Answer Box / Rich Snippets Effect on Traffic and Publisher Earnings

Google is phasing out websites!

[anefarious1]

Anyone notice that a huge percentage of Google searches now result in what's known as position #0 ( A Google answer box) which often negates the need for a user to visit a 3rd party website? Google is moving from a librarian of data to The All Knowing Borg!

It makes sense... I guess Google figures why send users away from Google when they can keep them on Google. But this is having a big effect on traffic as well as Adsense earnings, any type of earnings really. My Google Search Console shows that I haven't been losing SEO rank at all, yet my traffic has dropped 60 percent over the last year.

Every time I do a test search, they are using content from my website to provide succinct snippet answers directly on Google. Times are a changing!

[keyplyr]

Anyone notice that a huge percentage of Google searches now result in what's known as position #0 ( A Google answer box)

Been discussed many times:
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
and many more found by using our Site Search in the upper-right corner of all pages.

[MrSavage]

You touch on the elephant in the room that most of the "experts" around here want to ignore. To be honest in the last while, I rarely find NO answer box. Previously it was rare. Now it's rare to search without it. And be assured, most time it's one less click the searcher needs. Google keeps the searcher, you provide the answer, and you should in theory question the future prospects of being a slave to this. So "experts" can talk all day about this update and that update but mostly now it's just about a more aggressive answer box. If you wanted any more proof that Adsense is nothing to Google (aside from a few elite) then consider they don't care whether your ads gain that organic traffic that the answer box is scooping away. For most average webmasters like myself, I roll my eyes at a lot of the effort being made to work around or problem solve this. When Adsense mattered to Google, they cared about organic traffic to sites. The way they treat search results is all you need for the answer of how much they truly care about the Adsense program. I don't fret about it anymore. Perhaps an alternative search comes along that won't scrape, but for now it's pretty much a done deal. Too many shills to really tackle it. It's not like the webmasters are together like the newspaper industry.

[NickMNS]

If a website's value proposition can be "hijacked" by a short snippet shown by Google in the Serp, then one needs to re-think the value of that website.

[trebuchet]

Yes, I'm with @NickMNS. If a searcher's query can be fully addressed with a simple answer box, there was negligible reason for them to visit your site in the first place. Engaging content and time-on-site should be of much greater value than the simple provisioning of facts.

Having said that, we know that content thievery is alive and well. I know of several Wikipedia pages based almost entirely on my content that now rank above the same pages they've milked information from. What can you do about it? Shrug, smile and produce more content, because bitching gets you nowhere.

[MrSavage]

You guys are narrow minded and self centered. It would also appear that using Google as an end user isn't on your agenda. Sounds pretty ignorant to me. Here's one for you. Where does it say the answer box isn't expanding? So it cannot include more words in the future? Maybe text and images? Maybe your image and the other websites text. Who says the answer box needs to be limited to just one source? What about multiple source answer boxes? The sky is the limit and you're the sheep. What if my article addresses multiple points, which most do, but Google's technology is "scrape intelligent" to lift exactly what's needed and rearrange the text so it gets the answer. Not sure about you, but I don't have that technology baked into my website. You're an ID..T if you think the content in the answer box comes from an article with a singular point or answer. I personally would rethink listening to anyone with such a self-centered view of the world. The ID..T invests more time, money and effort into creating better content that is up for scraping. Safe today, but if you assume Google isn't evolving then clearly you need to look beyond your own Adsense cheque.

[NickMNS]

@MrSavage

I would be really nice if you could have respectful conversation that doesn't include insulting those that disagree with your position. You appear to feel very strongly about this, and nothing that I share is likely to change that. So I wish you luck.

[trebuchet]

Ditto from me.

[MrSavage]

Anyone reading or considering taking advice or suggestions needs to consider the source. It's ignorant to suggest people write an article with one answer or one single point. Producing more content when the trend is less ad clicks and less search traffic is nonsensical advice. Some opinions are worth considering, others are not. The OP made some valid points and observations. I think my advice is to use Google like an end user then you can offer advice like spending more time, money and effort. So I say with respect that your view(s) on this subject are not worth the bandwidth it takes to display them. I'm dealing with facts and reality which I believe is what the OP was speaking to. By suggesting that the OP or anyone else's content is single use and that's why it's in the answer box is also condescending and rather pompous don't ya think?

