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!

[trebuchet]

Fair enough. It is clear the glory days of Adsense have long passed. I would never recommend Adsense publishing to anyone starting out today. There are too many factors working against them, including the Knowledge Graph. Us old hands with experience, established sites and a raft of content can still milk the cow, for a while at least. Will we be here in two years? Maybe. Will we be here in five? Somehow I doubt it.

[NickMNS]

@anefarious1
I read the article you linked to, and there was no conclusive proof of anything just a convoluted anecdote about some person's website during a period of time where many other websites have seen massive fluctuation in rankings, traffic an Adsense earnings. I'm involved with a site that has seen very similar earnings and traffic patterns at the same scale as described in the anecdote and was never part of knowledge graph. So again, no proof just anecdotes.

And this doesn't address the fact that the celeb site in the article declined Google's offer and thus allowed other sites to take possession of the knowledge box. Even if the site ranked #1 there was a competitor ranking above. I'm certain that those other sites saw rise in traffic as a result. This article only proves that the wrong decision was taken.

[anefarious1]

@NickMNS
That's a very interesting take on it. Google's offer was declined yet Google went ahead and scraped CelebrityNetWorth anyway... is what I got out of it.

I wonder if CelebrityNetWorth thinks there is conclusive proof of their demise or just anecdotes.

[anefarious1]

Anyone looking for conclusive proof regarding this issue won't be able to find it with the help of Google (wonder why):

[searchengineland.com...]

But if you want conclusive independent proof you can find it here:

[searchengineland.com...]

What say you Nick?

[NickMNS]

@anefarious1, I was so wrong. This article proves it. Specially the disclaimer:

SIDENOTE. Please treat the results of the above experiments with a grain of salt because featured snippets aren't the single contributing factor to both CTR and Clicks/Volume ratio of a search query. And the numbers vastly vary from keyword to keyword, while we're giving you averages across a large sample. But the general takeaways do seem to make a lot of sense nonetheless.

The only source capable of testing this is Google as they are the only ones that have access to the required data. Anyone else trying to measure such a thing must make big assumptions the will lack statistical rigor.

Even considering all the shortcomings of the study, it still doesn't prove that all sites will loose revenue as a result of the appearance of the featured snippet. The study shows that some users will click on the featured snippet instead of the first result. 26% click on the first result without the feature snippet. With the feature snippet, 9% click on the featured snippet, 20% on the first result. So if you occupy the first result and the featured snippet you clicks increase by 3%. Assuming (and this is a big assumption) fewer people end up clicking with featured snippet, you have not only increased your CTR by 3% but you have also filtered out un-engaged users, so you get a higher quality audience.

Assume now that you rank 1st but don't appear in the featured snippet. Then your CTR drops from 26% to 20% and that 6% go directly to the website that is featured.

So feel free to stay out of the featured snippet, I will work on getting featured, because at worst the CTR of engaged users will increase 3% at worst and at best 6%.

[MrSavage]

...under the false pretense that the scraping AI doesn't improve as we move along. Its also false to assume that the box won't grow and thus do an even better job at answering the inquiry to the point there is no need to click through. Its take a little, take a little, take a little more.

[anefarious1]

Let's say there's a particular niche that gets 100 million searches on Google each month. Let's say the percentage of those queries receiving a rich snippet answer box has been increasing to the point where it is now at 70% or 70 million monthly. This depends a lot on how users word their searches but that's another topic.. Anyway, let's say half of those results no longer receive any click thru whatsoever because the answer box is sufficient for these users.

That means Google that reduced overall traffic to these niche websites, as a whole, by 35% or down to 65 million from 100 million. It's true that some websites in the niche could actually receive a bump in traffic, but overall most websites will see a noticeable decline.

The biggest traffic declines are experienced by websites that are ranked highest in the results (measured over time during the increased roll out of answer boxes). They stand to lose the most, regardless if they are featured in the answer boxes or not.

