That's the way of the internet. Google isn't the be-all end-all of the internet, and I'm kind of glad I spent a lot of time rarely posting on the forums because there is so much worry about Google this and Google that. Yeah, I know it did cause a big hit, but that's why you gotta be a hustler. Keep doing what you're doing and keep the money rolling in. If Google is hurting you, find other ways that help you. Diversify and write articles at many different places, not just Hubpages. Get people's attention and build up your backlinks not for Google purposes, but for the purposes of people finding your article through those backlinks themselves. Make other people want to backlink to your articles. Write on what you're an expert about and what you know works instead of playing with all of the SEO confusion trying to game Google. Think about Hubpages and any other article writing sites you may use as if you are preparing to succeed without Google. The internet is going social, so take advantage of it.
I actually remembering using the internet before Google appeared. It was not easy.
I used something called Dogpile to work my way through the results of one lousy search engine after another- things like Lycos and Alta Vista.
Google was a revelation. It made the net relevant. Later, it also made it possible to make money- which gave the internet a future.
The fact that Google stands head and shoulders above every other search engine is hardly Google's fault. Google's competitors have never really competed.
I generally agree will you, Will. Though I still think that it was healthier when there were 6 search engines fighting it out. Google came along and won out because they were more appealing than the others. But monopolies are never a good thing for any market. Especially the internet, where innovation is vital to its success.
True, and that's why it's naive to say "don't worry about Google". True, it is possible to get real people following links on forums and blogs about your chosen topic. But it's nowhere near the volume of readers you can get via Google.
Whether we like it or not, most people use Google to find stuff online. If they don't use Google, they use Yahoo or Bing. If your article isn't listed on those search engines, it doesn't matter how much other "hustling" you do, you're never going to get the big traffic you need to make money. And I don't see any reason that will change any time soon. That's why we all worry about Google so much!
My point is that the worry about Google causes people to become discouraged and distracted and lose drive, and forget that even with all of the crap that has been happening, it is still entirely possible to get ranked on Google and on the other search engines.
Evan, you certainly bring up some good points in your post about google. You will have to get yourself out there and get noticed by others as mentioned. The best way to do that, is to post some new and fresh articles on a few other sites. As addictive and hard for me to get away from the HP community, I am seriously thinking about joining other sites such as Info barrel, Squidoo and Wizzley. These sites in addition will assist in getting traffic to your articles, as well as people noticing more of your work.
That is true, I used to write for eHow for a few years, and they closed the writer's compensation program. Fortunately, I was offered a very generous settlement to purchase my content, but I did lose that monthly source of income. It is important to diversify!
This is good advice and many of us will do well just continuing to do what we are doing. Write! write! write!. In as many places as we can.
I don't feel like dissipating my energy worrying about Big Daddy G! any more.
When things reach bottom, they can only rise back up again, in good time.
Who knows, if/when thing get better, we'll all be (ing) to the bank every month.
I thought Alta Vista was a very good search engine in its heyday. Using the advanced mode, it was possible to get a far better refinement of searches than I have ever succeeded getting with Google. However, it was a tool for those who understood how to combine operators to produce very precise search statements. As such, it was not usable by the great unwashed, which doubtlessly contributed to its demise.
I miss being able to "search this search." and now you just can't search for things that have the word 'and' in them. if put a + or qoutes in my search, google tells me not to do that.
I always liked the "near" operator, myself.
There was a time when searching for and managing information was seen as an important task. Some of us spent time, intellectual effort and money becoming qualified to do so.
The Internet gave everyone the idea that all this could be done for free and with no effort.
We are now living with the consequences.
A company I worked for in the late 70's actually paid for me to take a couple of courses in "Search" (finance/business, technical, and general). It was "The New Thing" and some Corporate Planning people were taking the courses. You're right. It was "good money" that they spent (thousands). The Internet didn't exist. There were only individual, high-priced, databases.
Later I left the company and eventually started doing freelance work when my kids were little. Eventually, every ten-year-old and his sister were searching, and I made sure I no longer included what was once just a little bit "cutting edge" on my resume because by then it just "looked stupid". Very recently I've discovered that Google has people who have Ph.D's in "Search". Now, I'm thinking, "Gee. Maybe I ought to put those courses in "Search" back on my resume." (Nah.. I found it fairly unbearable back then and still find it pretty unbearable today. Oh well... One man's "fascinating" is another man's "unbearable".
