Google To Release Core Update From 21 August

Helpful or Cleaning up Spammy Serps?

[engine]

Google is to roll out a "helpful content update" next week, which it says is "to better ensure people see more original, helpful content written by people, for people, rather than content made primarily for search engine traffic." It' says it should take around two weeks to roll out.

Google makes it clear that publishers should avoid creating content for search engines first, and to focus on the people-first content.

This update introduces a new site-wide signal that we consider among many other signals for ranking web pages. Our systems automatically identify content that seems to have little value, low-added value or is otherwise not particularly helpful to those doing searches.

Any content — not just unhelpful content — on sites determined to have relatively high amounts of unhelpful content overall is less likely to perform well in Search, assuming there is other content elsewhere from the web that's better to display. For this reason, removing unhelpful content could help the rankings of your other content.

A natural question some will have is how long will it take for a site to do better, if it removes unhelpful content? Sites identified by this update may find the signal applied to them over a period of months. Our classifier for this update runs continuously, allowing it to monitor newly-launched sites and existing ones. As it determines that the unhelpful content has not returned in the long-term, the classification will no longer apply.

This classifier process is entirely automated, using a machine-learning model. It is not a manual action nor a spam action. Instead, it's just a new signal and one of many signals Google evaluates to rank content.

Just looking at the description of this, we could see some significant shifts in the SERPs.

[developers.google.com...]

[Markedd]

@robzilla I didn't really want to post again for a while, but this comment rubbed me a bit the wrong way. You know that there is a Videos section. That's were people should go if they want to watch a video, be it from YouTube, Vimeo, Odysee, whatever. This thing that Google does is pushing their own properties above. I haven't seen a 'helpful' video from other websites, it's just YouTube and ads covering the first page. Sorry, but I had to be blunt.

[robzilla]

You know that there is a Videos section. That's were people should go if they want to watch a video

Are you serious? There's also an Images section, and Shopping, and News, and Maps, etc. You're saying none of those things should be mixed into the "unfiltered" SERPs? For hopefully obvious reasons, people want every type of relevant result in one overview.

I haven't seen a 'helpful' video from other websites, it's just YouTube

YouTube is the #1 video platform. It doesn't need to be manually pushed to the top (also, that's not how Search works).

[engine]

I've been looking for signals on this update, and so far, it's been very stable.
Google does say that it's an ongoing process from the launch date, and will be part of the whole process of providing signals for ranking

Key points to bear in mind:-

Automated, machine learning process. No manual actions.

English language only at present, and other languages in the future.

Some "people-first content on sites classified as "unhelpful content" could still rank well if qualifying signals indicate "people-first" are relevant, and helpful.

Sites with lots of unhelpful content could see greater effects.

It will be monitored to refine how its classifier detect "unhelpful content."

Sites identified in this update may find the signal applied "over a period of months."

"As it determines that the unhelpful content has not returned in the long-term, the classification will no longer apply. "

As a reminder, What creators should know about Google's helpful content update [developers.google.com]

[RedBar]

Yesterday 98.3% and with 7 hours of today to go already at 90.7% and the majority with traditional multiple PVs, not loads of one page and gone.

Plus several serious realworld enquiries of which none / zero are from the "West"!

[Markedd]

@robzilla Yes, I am serious. Either remove the Videos section completely or don't mix them. That's how it was for decades and nobody complained until now.
I don't really understand what you mean about how Search works. You think people want to see YouTube and not to read media? That's why Google 'had' to put it at the top and sometimes even cover the entire first page with it? We are really off topic here, but I'll tell you what Google, YouTube and Alphabet really want. Money, that's all. They polluted the search engine with their other monopolistic platform trying to transform the world wide web the Google web. And it's working. I'm seriously disgusted by this company and its now weekly major controversies and so should everybody else.

To still talk about the update, my main website so far, it's doing fine. Hopefully it remains this way for a long time because my content is goddamn gold.

[Atomic]

Last big update hit Memorial Day weekend. Same last year and then July 4th weekend. This one's going to ruin some folks Labor Day weekend. I am seeing zero movement from sites that have no business being anywhere in the SERPs. Yet, they continue to enjoy lucrative, high rankings. And then there are the "stay in your lane" violators. They have not budged. And I watch them closely.