[londrum]

I'm guessing you're about 15 years old

[MrSavage]

Do we speak to the topic at hand on a forum or just offer judgements on members? Schoolyard antics much?

If you have a counter point of offer some type of inspiration for the OP observations, then let's hear it. Maybe like others, you know the inside scoop on the Google roadmap as it pertains to the answer box. Like you can tell us all that there won't be images from source A, text from source B, C and D in the same answer box. If you have that forecast, do tell and back up with sources. Until then, what makes you believe in pumping more content out and more resources into a boat that is taking on water and you're resorting to bailing it out by hand is smart? Sure you can keep afloat for a while. Or at least until you come to face the reality of said situation.

One thing we can agree on. It's not going to reverse or become less common and as it currently stands, the answer box isn't going to help Adsense revenues increase. If you want to debate that pretty elementary observation, then go for it.

[NickMNS]

Against my better judgement I am going to re-enter this thread.

what makes you believe in pumping more content out and more resources into a boat that is taking on water and you're resorting to bailing it out by hand is smart?

I never suggested that adding more content was the solution to the problem. Adding value is not the same as creating more content. Writing an article about a topic that is already covered accurately and in great detail on wikipedia is not creating value. No matter how long or "high quality" it is.

Creating value means providing something to the user that they cannot easily get somewhere else and that cannot be easily reproduced by others. Functionalities and features add value, expert insight, timely information there are many things that add value. And all of these things can just easily not add value. I have site that has a widget calculator, IMO it adds value, it is not easily reproducible as it use proprietary data. But create a site with a calculator to convert kilometers into miles and that adds no value.

So if there is very little value you created by your site and users can derive the value from a short snippet then yes I would be very worried about Google's Answer box otherwise, bring it on and show my site in position #0. I will take all the traffic I can get.

[frankleeceo]

I believe that websites themselves are always being disrupted by other sources of traffic or platform, whether or not they are owned by Google. Answer boxes is starting to evolve into Voice and potentially evolve further into some form of Augmented Reality a couple decades away. That is the reality. Any easy to be embedded or indexed information will be phased out within the next decade or so. I believe this is the harsh reality. If not Google, it will be another company with products that disrupts the information industry.

Change and adapt is key to survival. I am taking this to heart.

With that said, I am staying far far away from niches that can be addressed or answered easily for the short term. I foresee more websites and verticals under attack as they expand their information landgrab. For now, staying a step or two ahead of the answer box can prolong the survival, while perhaps prosper from it. One way to see is to see answer box as a powerful competitor, just like I do with any other sites that competes in my space, how to create stuff that beats this powerful competitor.

The only way out that I see is to build some form of brand or knowledge or specific features that will be hard for any tech company to take and scale. So that users will opt for individual websites rather than trusting Google's short / mid form answers. It's probably not that far off that Google will eventually to use AI to parse out entire articles helping visitors with their queries within the next decade. It's pretty ironic that they will become the master article spinner / stitcher using AI to create value, while having spent so long trying to combat the spinner spammers.

It appears to be surely moving in that direction. Piecing together images / short snippets from different sites could very well be experiments toward something bigger. Now they have proven their ability to stitch basic level contents. A more comprehensive result completely written by AI in real time does not seem far fetched.

The future where AI can copy or imitate features and UX in real time from individual sites, is the time where all sites will die. I hope that does not happen in my life time while I am still in this business. But yes, I do believe in eventual phasing out, probably 100 to 200 years away. Too bad I'll surely be dead at that time. Reading and website isn't just natural, information should be pinged directly into the brain like the matrix...well...that's a little too far out, but yeah. Let's see how we can serve ads or sell #*$! directly into the brain.

[keyplyr]

From another thread but applies especially here... it is not an idea that is favored by "webmasters" in general, but I am seeing more and more evidence that most, if not all, websites are heading towards being irrelevant on the ever changing web.

Search referrals are down significantly from a few years ago, mobile apps & social media dominate the time spent online and users no longer need to visit a website when they can get most all the info they search for right on the SERP (answer box.)