Using all the features on Google's search is one of the keys to writing well online.
If you haven't searched discussions, images, video and news as well as 'everything'(plus recent) you have not done your research well.
Of course, if you have a library you can do even better. I live in the jungle (literally), so those facilities are out of the question for me.
I personally think the best search facility on Google is Scholar.
Video is only relevant if you feel you must stick a video on a given hub. Forum discussions can be useful very rarely, but unless you know quite a lot about the subject beforehand, it is difficult to avoid picking up unreliable or downright inaccurate information.
Discussions are often the the most important element in search. You will find which questions people most want answering. You will also find the answers themselves, often enough, if you can can weigh the validity of offerings.
If that is not possible you need to go dig around.
Scholar is limited by pay walls. Which is a shame.
I would never use a piece of information obtained from a forum without having verified it from an authoritative source, or preferably a number of reliable sources.
I think it depends on what you're writing about - I recently had to write an article about caravan cooking and I got a vast amount of very useful information from a forum thread on that subject. In certain cases, first hand knowledge from people who've actually done the subject you're writing about is an absolute lifesaver!
But yeah, if you're writing about open heart surgery or MRI scanning then you tend not to find what you're looking for in a forum.
I have a hub about hip replacement recovery. I reckon it is probably the best resource on the net for anyone getting a new hip- not because of the very workman-like article, but because it has well over a thousand comments from people who have been through the whole thing. Some of the contributers are pretty expert in their areas.
Here is one reason why I think Google is utter c__p as a search engine.
Just now, I needed to verify some terminology for a journal article I am translating, so I search on: insonant
Without even asking if this is OK, Google returns pages containing the term "in sonata".
I have to start again, using +insonant in order to force the search to be on the term I need.
I do not see why I have to waste extra time re-entering search terms just because Google assumes its users cannot spell and provides search results for a completely different and irrelevant term.
And yes, "insonant" is a term used in ultrasonography
Panda, Panda Panda. Do any of you know that links are STILL used to determine the most relevant result? The only difference is that you can no longer build huge amount of links from crummy websites and expect it to help - your links have to come from website with decent Pagerank and that discuss the same keyword or it's cousins. People heard that GOogle did an update and think that the entire world is changed forever - it changed TWO PERCENT OF SEARCH RESULTS PEOPLE!! TWO!
Google does NOT, I repeat does NOT know how to completely change their algorithm to be focused on social networks yet, and Panda did NOT make that happen. Still, their algorithm is a few years ahead of the other search engines, and the others probably wont catch up. And if they do - Google will buy them out easy as that.
Google makes millions through selling books they don't have the rights to. They also record our Wifi login information and sell it to other countries for their phone books and whatnot using their Google cars. They pick up Wifi connection as well as your address, business name etc. then set that right into a database to make more money. Google's plane constantly flies over your head. I've heard about deals being made with China and Google (the only actual threat to America right now that we all ignore). Google Apps hosts thousands of resources used by big business and individuals alike. Google Wallet didn't come out I don't think, but even that had a bunch of hype. They also own Youtube and just about every other major website you can think of.
Google is a monster and we should all be very, very scared.
Panda hasn't been mentioned in this thread so far, so it seemed a bit of a non sequitur.
I suppose this is as good a place for Google rant as any, lol.
ehh. Agreed, but I think the only reason this post is here is because of the Panda update, hence the "big hit" from Google.
I've been spending much of my time on Hubpages explaining some of these SEO concepts and whatever else. The average hubber just doesn't have the same knowledge as the average blogger or webmaster, but they sure talk about Panda alot.
Either way, sorry for the rant Lol - true spit though Google is a beast
Well the thread does mention Google twice in its title, or rather: "Google" and "Googl"!
Hey don't drag me into this increasingly heated debate, I was just making a moronic comment, not taking sides!
LOL Very sorry lmao - May the court understand that there is no relation or affiliation between Paul and Paul
((Oh sure jump in for a minute and leave me here to get crucified.))
This is definitely the most entertaining and irrational thread of the day. I don't have a clue what anyone is talking about.
It's become a moral issue now I think lol - anyhoo it was nice talking withya Will. My whole angle was that everyone seems to be looking for the new direction to take when the trail is still pretty much the same.
After that I got caught up in the idea of the internet *after* Google, which I don't think they plan on ever seeing down at Google HQ.
You were completely correct in the misplaced post on my end though - a lot of what I said probably could have found a more useful home on another thread
Complaining about Google (if you are a writer online) is like a sailor complaining that the sea is wet.
