Google Updates and SERP Changes - August 2018

[yollo03]

System: The following 2 messages were cut out of thread at: https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4909313.htm [webmasterworld.com] by robert_charlton - 3:47 am on Aug 1, 2018 (PDT -8)

-----

HERE WE GO! Get your sit belts on:

Google Search Algorithm August 1st Update Rolling Out Now; Might Be A Big One
Aug 1, 2018
https://www.seroundtable.com/google-search-algorithm-update-26141.html [seroundtable.com]




[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 11:57 am (utc) on Aug 1, 2018]

[yollo03]

Im not sure i I see any big movements in the rankings but I can say that one website (scam) decided to give me a bad review was pushed down by google. I complained to google about them so I dont know if its related to that or not.

[Martin Ice Web]

Anyone else seeing any movement again this morning. Not good for us again :(

yes, all the buyers are gone from google to amazon right now.
i canīt belief that users are lucky when 9 out of 10 results are rubbish and have nothing to do with the search.

[Martin Ice Web]

guys i need to have 2 or 3 bigger sites that have suffered with thiis update for proofing my theory. Maybe u can PM me.

[Bluejeans]

I'm not sure why I declined 10% in one (English-speaking) market and only 2% in another according to semrush. This is an informational website on a subject that should be of equal interest to both markets.

[Jez123]

Are there many people here who got a positive from the update? People who gained are being very quiet. I am interested to hear from gainers please.

[cheegum]

In my niche, a tech how-to site i am seeing forums taking over, video carousels and related question snippets. Keyword seems to be more relevant then ever, Google is filtering out content that exactly matches with the user query.

[Dimitri]

Are there many people here who got a positive from the update? People who gained are being very quiet. I am interested to hear from gainers please.

I mentioned it earlier this month, i am seeing an improvement of my traffic +15% roughly (up to 30% on some sites). My sites are mostly forums, on several subjects , especially entertainment, hobbies. I have no evidences, this is just a "feeling", that Google might like, when a page, is frequently "updated". This is typical of a forum where a topic get new messages added once in a while. May be it works as a positive signal for Google, when the content of the page is constantly enriched. I see some topics, which for a couple of years, had just one message, made of a couple of sentences, and ranking barely nowhere, then, someone will come by and post a reply, and within a matter of days, such topic will start ranking high on some keywords, which were already present into the page. (it might also be a transition from a "thin" content to a better one)

Just sharing "feelings".

[jmorgan]

Are there many people here who got a positive from the update? People who gained are being very quiet. I am interested to hear from gainers please.

My site improved a little, but it usually has a gradual increase in traffic at this time of the year anyway. So I would just say I was mostly unaffected, or maybe just marginally better.

[thejimster]

Are there many people here who got a positive from the update? People who gained are being very quiet. I am interested to hear from gainers please.

We've had some nice gains overall, however we've seen our positions bouncing around quite a bit from day to day... still. My business/clients/etc are a mix of manufacturers and ecommerce. No adsense. I almost never focus on links. I don't do any affiliate work.

Like with all updates, it seems as though the losers are those that depend on adsense and complaints tend to mention article word count and the amount of posts written per day.

[givinguponlife]

< Are there many people here who got a positive from the update? People who gained are being very quiet. I am interested to hear from gainers please.

Jeff Bezos is too busy to visit WebmasterWorldorld

[Cralamarre]

Like with all updates, it seems as though the losers are those that depend on adsense

That's not true at all, and comments like that are why this thread is as useless as it is. My site relies mainly on AdSense for income and my traffic has increased after this latest update. Just because a site uses AdSense does not mean it's "made for AdSense". Many great sites with great content use AdSense.

Someone commented earlier that the people who gained from this update tend to remain silent. Of course they do. On this thread, sites that benefit from updates are automatically labelled as low quality garbage. Who needs that?

[HammerDown]

Anyone else seeing any movement again this morning. Not good for us again :(

Two days in a row now of over 20% increase in organic traffic for us! Obviously there's some tweaking going on.

[whoa182]

@HammerDown

I'm also noticing the same thing. My keywords are moving up the SERPs... slowly.

I'll update with some stats at the end of August.

[EditorialGuy]

yollo03 not to be a smart ass but an article with 1.6k words give me an internet break, and now since this was hit cut it. IMO should have been cut a looooong time ago.

An article should be the length that it needs to be to cover the subject adequately for the target audience.