It has become imperative for today's webmaster to be innovative to stay relevant.

[MrSavage]

I suppose the movie industry and the newspaper industry could share the same opinion. Just let them "have at 'er". Google can show news articles or at least all the meat of those articles on Google.com and the torrent sites can share all those movies, freely, just because. Then we can say it's the newspaper industry's fault or it's the movie producers fault for not keeping up and adapting. The onus, it appears by some, seems to be on the creators rather than the thieves. It's interesting. Imagine if you searched movies online and the first result was a link to a torrent (or full movie on YouTube). How about an ad, "watch the movie for free here". We blame the movie company and expect them to adapt so that their movies aren't stolen? Ah right, the apologist will say "block Google then". Aha, let's block out the 95% of the world's population and still make enough money from our creations.

Should we also lose sight of the impact of a 90%+ (99% mobile) market share just to put the icing on the cake? Like where is that other portal to the web? Even if there was a "pure" non spinning true "search" engine, what is a 5% or even 10% volume of traffic going to do for webmasters.

The fact is the OP is correct. However, for whatever reason, some from the webmaster community put the onus on the content creators to come up with something different because all the usefulness that they created in the past is just being spun and provided on Google.com. Sure, it's up to me to invest more time and effort in hopes that Google behaves and scrapes less content. Sure. Right. Just like that pure and innocent persona.

If I write good sh!t on my website that matters and provides usefulness, then THAT IS WHAT GOOGLE WANTS TO TAKE. Maybe not today, but the day after tomorrow? Oh, I'll base my strategies on a few random, wishful thinking perspectives.

Imagine if the newspaper industry rolled over. I would suspect that we would use Google news for all things news. To be clear. If Google wants my answer or my content, then just pay me for that. That's all. PAY ME FOR WHAT YOU TAKE.

[Webwork]

Maybe I missed it in earlier discussions of G's Answer Box but, if not, I think this squishy data point is relevant:

The 15% figure for full literacy, equivalent to a university undergraduate level, is consistent with the notion that the "average" American reads at a 7th or 8th grade level which is also consistent with recommendations, guidelines, and norms of readability for medication directions, product information, and popular fiction. [en.wikipedia.org ]

IF someone writes for the benefit of "average" - which, I imagine, describes 70, 80, 90% of online or digital "content" THEN, thinking about it for a moment, why wouldn't an 8th grade AI (G's current Answer Box technology) be capable of "answering" 70, 80 or 90% of G search-box queries? You know, the queries that call for answers / info that needs to be . . and can be comprehended by readers with an 8th grade level of reading comprehension?

So, it's not that anyone has demonstrated their simplemindedness in their their writing and publishing IF they followed what has been "good advice" WHEN they deliberately wrote at a level that could be comprehended by an 8th grader. They were being smart enough to follow good advice. That's intelligent, not stupid.

As to any smartypants looking down their noses at those bemoaning their fate, visited upon themselves by creating content (yuk) for consumption by the sub-cognoscenti, I suggest you all take a moment to reflect on the admonition in the rearview mirror of this world: "Objects in mirror are closer than they appear!".

G's AI is coming for you, too, you publishers of arcane content.

It's only a matter of time and, in the world of AI, time is accelerating.

[MrSavage]

I suppose all this comes down to one simple principle. Should the articles newspapers create be free for all. Should movies be free to download and view on YouTube for free (some are already), should anything that has been "created" have any sort of protection at all? Just because someone like Google can scrape every last word from every website (and video) on the planet, does that mean free access to suck out the good parts, spin it, provide that content on their own property and leave the carcass behind? When you can suck the value out of content creation, the money disappears and so do most of the content creators themselves. Ask the newspaper industry who had to adapt to the online world which they cannot monetize fully (they have to hand over a good chunk of their ad revenue to somebody...) and see what the staff levels of those organizations are like. So at the end of the day, as the OP says, giving something away for free is not sustainable. People say adapt, and I say good luck with that. I need to create useful information that will somehow not be useful enough that Google chooses it as part of their answer box.