If it is not true then Google is failing to achieve their objective with answer boxes. This is just common sense. There is no proof needed. If you understand that Google is transitioning from a librarian of data (pointing users to websites on the WORLD WIDE WEB) to a source ITSELF for information then you should understand it will negatively affect website traffic. Anyone arguing otherwise is just arguing for argument's sake. I like to play devil's advocate sometimes too. It's fun.

By the way, there are a ridiculous amount of Google searches that are done in the form of a question. These are especially where Google is focusing and the number of niches with answer boxes are expanding more and more at a rapid pace. These people generally have extremely short attention spans (many not capable of reading a full article) and Google is catering to them. As answer boxes improve over time many more high traffic information based websites will begin to feel it soon enough.

[keyplyr]

...there are a ridiculous amount of Google searches that are done in the form of a question. These are especially where Google is focusing...

Not only reflected by the Answer Box but AI results from voice search via mobile device and Google Home. In fact most voice queries are questions. IMO this trend will continue and may become a dynamic in the way SERP evolve.

For many sites, moving away from keywords to answer based structured data may be the best approach to stay relevant.

[RedBar]

This has been an interesting tennis match however Google has a known precedent and that is images.

It is generally accepted that after their image theft most image-related sites lost 95% of their traffic, certainly I went within the space of a few months from 100+K image pages per day down to ~5K. Granted that was a full roll-out of image results whereas the Answer Box is only partial at present, however if the same were to happen then I feel there would only be one inevitability with many sites not being able to justify their continuation.

[frankleeceo]

@keyplyr

Are there any reading materials or information on answer based structured data? You have mentioned it several times in different occasions, but I am having hard time grasping it. Is it a specific way of setting up sites / content? Is it the flow of content / UX? Or just simple markups? How does it help against Answer Box theft? If the site becomes fully answer based and being able to be answered in short terms / phrases, wouldn't that just be easier to be dominated /replaced by the answer box?

@ RedBar

I agree with you, during early stages of Image search it was actually helping webmaster by having better exposure and CTR, but as it matures, it got fully expanded and UX added, rendering sites that provide the images almost irrelevant. The same thing appears to be happening here. During this relatively early stages of Answer box and rich snippet results, it is indeed helping the person landing on top of those results. But with the full eventual roll out, sites will become irrelevant as well.

As a User personally searching almost hundreds of queries on alot of topics per day researching for my vertical, I am bypassing 80% of my searches, when the rich snippet has the answer I want. I grab that answer, and completely skip the sites. If the snippet did not exist, the individual sites would have gotten CTR / traffic from me. If the rich results can take care of the other 20%, I will skip individual sites completely.

[frankleeceo]

All in all, I think there's only 1 strategy to counter this Google movement.

1. Work hard to get into that featured spot, it's in essence just ranking game / exposure as usual. Position 0 is well...just higher than position 1.

2. Work hard so that your site does not get replaced by the answer box.

The two does not really in conflict of each other. I believe the key is recognize that Answer Box does have the potential to replace sites. It might or it might not, but I rather bet that it will and generate my strategy accordingly.

[keyplyr]

First of all, you're not going to defeat Google's Answer Box. All indication shows it may be increasing in use and here to stay.

Using answer based structured data [developers.google.com] is not a weapon against the Answer Box. It's not as singular as that. It is merely one approach to gain more control with AI results in SERP, especially with user voice input.

[browndog]

All in all, I think there's only 1 strategy to counter this Google movement.

1. Work hard to get into that featured spot, it's in essence just ranking game / exposure as usual. Position 0 is well...just higher than position 1.

2. Work hard so that your site does not get replaced by the answer box.

The two does not really in conflict of each other. I believe the key is recognize that Answer Box does have the potential to replace sites. It might or it might not, but I rather bet that it will and generate my strategy accordingly.

I'm doing both, working 7 days a week, 10-12 hours a day and have gone backwards. My site tanked when I upgraded (to make it responsive and keep visitors/Google happy), and when I spoke to Adsense about that, they said it was a sudden drop in valid traffic (because Analytics didn't change), and I should spend more money on marketing and add more content.