It's like anything else: Someone who wants to know "What's a beignet?" might be happy with a one-line definition from a pocket dictionary, but someone with an abiding interest in beignets (or in etymology) might prefer a 300-word definition in the OED.

FWIW, our editorial site's most popular article is more than 1,300 words long, even though we have many articles that are shorter and that rank just as well or better in Google and other search engines.

[EditorialGuy]

Two days in a row now of over 20% increase in organic traffic for us! Obviously there's some tweaking going on.

I've been seeing some upward movement in average rankings, as reported in Google Search Console, over the last week or so. Traffic seems to be creeping up, too, which is a pleasant surprise during the dog days of summer.

[yollo03]

Check the keywords, The upmove in rankings could also be google has removed certain keywords that ranked you at the bottom so you get the illusion your ranking improves where really its not moving. I check every page individually and then the keywords.

[jmorgan]

Cutting content wont help from that angle but if not getting keywords anymore then whats the point of keeping it until the next algorithm update?

So the content was there only for the keywods, not users? :)

[yollo03]

No. The content is for the users and its been like this for 4 years. Google for some reason decided to remove the keywords for that page, sending it to position 130. It was less than 40 the other day, now it doubled but the ranking position is still the same. This page meant to be ranked has it has been for 4 years, I survived many updates but not this one. I am coming to the point where content should not be over 900 words based on this quality algo.

Another interesting thing I noticed is that google is now factoring the ranking for all pages and not each page individually. So if you have a few poor quality pages you will get hit. Thats why I think they said to go broad. I am in the middle of attempting to add more content to old posts. It will take time but im no a hurry.

When I say hit I mean the update went after certain keywords. When these keywords are removed the page is not getting traffic. My overall ranking has not changed, its only specific pages and my main keywords that were gone. As a result impressions and traffic is down.

[jmorgan]

Ok, this is the last time I'm making my point as it seems I'm not getting through.

I am coming to the point where content should not be over 900 words based on this quality algo.

You are deciding how long content should be based on what you think is Google's algorithms, while you should be including as much (or as little) content as is required to help satisfy the user's intent REGARDLESS of Google's algorithms.

Another interesting thing I noticed is that google is now factoring the ranking for all pages and not each page individually. So if you have a few poor quality pages you will get hit. Thats why I think they said to go broad. I am in the middle of attempting to add more content to old posts. It will take time but im no a hurry.

When I say hit I mean the update went after certain keywords. When these keywords are removed the page is not getting traffic. My overall ranking has not changed, its only specific pages and my main keywords that were gone. As a result impressions and traffic is down.

Who cares, dude? Just focus on the user and not Google.

Your page lost its rankings, which sucks I know (I've been there), but instead of asking yourself, "How can I better give my users what they want?", you are asking yourself, "What should I do so Google's algorithms will rank me higher?"

Again, this is the last time I'm making my point as I've already said it too many times already.

[Cralamarre]

I am coming to the point where content should not be over 900 words based on this quality algo.

Lol... the "Too Many Words" update. Just when I think I've heard it all.

[frankleeceo]

Some users like 400 words, some users like 900 words, some users like 1 sentence, and some users like video, and some like audio, and some like pictures.

The overall trend is that content will be more and more ranked by user centric behaviors and preferences. Device, time, and location dependent. I believe we are seeing signs of this happening across Google's properties.

[Cyril TechWebsites]

Who cares, dude? Just focus on the user and not Google.

Your page lost its rankings, which sucks I know (I've been there), but instead of asking yourself, "How can I better give my users what they want?", you are asking yourself, "What should I do so Google's algorithms will rank me higher?"

@jmorgan

But why should I not to take into consideration such a GREAT possibility as Google traffic? In case I can get XXX$ a day instead of XX$ why should I say "Just focus on the user and not Google" and lose all extra revenue I can get?

I'm pretty sure that webmaster needs to focus on the user because it's the greatest guarantee to keep your traffic stable or increasing during the Google updates, not just because of the idea to focus on user. It won't keep your websites on safe side for 100% (your website still can be hit by the next update), but at least it's the only known safe option to keep gaining a stable traffic from Google, it makes your chances bigger.

I think you just SHOULDN'T RELY on Google's traffic and Google as a stable revenue source, but why shouldn't you take all the money it can give you? I'm making all I can (not hurting the main idea of quality content) to make my organic traffic increasing.

[jmorgan]

Well, the idea is by focusing on the user, that will in turn mean you focus on creating a better quality website, which should, in theory, mean your rankings will increase as a result of the quality of your website improving. And with Google actually using human Quality Raters now, this should be evident if one of them happens to look at your website.