To go full circle, whatever your view on the answer box, if you're not the "chosen one", then was all took a 2 or 3 position drop in the SERPS. And as Adsense publishers, that means less traffic and less income. We don't even really need to debate the value of the answer box itself. It does certainly push everyone else down the page which is really bad for an Adsense publisher (OP).

[trebuchet]

It's ignorant to suggest people write an article with one answer or one single point.

It's even more ignorant to attribute statements to others that they did not say. My comment was about user motive and imperative, not quality of content. My point was that a user whose search query is satisfied by the sparse information in an answer box is probably not the kind of user I want on my sites. He/she is a window-shopping fact collector who is unlikely to engage with my content. Some webmasters might think that G using their content to populate answer boxes entitles them to a click - and fair enough - but realistically, how much engagement and opportunity do they expect to extract from that clickthrough?

Adding value is not the same as creating more content.

@NickMNS gets it. Content with value will always draw and hold engaged users, who are the kinds of users I want. The kind whose curiosity is sated with an answer box are of little interest to me.

[MrSavage]

Who writes a singular article? One point per page? Who creates content that sucks and doesn't engage the user? Google can extract whatever they want from whatever web page that exists on the web. A tutorial, a recipe, a guide, whatever. So people here are suggesting that those types of content are not "valuable" content or is somehow ripe for plucking because it's easy to stick in a box? The box can parse out 20 of the 21 valuable piece of information on my article and put that 1 valuable piece into the answer box. Yet people here suggest I need to build better, more in-depth, and engaging content? So the recommend solution is to create valuable engaging content that is somehow going to be ignored by Google. I see. Lead the way on that one.

It appears that many here do not use Google on a daily basis as an end user. I require search pretty much all day, every day. If you don't know Google then at least preface your views on what the answer box was 6 months ago vs 2 months ago vs what it is today. Has anyone been keeping track of the growing scope of answer box? How do you get clicks for your Adsense ads when they get cut off on the search results page? Right. So we are talking about Adsense earnings which requires TRAFFIC to monetize, yet we are so endowed with traffic that we can say, "no thanks, I didn't want that site visitor in the first place".

It's the Adsense forum and somehow, some people are spinning this into the belief that those searchers who get what they want from the answer box is somehow better for an Adsense publisher. A lot of people won't need to click on a website and thus you and I get less traffic. It's a fact. To suggest that those kind of searchers aren't good for Adsense earnings is simply idiotic. The more traffic, the more likelihood of clicking an ad on a web page. Sure some traffic is better than others, but more traffic is better than less traffic. The answer box is sending less traffic to websites. If people are disputing that, then discussion over. Sometimes the dummies are the ones who click the ads. Those same dummies are the ones who now don't need the website because they take that box as being sufficient. If not they will just click that other big box of questions/answers before even considering click on a link to a website.

[trebuchet]

I don't think anybody here is misled about what Google is, how it operates or how it views us and our sites. The one immutable fact is that none of us are chained to it. Adsense and Google Search are entirely voluntary. So [insert standard question for WW Chicken Littles] if you don't like the way things are headed then why not strip Adsense from your sites, block the Googlebot and find other avenues to discovery, traffic and monetisation? You wouldn't work for an employer who rips you off - so if you think Google and its Knowledge Graph are doing it, why are you still in the program?

P.S. If the Knowledge Graph is culling traffic then I'm not seeing it. My traffic has grown at a rate of 15-20% per annum for each of the past six years. That's after contending with answer boxes, scrapers, adblockers, etc.

[NickMNS]

I have a few points to add

Having your website appear in Google's SERPs is not free and never really was but the cost is certainly rising. But people have trouble quantifying the exchange of value when money, cash, is not part of the exchange. The tacit agreement with Google is you provide some information in exchange for exposure. Google has collected the information willingly and gladly provide by webmaster for decades. Instead of simply sitting on it they have worked very hard to monetize it and they are squeeze every ounce of value out of it. If you feel the exchange is not providing fair value for you you always have the option to block Google. It's simple with more and more websites being published there is more and more competition to get exposure needed to be successful. This all plays into Google favor. We work in an industry nearly no borders to entry, and that at least in the past provided a good return. No one should be surprised that there is competition.

