Google update has gone through a period of churn after launch day - and it almost always ends up less extreme than the first look. I'm assuming some kind of automated machine learning goes on based on statistical feed back.
Bunches of directories were whacked in this pass, not pretty.
why does everyone hate eHow so much?
Anyway, this seems like legitimate useful information if I was looking to buy a used car from a stranger:
Do the people at the search engines not see this? Don't they ever click on their own results and think, "wow, these sites are annoying?"
A very good point. Sometimes we discuss stuff in here as though G was not aware of what was happening.
Every recent Google update has gone through a period of churn after launch day - and it almost always ends up less extreme than the first look.
joined:Dec 29, 2003
We also know that Google continues to "learn" after an update. To make statements like 10 people are getting laid off on Monday, essentially throwing in the towel after 24 hours, is laughable. If I were at Google, I'd think that's the kind of site we want to eliminate. Jeeze, if someone's willing to throw everything away that quickly - how valuable could that site possibly be? I'd say score one for Google on those examples.