Matt Cutts replaced as Head of Web Spam at Google

[Robert Charlton]

Google Has New Head Of Web Spam But Won't Be The "New Matt Cutts"
Danny Sullivan on May 22, 2015
[searchengineland.com...]

Matt Cutts remains on leave, but Search Engine Land can report that Google does have someone new in his position of head of web spam fighting. This person is unlikely, however, to become the all-around spokesperson on publisher and webmaster issues that Cutts had been...

...Google declined to name the person who has taken over Cutts's role. The reason is simple. That person isn't also assuming the other role that Cutts had played, that of being a general spokesperson about listing issues....

As the story indicates, "individual Googlers will keep splitting the role of providing advice and answers to SEOs and publishers in online forums, conferences and other places."

While I'm surprised to see that this hasn't been mentioned, I'm assuming that the entire transition has been orchestrated to keep it low key.

It should be noted that many of Matt's early "public" appearances were on WebmasterWorld as GoogleGuy, and he pioneered the kind of public outreach between search engines and webmasters that has been extremely helpful to the community. There's lots of speculation about whether he will return to Google.

[rish3]

No amount of spin makes this less awkward. "X has been replaced, but we're not saying who the replacement is, or what X is going to do now, though we've had months to mull it over."

[seoskunk]

I can't be bothered to wait so I will tell you , the new head of spam is Adam Lasnik.

[mikhailblaze]

Shame. I really liked Matt.

They're probably not going to publicly name him, considering the ton of e-mails and messages Matt received from webmasters and SEO specialists in his tenure.

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

Cutts cut!

[13Cube13]

He works for 15 years then takes all the accumulated vacation days at once. Love it.

The article says Matt cut out last July and said he may return in oct? Thats 15 months without a solid promise to return.

I don't think he can be cut for that legally. Though it may be possible to have him replaced.

[edited by: 13Cube13 at 9:42 am (utc) on May 27, 2015]

[lammert]

I can't be bothered to wait so I will tell you , the new head of spam is Adam Lasnik.

Adam is out of the search arena since 2010.

Having the head of department as your spokesperson is always a risky business. One slip of the tongue and no superior will be able to disprove those words. An invisible head of the team and some lower ranking spokespersons to outreach to the webmaster crowd is the best way to protect their company.

[Robert Charlton]

An invisible head of the team and some lower ranking spokespersons to outreach to the webmaster crowd is the best way to protect their company.

Thanks, lammert, for some thoughtful perspective.

Regarding Matt's status... complete speculation... I'm not at all clear he's leaving. He's got a lot of very deep roots invested in Google, and they in him. He also has a lot of broad ranging and positive interests in search, which he articulates thoughtfully and with a sense of personal involvement, where I'm thinking that Google is the ideal place for implementation. It may be, like much else in Google, that they're waiting to see how the current assignments work, before working Matt into a new slot... ie, assuming he wants one that is available.

His latest tweet, at any rate, doesn't suggest a rush to leave...

Matt Cutts
@mattcutts

@SamGSama I'm still around. :)

6:57 PM - 23 May 2015 [twitter.com...]

[engine]

I don't believe there's anything new in this.

Lammert has it nailed.

Since Google became a traded company, i'm surprised that Matt wasn't reined in then.
Head of webspam, or leader in outreach aren't linked, and it was only that Matt did that through choice because he was interested.
He's been Google's one-man outreach team since the beginning and ought to get an award for everything he's done to foster relations with those outside of Google.

It really doesn't matter so much who the head of webspam is, it's what they do that matters.

Outreach: We just need information and accuracy.

[vlexo]

John Mueller, whilst not in the same capacity, seems like an ideal person to be talking about most of the stuff that Matt was telling us. In fact, he's doing that in webmaster videos and answering questions from webmasters - just in a different format to how Cutts was doing it.

[EditorialGuy]

I've always had the impression that Matt Cutts is an optimist who--rightly or wrongly--believes that people and their behavior can be changed for the better. I wouldn't be surprised if Google's "sin, suffer, repent" approach to manual penalties owes a lot to Matt's faith in humanity. Is it possible that we'll see a less transparent and harder-nosed attitude toward violations of Google's Webmaster guidelines over time, now that Matt is gone from the Webspam team?

[Shepherd]

Some day maybe we'll hear Matt's version of events. I wonder if/how long he is required to keep quiet...

[netmeg]

It's a tough job. I couldn't do it, and if I could, there's not enough money in the world.

[aristotle]

It's understandable that Matt Cutts would get burned out from all the years and all the frustrations of trying to fight spam.