Big hurt's coming. I have snacks to watch the show.

[robzilla]

You think people want to see YouTube and not to read media? That's why Google 'had' to put it at the top and sometimes even cover the entire first page with it? We are really off topic here, but I'll tell you what Google, YouTube and Alphabet really want. Money, that's all.

I'm curious to know your perspective on the fact that YouTube videos are all over the Bing search results as well. I've picked up tennis again recently, and a search for "improve tennis forehand" gets me a healthy mix of videos (at or near the top) and webpages on both search engines. What's more, just about every video in the Bing SERPs is from YouTube. What's going on there? Is Microsoft also "polluting the search engine", and with its competitor's video platform to boot? Why is Bing pushing YouTube to the top?

Could it be because that's what searchers want to see? Because videos can be a helpful (sometimes even preferred) result type, and YouTube is arguably the best platform?

If you think people only want to "read media" and see the basic 10 blue links of yore, well... that sounds like some sort of webmaster pipe dream, out of touch with what people are actually using search engines for and what's helpful to them.

So it's not off-topic here either, this is all ultimately about helpfulness of search results and helpfulness of content. If you can't put yourself into the searcher's shoes and understand what would be helpful to them, instead of what would be helpful to you as a webmaster, I'd say you're at greater risk of being negatively affected by this update (and future ones).

Google isn't pushing YouTube to the top, their users are. Same with Bing.

Watch this video from 29:20. What Matt's saying at 34:20 also explains why you see a mix of result types.

[youtu.be...]

[RedBar]

#1 anti-Google fanbuy here!

We are really off topic here, but I'll tell you what Google, YouTube and Alphabet really want. Money, that's all.

It also knows, like all good business-focussed people / companies, that if it does not provide what the vast majority of users "want", it will not survive. Whether "you" like it or not is an entirely different matter.

You think people want to see YouTube and not to read media? That's why Google 'had' to put it at the top and sometimes even cover the entire first page with it?

I am 70, I have been web-developing 29 years, Google is responding to ITS market forces which, believe it or not, is without doubt younger people who use search engines and their results in a totally different way. I have two 30+ year old daughters who grew up with everything I did and I watched how they used The Net, they watch their children use The Net and contribute all the time what is "current". They are often told by their children "how to do stuff"!

If you think people only want to "read media" and see the basic 10 blue links of yore, well...

Precisely, my main global site is loaded with info and blue links and has 50% desktop / mobile, it has technicalities and product specifications found nowhere else and is essential to architects and specifiers ... For Joe Public end-user it is probably the biggest waste of space and time for them and they probably wonder why anyone needs all this stuff ... they wouldn't if their building fell down!

Like a few others here I am in the fortunate position of being at the start of the www, the information age, it has morphed into an incredible tool for those who know how to use it. I used to get millions of visitors per month, now I am in the tens of thousands BUT I make more money since my sites are focussed on my products.

If, I am not suggesting anyone is doing this, all someone is doing is using a scattergun approach, re-think, if you are simply trying to compete against highly-financed boxmovers, re-think ... You cannot perform miracles if you're not prepared to pay to be #1 in the classified ads.

Constructing SEO-friendly sites these days is easy for many of us, working in the FMCG market has to be the worst nightmare ever for an SEOer!

[martinibuster]

Could it be because that's what searchers want to see? Because videos can be a helpful (sometimes even preferred) result type, and YouTube is arguably the best platform?

Yes!

If you think people only want to "read media" and see the basic 10 blue links of yore, well... that sounds like some sort of webmaster pipe dream, out of touch with what people are actually using search engines for and what's helpful to them.

Yes again!

I've been sharing that insight since at least 2016 (check out the link below).People scoffed at my insights, even when I share them with links to patents and research and instead chose to believe dumb ideas such as "I don't rank me because Google prefers brands."

Check out what I posted in 2016: [webmasterworld.com]

"Google is indeed biased. And these are the clues to Google's bias:

The answer is written throughout the entire Google Quality Raters Guidelines.

The answer is in the first lines of Google's policy statement [google.com] of the ten things they hold true.

The answer is in Google's various (and misunderstood) patents for studying click logs.


