Does Panda devalue for crap website design too?

[chiragparekh]

As a webmaster and SEO we all know that Panda is for crap content. But I heard many people saying that Panda also affect crap website design in some cases. By saying crap website means, website having low quality content and very average design that only created for adsense and link exchange. Curious to know what your views on it.

[tedster]

The problem is, no one knows for sure. From the comments made by Google engineers, it does seem like the way a page looks may create a Panda problem.

[netmeg]

If Google is really trying to gauge user satisfaction with the site, then I would think MFAs and even good sites with usability problems might suffer. And yes, I know, there are still a lot of crap sites ranking (and that floated to the top) but I don't think that means they're going to stay there. Google has never said they were *finished*.

[Atomic]

I think a site's design fits into the big picture one way or another. I doubt people are likely to Like, share, join, comment on, or return to a site with design issues.

[htmlbasictutor]

Your idea seems plausible but not from a visual side. The type of sites you have referred to have poor background construction making it hard for the bot to get to the actual content. Or they have used methods to import content that is not visiable when looked at via the text view.

[balibones]

As a webmaster and SEO we all know that Panda is for crap content.

Speak for yourself. I think that Panda was for user experience, which "includes" but is certainly not limited to crap content. It was about quality, and ugly sites aren't as high quality as beautiful sites, all other things being equal.

Let's say for example that Google sent thousands of paid quality raters around the web looking at hundreds of sites a day for years straight. Then they took the data that came back about whether a site was good or bad, trustworthy or spammy, high quality or low quality... and used a machine learning algorithm to determine what those sites had in common. I'm sure one of those things would be crap content in one way or another, but others might be Adsense units above the content, lack of contact methods, lack of trust symbols, confusing navigation, terrible English (if written in this language), etc... So to limit your understanding of Panda to "crap content" is to be doing yourself a disservice. That is, if the above analogy is even in the ballpark of the truth.

[walkman]

'Like' for what balibones said.

[lucy24]

On the other hand, it doesn't take a very sophisticated algorithm to count the occurrences of <blink> and subtract a logarithmically determined number of points.

:: snicker ::

[chiragparekh]

I am thinking the same. It should have some difference between good website and crap website in Google's eye. However it is authenticated specifically by Google yet. Thanks you