In the past few years, I have added hundreds more articles, making sure they tick all the boxes. A brief explanation at the top for the TL;DR people and answer box, unique images, engaging content, focusing on readability and my son now earns more per hour than I do for his paper round. In fact, I just cleaned out his bank account to pay for an SSL certificate because I don't have the $40.

Working hard doesn't always work. I still see one site in the answer box 80% of the time, followed by an additional 2, 3 or 4 links in the results. You just can't compete with that.

I look for employment because my income is now completely unsustainable, but it is hard to find work when I've been self-employed for so many years. I use my own site as a reference for what I've been doing, but that doesn't really translate in the real world where I'm looking for reception/admin type work.

I know I'm not the only one. I also realise Google will continue to take a bigger slice of the pie, but I do think small players such as myself will eventually be forced out, leaving only the giant/generic sites.

[anefarious1]

@browndog

What niche is your website in? It's strange though that your analytics does not show a drop in traffic? I don't understand that. Anyway, I can sympathize with everything else you said. Your website is being phased out due to several factors. You can expect it to continue but don't feel so bad. Even websites with hired staff do have content that gets very little actual traffic.

[browndog]

@anefarious1, pets.

My analytics didn't drop, I went from 4,000 desktop and 10,000 mobile to 14,000 overall, but Google told me I had a huge drop in valid traffic and there was nothing I could do to prove otherwise. They would not reveal more because they need to protect their advertisers. Add more content and spend money on marketing was their advice.

The beauty of the Internet is it created an even playing field for everyone, I could sit alongside Cornell University, but it's changed. Big brands dominate and Google's need for constant growth means they are taking more and more from webmasters. The link in this thread (I think) about the wealth of famous people is a great (and sad) example.

It's not just that. It's ad blockers, less ads showing for people on mobile, ad blindness, apps...it's a changing world. My husband has supported me with his set aside tax money, but the sad reality is that I need a job. I can't compete when a search endine repeatedly returns 3-4 results for the same website on page one.

[MayankParmar]

I hate the fact that Google shows a article on answer box and that same article is repeated below the search box as a normal SERP.

[browndog]

I've also noticed if I search for common human diseases, Google covers the entire topic in more detail on the right hand side of the search page. Much more information is provided than the answer box. There are tabs to click which provides additional information, still on the search page on the right. I think this is the way Google will go for the majority of content in future, so the entire topic can be viewed on there, not just a snippet. Under sources it says XYZ site and others.

[anefarious1]

There a very interesting discussion about this very topic here:

[webmasterworld.com...]

Some webmasters get it and some don't.. yet. IMO this is the biggest yet least discussed topic regarding Search. The discussion will increase big time in 2018.

[EditorialGuy]

There's a current discussion of this topic at:

[webmasterworld.com...]

In that thread, I've linked to a Search Engine Watch article that's worth reading:

[searchenginewatch.com...]

The SEW article includes some interesting nuggets of information, such as:

...let’s dive into our data analysis. On average, the Google Answer Box secures an astounding 32.3 percent CTR.

The article also describes the "answer box" algorithm, which (in a nutshell) is designed to feature answers from pages that have in-depth information and answer "halo" (surrounding or supplementary) questions. That makes sense, because in terms of the user experience, there isn't much value in encouraging users to click through to pages that have no more information than the answer box does. (This is pretty much the same approach that a good writer or editor uses when deciding which third-party resources to cite in links from an article.)

The key takeaway, IMO, is that "answer boxes" can represent an opportunity, not just a threat. My own top landing pages (in terms of traffic) are pages that are featured in Google "answer boxes," and traffic on those pages has continued to increase. Of course, as always, YMMV (depending on the query, the nature of your content, and dumb luck).

[EditorialGuy]

Addendum (if only because this is the AdSense forum, after all):

If your page about multilingual voice-activated lawn mowers is featured in an answer box, you'll see more traffic on that page, and (in theory, at least) such traffic should skew toward motivated users who are researching that topic--not just "drive-by" users. In other words, "answer box" traffic and AdSense ads should complement each other nicely.