Google aspires to please their users.
They want their users to come away satisfied. Your local supermarket aspires to please it's shoppers. Walk down the cereal aisle. What do you see?
Fruit Loops
Captain Crunch
Lucky Charms

Google's algorithm is tuned to please users. What do you think all that click log mining is all about if not to find out what pleases users? Lastly, what do you think happens when your focus turns away from showing people the correct answer to a search query to showing people what will make them happy?

IF you read the patents about clicks logs, click backs, CTR and dwell time and machine learning the focus is always on pleasing the user. Do the metrics show that the user was happy? If yes then the search engine succeeded. But is showing people what they (apparently) want to see the best response? Google is indeed biased and it is biased toward showing people what pleases them."

[Markedd]

I'm curious to know your perspective on the fact that YouTube videos are all over the Bing search results as well. I've picked up tennis again recently, and a search for "improve tennis forehand" gets me a healthy mix of videos (at or near the top) and webpages on both search engines. What's more, just about every video in the Bing SERPs is from YouTube. What's going on there? Is Microsoft also "polluting the search engine", and with its competitor's video platform to boot? Why is Bing pushing YouTube to the top?

I have posted a screenshot some months ago and it seems that I have to do it again. This is how Google displays YouTube on Desktop, I am not even going to mention the garbage that's the mobile SERP: [imgur.com...]
Bing does post YouTube videos which was peculiar for me, so I checked it a bit more. In my case (anyone else can confirm), Bing is stripping the ads from the videos and it's using a proprietary frontend. I will look a bit more into this, but I don't think Bing is doing it from the kindness of their heart. Also, there really isn't an entire page filled with YouTube videos. Just one or two shyly positioned on the side which don't bother.

Could it be because that's what searchers want to see? Because videos can be a helpful (sometimes even preferred) result type, and YouTube is arguably the best platform?

Incidentally, it's pretty much the only relevant platform, a monopoly, so yes, it's the best since there is no choice in the matter. Is it helpful though? Well, let's check the weekly controversy and the bingo is on Kremlin collusion. Check the Business Casual lawsuit to know more.

If you think people only want to "read media" and see the basic 10 blue links of yore, well... that sounds like some sort of webmaster pipe dream, out of touch with what people are actually using search engines for and what's helpful to them.

That's the thing, I tried to maintain an objective view, because besides being a webmaster, I am also a web user. And I do like compartmentalization, while I loathe being distracted. So seeing things move everywhere, check this, check that, it's annoying, so I prefer clean and classy. Maybe it's just me.

Google isn't pushing YouTube to the top, their users are. Same with Bing.

Agree to disagree.

So it's not off-topic here either, this is all ultimately about helpfulness of search results and helpfulness of content. If you can't put yourself into the searcher's shoes and understand what would be helpful to them, instead of what would be helpful to you as a webmaster, I'd say you're at greater risk of being negatively affected by this update (and future ones).

It doesn't matter. If my content is no longer relevant and a competitor does things better, I will applaud it. But these AI-generated content stealing websites are no match for a very long time. And that includes Google as well since they really like stealing content and put it in their 'snippets and People also ask' helpful boxes. God forbid people actually leave Google.

I am 70, I have been web-developing 29 years, Google is responding to ITS market forces which, believe it or not, is without doubt younger people who use search engines and their results in a totally different way. I have two 30+ year old daughters who grew up with everything I did and I watched how they used The Net, they watch their children use The Net and contribute all the time what is "current". They are often told by their children "how to do stuff"!

That's a great age and I am happy to see that the love of IT went through the generations.
But, I am edging between Gen-Z and Millennials, so I essentially was born with tech in hand, but things got weird the last few years. I get the fast info and the inter-connection across the globe. But I also see distractions from the point, like strobing lights in the eyes. If I search for something, I want to find that thing fast and simple. I shouldn't have to open three different search engines just to curate the ad-filled, buying-focused keyword filled garbage that Google (and other competitors) and trying to push down my throat. And this is something that a lot of other users experience for a few years. It's jarring.

[tangor]

I want to find that thing fast and simple. I shouldn't have to open three different search engines just to curate the ad-filled, buying-focused keyword filled garbage that Google (and other competitors) and trying to push down my throat.

