Core Google algorithm change, not Panda = everflux as usual?

[Robert Charlton]

Yesterday (June 17, 2015), "hot" MozCast weather reports, coupled with denials from John Mueller that this was Panda or Penguin, resulted in blog headlines that there was a "core Google algorithm change".

I posted last night about John's comments in our Panda Refresh thread...
https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4750655-3-30.htm [webmasterworld.com]
(My emphasis added in quote below...)

...I don't think that John even confirmed that an update is rolling out. As I heard it, he was being extremely evasive about what's happening now, but he eventually did seem to suggest that something Panda-related might happen in a couple of weeks. Here's a link to the hangout...

English Google Webmaster Central office-hours hangout
Jun 17, 2015 - trt 58:50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHy4MHhL8dI [youtube.com]

Where I heard (min:sec) comments on the churn that many are seeing...

- At c 10:55 into the hangout, John is asked directly about an update and he says he doesn't know anything specific, and if you're just seeing changes in the results, these are just changes that we make all the time. He doesn't think an update is happening.

- At c18:10 - When asked about Panda, he said essentially that he doesn't have anything specific to share with you guys, but maybe in the next couple of weeks

Search Engine Land reported this morning that this has been confirmed by Google as a core update. I would love to hear the language of the confirmation, as I'm wondering whether it's anything more than John's comment that this is everflux as usual...

Not Panda: Google Confirms Another Core Search Algorithm Update
The Google update from yesterday was a core ranking change, something Google does throughout the year. This was not Panda-, Penguin- or HTTPS-related.
Barry Schwartz on June 18, 2015 at 8:58 am
[searchengineland.com...]

Barry sums up the confluence of factors that were perhaps what made this look big....

I suspect the reason so many tools showed a spike this week was related to the number one Google search result, Wikipedia, changing all its URLs to go HTTPS this week, which ultimately changed so many 1-5 Google search results, causing the tools to spike.

So from what we know, this was not Panda, not HTTPS and also not Penguin. It was simply a normal Google core search update where Google won’t give us any details on.

[MrSavage]

Case in point, Wikipedia can turn the internet (Google and Bing) on its ears. It's comical in a way that one site can disrupt the entire internet.

[n00b1]

Well I've seen big changes in my sector where Wikipedia doesn't feature at all on the first page. So it wasn't just that. I'm not sure what the 'tools' picked up though.

[dvduval]

I can now confirm that unconfirmed confirmations have occurred involving animals yet to be named. It could be the new Wolverine update. As you may know the wolverine is one of the most dangerous animals. It is rarely seen but it when it strikes you don't want to be there!

[netmeg]

Umm. I'm a Wolverine.

[blend27]

..so was the Ant-Man who invented a substance that allowed him to change his size...

[RedBar]

Ant-Man

Ohhh...that looks fun:-)

[moTi]

case in point, i'd very much like to see an update from google that really deserves the name "core search update". one that affects 100% of results, a real shuffle. for far too many searches i see old sites with outdated content. hey google, there are plenty of fresh sites these days that your algo is too "shy" to find and show accordingly. yes, quality may be hard to detect, but you're in this business for quite a while now.. eager to see a major update that really shakes things up.

[EditorialGuy]

i'd very much like to see an update from google that really deserves the name "core search update". one that affects 100% of results

Sounds like an artificial goal to me. A better goal would be to serve up the most relevant, high-quality results, whether that affected 100% of the results or a much smaller percentage.

[Edge]

I just might be liking this update - whatever it is.. There have been some search terms that always returned one particular website at #1 and 2 positions. This has been going on for years - that's right years. Now they only show in the #1 position. Their back-link structure was weak in my opinion and seemed to leverage Google properties for the ranking. They also utilized some other very questionable linking strategies for their ranking. I think the rankings now show a more fair distribution.. Let's see how long this algo change holds...

[Nutterum]

I haven't noticed much change in the niche I monitor but there have been changes in the 3+ keyword long tail results, that I can gouge as positive.

[jebernier]

Most of my major traffic generating keywords have dropped 1 to 2 positions in the SERPs which is having a pretty big impact on traffic. One Big brand in my space (Home De&^%) moved up (grrrrrr.) Also, two of the other competitors that really don't specialize in my product moved above me. Their websites are very broad whereas mine is focused on the specific product. Can't understand this? Hope it is just flux and things will return to normal soon, but who knows?