This brings up the next point, this same logic applies to Adsense. Adsense works on a user basis, it tracks and targets users to serve them ads. It is completely and utterly website agnostic. It could care less what site it ad show up on (within obvious limits such as spam and such). So as far Adsense is concerned the more sites the merrier. They do not care whether they show one hundred impression shown one by one on one hundred unique websites or one hundred impression on a single website. So again, competition is fierce. So how can one make money with Adsense? There are two ways. 1- Get an obscene amount of traffic such that razor thin RPM's add up to something decent or 2- Build a site that attracts an engaged and marketable audience such that avertisers will specifically seek you out. I guess there is a third build both. So (back on topic) if you strategy is no1 then yes you are facing a real threat from Google. But if you are following strategy no.2 then Google doesn't pose a threat, because you only want and need the engaged users.

I would like repeat Keyplyr's statement.

It has become imperative for today's webmaster to be innovative to stay relevant.

This is the web it is just about the fastest changing industry. If you are not constantly seeking new ways of doing things your toast. Even the spam has changed, the strategy 2 or 3 years ago used to be pump and dump with affiliate links, now its slopify - fb-ads to drop-ship from china.

[MrSavage]

If given enough time, anyone can show their true colors. Let people speak and speak away, and you can get a better sense (nonsense) of the source of the comments.

you always have the option to block Google

Your advice is to block Google even while running Adsense? Ah, you meant block 90-99%+ of all internet traffic and then remove the best/easiest monetization program. Right.

Adsense and Google Search are entirely voluntary.

I feel enlightened with that.

Fact: the answer box is more frequent than ever before.
Fact: the answer box pushed the search results down the page.
Fact: if you're not the one in the box, then you just dropped down on the search page.
Fact: the farther down on a page the less likely you are to get clicks or noticed. What does above the fold mean and wouldn't that same concept apply to where you show up in the SERPS?
Fact: Adsense success is largely based on high volumes of trafffic. Of course there are exclusions, but for I would giggle to hear anyone suggest that less traffic means more money.
Fact: Google doesn't share their plans with how the answer box is going to evolve. Some people here love to make assumptions that this is the worst it's going to get. As if Google themselves shared that with you personally.

I realize I'm talking to about three other people and the OP seemingly has disappeared, but hopefully the comments here speak for themselves. Too often people say "My site is doing better than ever" and then go on to suggest that the answer box has been good for their business or hasn't affected them. Guess what? Perhaps you are spared. Perhaps you are spared for the next 6 months. Who know. But to suggest your personal experience can somehow counter the FACTS, is telling enough. There just isn't enough credibility to be taken seriously.

I have no time for anyone who believes if you don't block Google, then you are fair game for being scraped. I suppose by the same token you shouldn't whine about your images or content being scraped and used by another website that outranks you. I've said this many times before, but Cutts himself had issues with the idea of the answer box. He openly questioned whether people should be paid for that use of THEIR content. That was Cutts who just happened to leave his position. It's okay to shill, but don't say things are fine in the world just because your narrow view and experience is safe from what's going on around you.

[trebuchet]

Your advice is to block Google even while running Adsense? Ah, you meant block 90-99%+ of all internet traffic and then remove the best/easiest monetization program.

Try reading what was actually written. You are not bound to Adsense either. Praising Adsense and cursing Search is a mug's game. They are both run by Google and are both run in Google's interest. I came to terms with that years ago.

As NickMNS says, there's always been a cost to Google and that cost is increasing for Adsense publishers. The three options are to ride it until it becomes unprofitable or unviable; adapt and innovate; or quit and find alternative revenue sources (or another job). Right now I choose Option One with a healthy dose of Option Two. If the situation changes and deteriorates, I will choose Option Three.

Actually, there is an Option Four: jumping onto the web or social media, cursing Google, ranting like a millennialist preacher and insulting anyone who holds a different view. That option achieves nothing, other than annoying people. It certainly won't change policies or strategy at Google.

[MrSavage]

You have to be able to look at the lay of the land and make decisions accordingly. I'm trying to keep to the facts here.