In a perfect world that is the results all of us would like ... but is that the results that the search engines desire? Empirical evidence suggests there are other agendas involved. :(

[Martin Ice Web]

I read an contribution some weeks ago that was about habits of the youth related to search for information.
So it pointed out that the youth doesn´t use google for seach as first source but snapchat, instagram and co. The youth prefer videos and tutorials. They don´t want to read.
That is a big problem for google. And while mobile internet is getting faster this shift will continue.
google is not stupid and IMO they not only try to gues what you want but of what age you are ( maybe it is easy because of the kind of typing the query ).
I think we will never get back to 10 blue links. But i´m as well astonished that the youth accept the with ads overloaded search results. I guess this is something they have been trained for over the years. Don´t ask, just consume.

[Markedd]

I read an contribution some weeks ago that was about habits of the youth related to search for information.
So it pointed out that the youth doesn´t use google for seach as first source but snapchat, instagram and co. The youth prefer videos and tutorials. They don´t want to read.
That is a big problem for google. And while mobile internet is getting faster this shift will continue.
google is not stupid and IMO they not only try to gues what you want but of what age you are ( maybe it is easy because of the kind of typing the query ).
I think we will never get back to 10 blue links. But i´m as well astonished that the youth accept the with ads overloaded search results. I guess this is something they have been trained for over the years. Don´t ask, just consume.

Depends on how you define the youth. Under 18, sure, they don't care that much, but will start to get annoyed once they start understanding that their time has value (when they get older), something that the big tech really likes to waste as long as they make a profit. I understand why some of you may be saying that people want to see videos alongside organic results, all intertwined in harmony. But that's not what I see, the search results are bloated to high heaven, ads, random links, questions, see this, check that, see what that guy said. I am using a search engine to find some information, not to scroll through TikTok. All have their values, but why add pleasure to the business? It doesn't work. I have shown people that are half my age how the web used to look 10+ years ago and they liked it. That simplicity is what all people inherently want, that's the point of a search engine. That's how I see it.
I mean what's to stop Google from adding Twitter posts, Facebook reactions, TikTok videos to the search page? Nothing and they would if they owned those properties or had a way to monetize them. Would that make the search engine called Google better? Absolutely not.

[BigKat]

As it pertains to videos, I believe they have their place in some SERPS but should be confined to a horizontal block of videos and not in the actual vertical results. As the image posted by @Markedd above shows (remove period from destination URL to see image link), we too have seen vertical search results with almost all or completely YouTube videos. I don't know about others, but the ads Google runs in these videos I see are all from drug companies. Even my children get these drug ads too. I'm guessing these drug companies have deep enough wallets neither they or Google care who they spam these drug commercials to, including young children, so long as they are making money.

Time to rant about YouTube videos...

Google is ranking a YouTube video in the SERPS where one of our products is being used in an unsafe manner. As an example, say we produce and sell lug nuts for wheels on vehicles. Imagine a customer's video whining about our lug nuts not holding the wheel on because the wheel the customer used them on is missing 3 of 5 lug nut studs. Yes, it's indeed that stupid and we've encountered the same on Amazon where customers in the Q&A section are instructed by other customers how to use our products in an unsafe manner. There's no way to remove these, and people following these instructions are putting the safety of themselves and others in jeopardy.

The products we manufacture/sell must meet certain specifications for safety standards. Though Google crowds their search results with offshore Amazon junk, only one of the offshore products sold on Amazon just barely meets minimum specifications. And for what we sell, meeting the bare minimum is not good enough or safe for many consumers. But as we know, the Chinese don't care and use Amazon as a dumping ground. When someone gets hurt or dies using a product sold on Amazon, Amazon isn't liable and the injured party will have a fun time being compensated when the Chinese seller lives outside the jurisdiction of the USA and conveniently disappears.

[JesterMagic]

I agree with a lot of what Markedd says.

Google isn't pushing YouTube to the top, their users are. Same with Bing.

@robzilla Sure you can say that now but that is because Google has been pushing Youtube to the top for so long that they pushed out all other competition. It never was a fair fight.

Since it is their own property I bet Youtube isn't even spidered by Google bot. I bet the search engine has direct access to the content giving them another leg up on the competition.

[javelin]

Sure you can say that now but that is because Google has been pushing Youtube to the top for so long that they pushed out all other competition. It never was a fair fight.