In my opinion, this is a better approach than, "Google's algorithm wants me to write XXX words ... and I need to make sure I have these keywords in ... but now these keywords don't rank for that content ... so I'll remove the content ... it's useless anyway ... even though it's not bad content ... but I'll remove it because I think that's what Google wants ... and now Google likes shorter articles ..."

I mean, seriously, if a Google Quality Rater happens upon the above, do you think they are going to say, "Gee, this guy really knows what the Google algorithm wants. Keywords, word count, etc. everything on point. 10/10 E-A-T!"

[Cyril TechWebsites]

@jmorgan

In my opinion, this is a better approach than, "Google's algorithm wants me to write XXX words ... and now Google likes shorter articles ..." I mean, seriously.

I think Google's algo now ranks the URL not just because of XXX or XXXX words. A lot of times I've seen how 2000-words post was driven less traffic than a short 200-words how-to guide and vice versa. It depends on the situation, keyword, niche etc.

but I'll remove it because I think that's what Google wants ...

But it's against the things you've mentioned above that the goal is to focus on the users? :) I'm pretty sure that the absence of the dinosaurs' era URLs and fresh updated E-A-T content in overall - isn't it's a good sign for users that this is a great quality website? It's better to perform periodical content pruning not because Google needs it - actually your users need it.

[pritz]

I have seen many low quality sites are on good position in SERP.

I have heard the word "E-A-T" so many times. Request you please share the step-by-step or implementation guide with use cases of E-A-T.

[browndog]

My best ranking article (by far) is over 2,000 words long. I enabled comments about 16 weeks ago and have over 200 comments thanking me, and asking questions. It was around that time (that I enabled comments) that it started to skyrocket. None of the other articles did, but none of the other articles really generate much conversation. There is a 180 word summary at the top for people who don't want to read 2,000 words.

I've battled with rankings since about 2013, I'm flavour of the month then I'm not. You have to get to the point where you stop trying to appease the moving target. You can't look at word count because what Google likes this month isn't necessarily what Google will like in December. So are we all going to run around in circles changing word count to make them happy? No...do the best you can for the people reading the article so that they will like it, and share it.

I come here (because for me I get the relevant info I need) for info on Google guidelines relating to things like https, responsive sites, you know...that kind of thing. But for content, I just do my absolute best to create great content by putting the user first, not Google.

[Dimitri]

There is a 180 word summary at the top for people who don't want to read 2,000 words.

Good idea!

[yollo03]

There was a rumor I read somewhere that google turned off rankbrain for this update and that it will be turned on again soon. Anyone agrees with it or noticed it happened in the past?

[Martin Ice Web]

I found two interesting problems.

#1: fetching our site with google mobil test shows that it coulnd read all resources
Sometimes it canīt get 20 recources sometimes 6 .....

#2: google site speed test shows an very low site speed for the mobile site
This has something to do with the EU cookie consent, As we implemented it, site speed was OK though but now this confirmation displayed as an overlay need roundtrips and mobile googlebot thinks the site is not fully loaded until it is displayed. google must have changed something here. Removing the consent site speed is back to over 90.

We will remove the consent and implement a own one, with no overlay.

[yollo03]

I have the same issue also I managed to get around it somehow. It is important of course but for my website it is not relevant to the latest update. Neither is page speed because my site is fast, 150 ttfb and page speed is between 1 - 3 seconds for all pages and I have many.

[JesterMagic]

@Martin Ice Web for #2 I was asking the exact same question yesterday. I had just updated the javascript social share widgets with my own css buttons to speed up page load and was questioning keeping the EU cookie consent (95% of our traffic is from North America). Desktop speed is fine with it enabled but mobile is not. This was the case as well when I first added it in May.

The overlay is our best option and is a popular script used by many sites on the web... you would think Google would be smart enough to realize what the overlay is about and not penalize a site for being a little slower in rendering a page... but then again probably not.

[Martin Ice Web]

@JesterMagic, reducing the text from the cookie consent helps a lot but i s not realy the final consens. I think they treat the overlay as something like ads or mobile app suggestion. Stupid.
We are using a script that is official suggest by google. So this is complete nonsens.

I already saw some websites removing the Cookie Consent completly..

My guess is that there was more than one update rolling out at the same time. Maybe an update for panda.
I examined some site that got hit and all have the very same issues. I fix our issues and we will see.