The OP makes an observation. I'm a bit bewildered at anyone not seeing things that same way. Perhaps you (and others) are saying yes, this is a negative situation but it's fixable by creating new content or a new website. Or what I'm seeing as you (and others) scolding somebody for their content that is being scraped by Google for the answer box and it's their fault for creating useful content. I'm really confused as to what your (and others) point really is.

ranting like a millennialist preacher

Insulting and stereotyping. I'm staying with facts of the discussion but that quote indicates others can't stick to the topic at hand. Again, the more people speak, the clearer the image becomes.

[edited by: MrSavage at 3:48 am (utc) on Oct 19, 2017]

[NickMNS]

@MrSavage

"My site is doing better than ever" and then go on to suggest that the answer box has been good for their business or hasn't affected them. Guess what?

The same logic holds in the opposite direction. "My Site is doing worse than ever" and then go on to suggest that the answer box has been bad for business and has ruined them. Guess what?
You don't know either way. The facts are simple Google provides and Answer Box and as Trebuchet stated all your whining is not going to change that. See the post above for your options...

[MrSavage]

I'm not suggesting my site is doing better or worse because of the answer box today. I'm saying that FACTUALLY speaking, what it does is push search positions DOWN THE PAGE. That's bad for Adsense publishers. I'm trying to maintain a discussion on the points. We are talking about the box and the effect to Adsense publishers and NOT about my personal traffic or dealings. Maybe that's why I'm fighting such an uphill battle. Logic is falling upon deaf ears I'm afraid.

[anefarious1]

Wow, I had no idea this topic would elicit should strong opinions. I'm still here, reading away at all the interesting viewpoints regarding this topic.

I've thought about this issue a lot. I've come to realize that people who sort of defend Google are those who really haven't been affected by the ever expanding use of their answer boxes (AKA rich snippets). Until you begin to notice it - you can't really relate to this seemingly unstoppable and worrisome (for webmasters) Google search trend.

I highly recommend the following article:

[theoutline.com...]

It may change your mind. Read it! Parts of it are disturbing.

You have to put everything into perspective of course. Google will successfully argue that their goal is to cater to end users and not webmasters. In that sense, they could defend scraping data by saying users would rather not view 3rd party websites if they can get the desired info quicker and without visiting a site with unknown scripts loading in the background, popups, etc. Standardization is a factor. They would also point out that they cite the snippet with a link in the bottom right hand corned of the answer box.

The web is moving away from its original structure. That's for sure. Google much look at Facebook and be envious of their ability to keep users on FB. Google is moving in this direction. They are after-all a monopoly and they've also developed AI, the Knowledge Graph, advanced algorithms, etc.

You won't recognize the web 10 years from now. Answer boxes will become much more advanced. My traffic peaked July 4th 2015 and certainly not due to losing rank! I'm ranked at position zero and position 1 or 2 for a ridiculous amount of searches.

[anefarious1]

@NickMNS "You don't know either way" you must be kidding me. You are obviously not close enough to this topic. Your statement reveals that. Read the article I've posted.

[trebuchet]

Insulting and stereotyping. I'm staying with facts of the discussion but that quote indicates others can't stick to the topic at hand.

Facts schmacts. You opened up here by misrepresenting what I said. And most of your long-winded diatribes are laced with insults like "idiot" and "ignorant" and "shill". So don't bleat and squeal and claim you're only dealing in "facts".

The facts are these. Google is a giant, greedy, content-sucking a**. The Knowledge Graph and its snippets seem here to stay. They will hurt some publishers, depending on audience/niche/content. Their options are to wear the losses, diversify, innovate or get out. Moaning about the system will not change the system.

Anything else is just crystal ball gazing or p***ing into the wind.

[MrSavage]

I should say too that I respect everyone here on the forum and who creates a website. Regardless of differing views, I still have respect for everyone. If people are wrong, so very wrong about a subject, I may point out the flaws, but more in jest than anything. I'm only here to discuss various trend and learn a few things. I also speak somewhat tongue in cheek, which is off the radar at times. I'm a realist about where things are right now. I know that Adsense has been the cornerstone of what I've been able to do online for years. It's been a joy having the program. I also know that for what I do, it's going to really take another fresh company to come into the "search" space. For me Google really is a lost cause but personally I'm adapting and not investing in a number of ideas and sites that worked previously.