Since it is their own property I bet Youtube isn't even spidered by Google bot. I bet the search engine has direct access to the content giving them another leg up on the competition.

This is exactly right. I understand the argument for those saying video content is what people want. Its a dumb blanket argument... Why? It is dependent upon the market sector and industry.

Some markets do better with video content, others do not. I know of one specifically that attempted to use video instead of blogs and it resulted in failure. Users requested the video content end because it made it too difficult to find the specific information they needed. The development team had to go back to regular blogging.

The point is when it comes to G, they own YouTube. There are times when user preference shows, then there are times choices are made for users based upon what a company wants us to use. Too much was invested into Youtube for it to be allowed to be our choice. Sorry I am not convinced the results in serps are as they are due to user preference.

[renatovieira]

I don't know on your side, but my traffic has dropped by half since this morning.

I've seen fluctuations in other updates, but this one is being too big on my site.

My site is about weather a travel articles. Unique content written by me...

[ichthyous]

I agree that many people do watch YouTube videos...I know a few people that watch YouTube incessantly, including my 84yo father. I personally am not into watching videos that much but it's definitely useful at times, and even entertaining (cat pranks, people running into glass doors, car crash videos, etc).

The question is, would people be watching as many videos if Google didn't push them under our nose all the time? YouTube is google's only successful social media platform in reality, and it has that addictive nature that is essential for any social media platform. I can see that the people who use it spends hours and hours mindlessly surfing videos to relax and entertain themselves. I personally find myself opening and checking my Instagram account reflexively, even though I truly hate instagram and wish I could just delete my profile and forget about it forever...but social media has that tendency to suck us right back in and that is 100% by design of course. YouTube is highly successful at it, and will only grow. We are in a post literate society...people do not want to read like they used to even a short 10 years ago.

[OldFaces]

Well Search Console finally updated (typically does every 3 days, and this time took 7 days). But now Ad Manager is not reporting impressions since the beginning of today 8/31/2022.

We all know G services have been having more hiccups recently than is typical (Analytics not reporting for periods of time and not reporting this to users unless you hound them being one recent memory). I wonder if this Helpful Content Update also had some bugs.

Personally, I'm shocked more people aren't upset that Ad Manager isn't reporting ad impressions for nearly 20 hours...

[OldFaces]

Also...regarding the lack of response to this Helpful Content Update...I found the tweet exchange between Danny and Glenn interesting. I believe one of them mentioned that those impacted by this release might not be quick or eager to share that they got hit as it would point a spotlight on their content being less than quality and exist simply for SERPs.

I suppose that could ALWAYS be the case with any algo release...but still an interesting point.

[engine]

It's interesting that Google's Search Liaison, DS, chose to converse about the update on his personal account, and not on the official Google account, to confirm the update isn't yet complete.

Update isn’t done. It’s also part of a continuing effort, as we’ve explained. We’ll keep refining how it works. Directionally, the guidance we’ve given is what SEOs and creators should be considering.

[twitter.com...]

[Terius]

I've picked up tennis again recently, and a search for "improve tennis forehand" gets me a healthy mix of videos (at or near the top) and webpages on both search engines.

That sounds reasonable. What I'm seeing is not. I will search for how to use a function in a SaaS I'm using because the site doesn't have a good help search function. Google will give me 6 videos on top that don't actually answer the question, and that's even when it's a question that's actually better answered by text and screen captures, not video. Plugging the same question into Bing, I don't get videos on top. Not one.

It's really not controversial to suggest Google might arrange the SERPs with some thoughts to their own profits. In the US, a publicly held company does not exist to please non-paying users. It exists to make money for stockholders, and they can sue successfully anytime the company doesn't prioritize next quarter's profits over every other consideration. And yes, Google claims they wall off search so they're not influenced by any of that, but the people developing search are humans who know what Google owns. Often they are also stockholders themselves. They wouldn't need to be unethical people to let these considerations influence them.

[ichthyous]

I am seeing a huge drop in USA traffic this morn...71% at 10am. Only USA...every other region is much higher. Yesterday was the same, a 60+% drop in the morning and then suddenly much higher USA traffic all day, ending up +20%. Let's see if the same pattern holds today.