[NickMNS]

@jmorgan
I fully agree with your position, but:

And with Google actually using human Quality Raters now, this should be evident if one of them happens to look at your website.

Let's keeps things in perspective. Google has always used human Quality Raters, but these raters have never, do not today, and most likely will never, directly set ratings for websites. The role of the quality rater is to evaluate the output of changes to the algo. When Google makes changes they use a test set of websites, apply the changes and then evaluate the outcome. The raters do the evaluating.

The raters guide is a great document at it set the guidelines as to what Google's interpretation of what quality should be but it is not a recipe book.

[Cralamarre]

Just a comment about the Cookie Consent banner. I took mine down a few weeks ago to see if it was impacting my AdSense earnings (it wasn't), but then forgot to put it back. So my site has been without a consent banner for a few weeks now. No one has contacted me about it, no one has complained, traffic is doing well, and in fact my traffic increased after this latest Google update.

I'm not suggesting that removing the consent banner had anything to do with my traffic increasing. I'm sure it didn't. I just remember how scared I was back when the GDPR was coming out, and yet here I am without a consent banner and absolutely no one seems to care.

[yollo03]

I have a consent banner. You want to tell me that this is one of the reasons I got hit? If anyone is removing their cookie consent an it actually helped you rank better please update us here.

[Cralamarre]

I have a consent banner. You want to tell me that this is one of the reasons I got hit?

Nope, I specifically stated I am not suggesting that the cookie consent banner (or lack of one) had anything to do with the update. I was only responding to a few comments about the consent banner and how some sites have removed it, and sharing my own experience.

[Cralamarre]

@yollo03 I apologize if you've already done so and i missed it, but if you really want help with your site, and you're willing to accept honest criticism if needed, you should post a link to it. Otherwise, no one here can help and you're just wasting time grasping at straws.

----

Mod's note: No, do NOT post a link to your own site for review. Public reviews are forbidden both by our Terms of Service and by the Google Forum Charter. Please see my more detailed comments below.

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 11:23 pm (utc) on Aug 16, 2018]

[yollo03]

I appreciate the help but I would rather not link my site. I appreciate criticism just not in the manner of 'your money has crashed.' The only issue I have is with this update, nothing else. As google said nothing can be fixed I am following the thread in case someone comes with a workable solution. I can tell you that I did nothing since the update and my ranking has improved today. I dont know what it means but im just keeping an eye on it. I did notice a big spike in crawled pages by google on 13 August so im assuming it must be related to it.

[Cralamarre]

@yollo03 I'm glad to hear you haven't made any changes to your site since the update. I can tell you that I have spent way too much time in the past desperately changing anything and everything I could think of after an update, and to this day I have no idea if any of it made any difference. Traffic is improving these days, especially after this recent update, but is it because of anything I've done? Who knows. I certainly don't.

Ultimately, all Google cares about is content. People on this thread love to focus on SEO and technical issues because it's easier to focus on those things, but content is king. Don't listen to people who say it isn't. I gave up worrying about Google. All I care about these days is creating content that is useful to my visitors, and making sure it's better than what my competitors are offering. That's how you get people to your site and keep them coming back. Focus on your visitors. Give them what they need. Be better than your competition, and be honest about it. If your competition is better, you need to improve. Ignore Google.

[Halaspike]

People on this thread love to focus on SEO and technical issues because it's easier to focus on those things

@Cralamarre what you said up there is false. Most people on this thread focus more on content & the user.

The people on this thread who focus more on SEO & technical issues are people who check their rankings 200 times a day, folks like @yollo03.

If folks like yollo03 were focused on content & the user, i guarantee you they won't even have the time to be all over this thread.

[Cralamarre]

Most people on this thread focus more on content & the user.

Do they? I would never guess that from reading the majority of the comments. Every time there's a new update, people start saying it's because of https, or schema, or the server, or AdSense, or page speed, or back links, or the GDPR and EU regulations. Even word count has been mentioned as a cause. I don't see "content" mentioned nearly as much. It's almost viewed as a slap in the face if you have the nerve to suggest to someone that the problem is with their content.

[Halaspike]

Content isn't mentioned that much here because by default a good blogger puts content first & most people here are good bloggers, except for maybe some new comers who put google first, blowing up the thread with their ranking positions & funny theories.

That said, when you already have good content (which most of us do) & you get hit by an update, all the stuffs you mentioned above is what comes to mind.

[RedBar]

As google said nothing can be fixed I am following the thread in case someone comes with a workable solution.