I hope that whoever takes over won't be so lenient to big brands. Big companies that have been caught buying backlinks to improve their rankings include J.C. Penny, Interflora, Gourmet Gift Baskets, Overstock, 1-800-Flowers, and GoCompare. And Forbes Magazine was caught selling links. But Matt Cutts and his team only gave most of these companies a slap on the wrist, whereas small lesser-known sites were given much harsher penalties.

Maybe Google's new head of webspam will change this policy of giving such favorable treatment to big brands.

[EditorialGuy]

But Matt Cutts and his team only gave most of these companies a slap on the wrist, whereas small lesser-known sites were given much harsher penalties.

Of course, in some cases those slaps on the wrist probably added up to a fair amount of revenue. More to the point, for some searches, users expect brands to turn up in results (e.g., Interflora in a UK search on "flower delivery"). In contrast, if Bubba's Flower Shop doesn't show up in a search on "flower delivery," few searchers are going to notice or care. Ultimately, it's about providing the best experience to the searcher, even if it means being more lenient with Interflora than with Bubba.

[glakes]

I firmly believe Matt saw the path Google was taking, how Google was abusing their market dominance, and decided to bail. I think Matt is above the nonsense Google is now engaged in and having earned plenty of money to retire decided the time was right. Google does have a leave of absence policy that higher level managers/executives can take for up to eight months, fully paid, while they decide what they want to do. I would assume Matt is still with Google under this program and his leave has/will be extended to him as needed. Unfortunately for Matt, being the spokesman of a company turned bad painted a huge bullseye on him whether justified or not. Google will probably keep him under their umbrella for a while because so many people dislike him despite the fact that Matt was nothing more than a pawn in a larger and more elaborate scheme to utilize their search dominance to extract more profit from search and extend their dominance into other sectors.

[jrs79]

An invisible head of the team and some lower ranking spokespersons to outreach to the webmaster crowd is the best way to protect their company

This. It is not in their best interest. They have nothing to gain (no longer?) by having relationships of this nature with webmasters and SEOs.

[RedBar]

It's a tough job.

At that company level no tougher than many other jobs out there however the big difference has been that Matt, basically, had to come to WebmasterWorld and other forum boards to learn the job he was appointed for at Google when selected as head of the spam team.

Unlike many other industries with charted historical data, this was a new man, in a new job, never done before. Sure I was seoing 20+ years ago, even before Yahoo let alone Google, heck, I like many others had been working for Google for free before he even joined them, however he was brought in at a crtical time of "exponential" WWW growth.

It must have been an interesting experience with a blank sheet of paper doing something no one had ever had to do before, no wonder he/they got some stuff wrong!

[aristotle]

RedBar -- Most likely the original purpose of Google's webspam team was to look for spam that the algorithm couldn't detect.

[RedBar]

look for spam that the algorithm couldn't detect.

Possibly and bear in mind was Google the actual creator of the massive increase in spam sites thanks to AdSense?

I think I need to get my memory head on!

[EditorialGuy]

Possibly and bear in mind was Google the actual creator of the massive increase in spam sites thanks to AdSense?

AdSense didn't create spam sites, Webmasters did. AdSense helped to democratize Web publishing by giving small publishers a way to earn income from their content. (For most "little guys," it worked far better than the banner-ad networks of the day.)

If you were on the Web before 2003, you may remember that affiliate marketers dominated search spam in the early oughts. "Churn and burn" was having its heyday until Google clamped down on thin-affiliate garbage.

[aristotle]

Of course, in some cases those slaps on the wrist probably added up to a fair amount of revenue

In the case of JC Penny, their SEO company bought more than 10,000 paid backlinks with targeted anchor text. Evidently as a result, during the last three months of 2010, in the holiday shopping season, Penny's pages ranked number 1 in Google for numerous top selling products, and the company made huge profits. Google's algorithm didn't detect the link-buying violation, but it was eventually brought to the webspam team's attention and a 90-day manual penalty was imposed in the following spring.

But the point isn't so much about what has happened in the past, but rather what will Google's webspam team do about such cases in the future. If the big brands realize that they will only get a slap on the wrist, then they might figure that they can make such big profits before the penalty is imposed that they will come out way ahead overall.

[JS_Harris]

Hey, we were only supposed to have Matt for 5 years, it's what he told his wife early on. I'm thankful we had him for three times that, like him or hate him he applied the rules equally on everyone and took the time to explain why.

I had a feeling that was the end of the line for him at Google when he took his extended leave, he's super rich and could honestly make a mint just appearing at occasional events for the rest of his life. Thanks for the solid run, Matt.