[JesterMagic]

@ichthyous I saw a 15% drop yesterday across the board for some reason. Basically erasing any increase I saw during this latest update. Site traffic is down from last year by about 44% on average per day (in general a slow lost in traffic over the year)

[Kratos]

Could the drop in traffic that some of you are reporting be due to people going back to work now that it's 1st September?

And then Labor day being on the 5th September so people are now actually back to work for a couple of days before taking a long weekend?

I hate it when Google updates coincide with dates in which people are traveling or not much on the internet. Several important updates have been launched with federal holidays coinciding and the likes.

Also, all I see now since this update started are Youtube videos cluttering the first page and taking over all real estate with those fancy timestamp bars.

Why not have some kind of carrousel of videos instead of vertically listing videos (of which close to all are YT videos) on the first page so that more real estate is dedicated to high quality websites with useful content as determined by G's algorythms?

Or freaking make the videos horizontal, there's enough white space on the first page ready to be used horizontally.

There are many cases in which i want to read a detailed review of a product instead of buying it from a video from some non expert getting a freebie or commision as is the case with 99% of Youtubers.

Like, I really want to read a review at my own pace while navigating the text review to my own liking as I see the original photographs to go with the text review.

And I know for sure that I'm not the exception when it comes to my preference of product reviews on the internet.

[robzilla]

I will search for how to use a function in a SaaS I'm using because the site doesn't have a good help search function. Google will give me 6 videos on top that don't actually answer the question, and that's even when it's a question that's actually better answered by text and screen captures, not video. Plugging the same question into Bing, I don't get videos on top. Not one.

While I may not agree with your reasoning, because I believe the "separation of church and state" discussed in the video above is real and has to be maintained for the Search dept. (and its engine) to survive long-term and secure the brightest minds in IR, I do think yours is a valid complaint re: the usefulness of those results. Video is not the answer for everything, and there are plenty of queries that don't show any video results, but the algorithm does get it wrong, arguably too many times. There are lots of great video tutorials on tech and programming, and I find myself drawn to them more and more for difficult topics (the same way a class can be more helpful than a textbook), but sometimes a textual explanation can be a much quicker and less "invasive" answer (no audio or video). I run across unhelpful SERPs sometimes and will usually hit the feedback link at the bottom to let them know.

Often they are also stockholders themselves. They wouldn't need to be unethical people to let these considerations influence them.

But they would have to do it collectively, and it would be no secret. It's not like a couple of engineers can sneak in an algorithm update [youtube.com] without anyone noticing. Anyway, off-topic obviously.

[edited by: robzilla at 9:21 pm (utc) on Sep 1, 2022]

[ichthyous]

Could the drop in traffic that some of you are reporting be due to people going back to work now that it's 1st September?

Not in my case...my traffic skyrockets as soon as summer ends because I get all the students. Such a huge drop is highly unusual

[tangor]

I hate it when Google updates coincide with dates in which people are traveling or not much on the internet. Several important updates have been launched with federal holidays coinciding and the likes.

This timing of roll outs is not coincidence, it is by design.

Think of it as the "Friday night information release" in politics (example).

[robzilla]

This timing of roll outs is not coincidence, it is by design.

That's a very US-centric perspective. Google is a global search engine and most of the traffic (and possibly revenue) comes from outside the United States. Every day there's a holiday somewhere in the world. Every year there are complaints about updates close to the major U.S. holidays like Christmas, when (1) it's not Christmas everywhere in the world, and (2) the Christmas season is probably as important to Google (to give the best possible results) as it is to merchants. You can't expect them to put the interests of some merchants above their own.

[jellyfish]

Long time observer, first time poster - hi all!
The thing I have really noticed this year for my own domains is that keywords, impressions have never been higher and yet Click & CTR is the lowest its ever been. This change coincides with the big shifts in the Google layouts, when they have stuffed the first page results with endless lists of videos and people also ask questions.
It seems quality content is pushed ever further out by useless videos etc that do not even answer the query posted by the user.
I use several analytical tools plus my own data to compare and I am working with domains with 10-15+ year ages and I have never seen such negative patterns from a webmaster POV as in the last year. I can see that I am not alone in what I am seeing just by reading the posts in this forum.
Until there is another search engine with the clout as G to compete against them I'm afraid things will not improve.