That's doubtful, Google has made an almighty fubar with this "update" across several/many industries. I am in specialised construction products and I can assure you my inbox has been going crazy with global trade friends and competitors alike asking WTF has happened.

I'm talking about many sites either disappearing altogether or sliding so far down that it really does not matter where they are, and most of them are quality sites of the E-A-T variety and what have they been replaced by:

A Chinese trade directory site with multiple links
An Indian generic directory site with multiple links
An Indian trade directory site with multiple links
Multiple Houzz links
Multiple Pinterest links

Where there are genuine trade sites, one which has been promoted very close to #1 has the most erroneous product facts I have ever, ever seen and to make things worse it's not even responsive!

This is a mess yollo03, a complete and utter mess for some of us and one that it is very unlikely we can do anything about.

Me?

I'm walking away from this for the rest of the month, after 25 years of doing this it is the first time I actually do not know the way forward and that includes IF there is a way forward at the moment.

[RedBar]

Content isn't mentioned that much here because by default a good blogger puts content first & most people here are good bloggers

I have absolutely no idea of the ratio of bloggers to ecommerce to corporate to whatever type of site it is who post here.

I have my own factories producing for a global market, our website are, quite simply, corporate brochureware. Most of the global trade people I am in daily contact with also have brochureware sites. We have high quality images and in-depth product descriptions, our factory production facilities run into multi millions of Dollars, we're not copy and paste scrapers!

I like making predictions and being the devil's advocate:-)

This could easily be a significant watershed moment for G.

[aristotle]

when you already have good content (which most of us do)

Well "good" content isn't good enough. You've got to have an expert knowledge of the subject and exceptionally good writing skills.

[Robert Charlton]

...but if you really want help with your site, and you're willing to accept honest criticism if needed, you should post a link to it.

Mod's note: No, do not post a link to your own site for review. As stated explicitly in WebmasterWorld's Terms of Service [webmasterworld.com...]

We do not allow review my site posts in the Public Forums.

Additionally, the Google SEO News forum charter states [webmasterworld.com...]

Requests or offers for site reviews are not allowed, including "the site in my profile", "can you PM me the url" etc.

Members are free to communicate by private sticky mail, but we ask that you keep that privileged informed out of the public thread.

We do offer a site review forum in the paid Supporters area.

Additionally, it's always a bad idea to publish your domain name in ANY public SEO forum because it might open you up to competitive sabotage. Competitors don't always play fair.

[Dimitri]

Most people on this thread focus more on content & the user.

Indeed, this is the purpose of debates like, how many words an article should be, what is a good keywords density, removing old articles (no matter is they are still useful to some users), etc....

Joke apart, everybody will claim they have good content, and focusing on user. Even scrappers can make this claim! They can argue that they provide all the information users are looking for in one place, and that they develop technologies to collect and display this information, etc...

This is like, when some say that they are writing quality article, because they did researches and so on. What does it mean? In most cases (of course there are always exceptions), it means they read articles from other sites, and recompiled/rehashed the information, to produce another article. This is how you find hundred or thousands of articles, on the same theme, which can all be the result of a significant work from their authors, but at the end, all include the same information, and same added value.

[browndog]

I think the key is to finding the source of the information (which in many cases is in a scientific publication and Joe Public isn't interested in reading). In my niche a statistic will be quoted on multiple sites, but very few actually do the necessary digging to find the original source. I do believe that Google will (if not already) start to place more emphasis on sites who do quote sources. You can't just say '90% of unicorns are right handed'...but that is what I see all the time, without reference to where that data came from. Sure, I'm saying that too, but I'm also proving information on where that data came from.

But it's not just about regurgitating what other sites produce, I find my really quirky articles are the ones that do best. Every competitor has covered 'unicornitis', so why is my article on it going to perform well? You have to find the stuff your competition isn't writing about. And there's so much that they haven't covered.

[Dimitri]

90% of unicorns are right handed

I need to remember this :)

[RedBar]

In my niche a statistic will be quoted on multiple sites, but very few actually do the necessary digging to find the original source.

Yep, that really annoys me too, we spend thousands of Dollars having to perform scientific tests on our products to assist architects, specifiers and even governments plus:

it means they read articles from other sites, and recompiled/rehashed the information, to produce another article.

Absolutely, and Google gives no acknowledgement to the original article presumably because, despite what they say, they can't. Likewise with images, after the Google theft I removed tens of thousands of exclusive images since I was no longer the beneficiary of our work, only Google was, why bother visiting my sites when Google let you have it all for free?