I would really like to know what this core update targets {me and the rest of the webmaster world that is)!

[Robert Charlton]

No official announcement yet by Google, but there's been a "quick study" done by Marcus Tober of SearchMetrics, which is thorough enough to convince me that this is a QDF update (Query Deserves Freshness), having to do with new Google capabilities.

It is producing extremely topical serps, rapidly updating in real time, which accounts for the volatility being observed....

June 17 Google algorithm changes: "News-Wave Update"
June 22, 2015
https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4753914.htm [webmasterworld.com]

Assuming the analysis is correct, and I think it is, this also makes clear why some were seeing extremely volatile results and others weren't seeing any changes at all.

[Robert Charlton]

PS: jebernier, I suggest you take a look at the Marcus Tober report linked to in the thread I just posted. He indicates that some topical phrases on non-news sites might be temporarily affected during peaks of interest in various topics for which there's QDF... but in general it's not likely that a specific product as you describe you're targeting is going to be affected by this "News-Wave" update.

That said, everflux is still happening, with a great many changes occurring all the time, and that is most likely what's affecting you.

[jebernier]

Thanks Robert, I'll take a look at the report, appreciate the info.

[Nutterum]

What I noticed in the past couple of days is that SERPS change depending on the Geo Location of the Traffic. For example I perform on second page during the European Business Day hours and on First page on the US and Australia business hours. My event being held in Germany makes bigger brands like event organizers and multiple one domain results to push me down on Page 2 and once they stop being relevant for the day, getting removed and pushing me up on Page one. I can`t say the same for most keywords, but for the big events I rank for this is a pattern I can clearly see. In short this update does not affect "news worthy" websites only.

[MrSavage]

This is my experience. I think it's a two tiered system honestly. Only the biggest of the big grab the top chunk when said subject actually matters to people. As people care less, the smaller site (as in my case) can come back up for air. You miss the volume, and then return. You get that bump while Google figures it out, like half a day, then your traffic and position plummet while the interest is there by searchers. It would be like you closing down your restaurant during the lunch hour, but opening it up in the mid afternoon after the lunch rush. Yeah, that's logical? That business is going to fail and be the biggest POS. You would invest in such a restaurant?

In some ways, it's favoritism or an added wrinkle in fighting spam or thinner sites. I mean relatively speaking any site run by one or two people is going to be nothing compared to a fully staffed and run corporate news/informational type website. However, I'm good enough to rank well normally, so why is it beneficial to bury me when it matters most? Seems counter intuitive. Lots of different ways to view it.

[Nutterum]

I believe that the intent of Google is to show as broad (read big bloated news/product websites) the broader the audience gets. Lets say a green lawn mower suddenly is made smart with a widget. There will be huge influx of people curious on this new piece of tech. So websites like mashable and other techie outlets will push your e-commerce lawn mower website down, in favor of the broader crowd that will not necessarily wants to buy your products. Then when the big crowd is gone you are left with the usual few interested people to look around your shop. Yes, Google does not want you to capitalize from quantity, but will reward you if you have quality, something preached by every marketer out there since 2009.

[RedBar]

something preached by every marketer out there since 2009.

Did I miss something in 2009?

Since the early 90s all our sites have been about our quality products and, insofar as many other webmasters were concerned in many industries, they constructed similar, the WWW was not about a new type of marketing, it was simply another extension to existing marketing efforts.

Was 2009 the year some marketeers took over control of some websiites or something?

[Edge]

Well, I was liking this update but now the same old silly and spammy search results have returned. I haven't been this frustrated with Google's search quality - ever. Does any body know how to send feedback to Google?

Honestly, I long for the Matt Cutts days..

[Nutterum]

Hah RedBar, 2009 was the year where cheap spam techniques became non viable (well in most cases anyways), so people realized and started preaching what they should have done years ago already.

Sadly the reality is that the algo is getting more and more chaotic and following Google's guidelines punishes us more often than it helps us. If only there was an algorithm that could monitor how well a website is following Google's guidelines, then we would see quite different SERPs, as most spammers and mom and pop run of the mill websites would simply vanish due to non compliance.

[RedBar]

2009 was the year where cheap spam techniques became non viable

Unfortunately I feel there's more spammy scraping than ever now, they're successfully making their search into a pay for inclusion...it's no wonder Amazon, Ebay et al are doing so well for everyday products, who needs Google for those?