*teaching* not complaining, but Google is actually a very malicious company bottom line and I just don't approve of that in any situation. If you check the first remark I left, you will see I was more on the explaining side of things.
When Google starts pouring Google Goo into the ocean, you can bet it'll make the sailors and online writers pretty upset. I have no problem with them improving their search engine, unfortunately that is but a small blip on Google's ginormous radar.
Although it has to be said that the sea is much less vulnerable to legal action than Google, which often becomes more amenable after it has been sued. Unfortunately, large companies like Microsoft and governments are the only entities with the resources to take them on in court, however, generally speaking.
Your totally playing the outside game on this threat Paul haha cant say that I blame you . Google has been getting slapped with quite a few lawsuits as of late, but the amount of money they are racking in is just impossible to go against. I think they are building quite a political presence for themselves as well..Not hard to do when your rolling in dough..Most companies or even governments would probably have better luck trying to audit the Atlantic.
If writers started submitting their work to other search engines on a regular basis,there could be a big difference...I think people are afraid to anger the Google Gods..
A rant in reply to a rant (so needless to say, skip over this if you're not interested in another off-topic rant - but this one's been building ever since Panda seemed to get a lot of "backs up"; so PaulPD0, your post, alone, isn't the cause of this rant. It's more of a straw-that-broke-the-camel's-back" kind of thing. ) (and apologies for going off thread-topic)
In reply to PaulPD0's first post:
A lot of people (including me) know that decent links still matter. (I ought to know because I don't backlink and awfully close to all my traffic comes from search engines only, but for my purposes on here I'm fine with that for now.) People shouldn't assume other people don't know stuff.
to the second one:
Most people are similarly concerned about at least some of the issues raised; but you know what.. Plane overhead or no plane overhead, there are still ways people can build themselves a good, solid, roof that (at least to the extent that some compromises that are going on in a technological world, and completely unrelated to Google, all combine to make the strength of such a "roof" limited in some ways). Most people know that the only way to keep some info private is not to use any company that uses technology at all; and a lot of others are more than aware that if they use some Internet-related services they'd better not put a lot of other kinds of private info out there in the first place.
to the third one:
Nobody's "forced to use Ad Sense", but if they want to earn money from it then it's pretty reasonable that the people paying the money decide what they'll pay for, what they won't, and what isn't going to do well in their searches. Nobody has to be afraid of Panda - just adjust to it. Nobody has to use Google - just earn money for their writing some other way or else through search engines that don't have "a Panda".
to the remark about "the average Hubber" versus "the average blogger or webmaster":
You can't just what "the average Hubber" really knows or doesn't by conversations on here. They either arrive to the conversation because they know nothing about SEO-type stuff, a little, or else they know more than they show through a particular conversation. Many, of course, know little and want to learn more; and they'll show up in such conversations. With "average bloggers and websmasters", people who are likely to be those who are already more interested in SEO-type stuff and/or already more involved with. What you don't see (in whatever conversations you have/run into) are either people who already know more than you do and don't join in such conversations, or else people who know nothing and aren't interested in learning anything else or talking more about it. Either way, your view of what's "average" probably isn't accurate. So, again, be careful about assuming things about who knows what.
Since HubPages is a mix of people who earn through Ad Sense it's pretty reasonable that so many talk about Panda and Google. Personally, I've at times been really tempted to post a thread like, "Don't any of you people know that there's a writing world outside of search engines and the Internet in general," but I refrained from it because 1) I know most know that, and 2) respect their choice to approach their own writing efforts in their own way and for their own reasons. I don't assume they "don't know". We all have our buttons that get us to post rants. It's apparently Panda for some people. With me, it's when people assume others don't know stuff that a good number really do know (but choose not to emphasize or talk about).
In the meantime, it's already been established that "Panda" is one subject and "Search" is another. (There's nothing wrong with trying to "explain". Sometimes, though, people appoint themselves "teacher" because they underestimate what others know/realize already and tend to assume they're one of a few who know something. On top of that, many self-appointed "teachers" approach "explaining" in a way that lacks the interpersonal skills that make the difference between a real teacher and a self-appointed one. To be honest, the original post in question comes across as someone still hurting the from the fall that took place when Panda pulled a big chunk of rug out from under him. A good number of us went through it and a good number are still trying to figure out how to make sure the same kind of thing doesn't happen again - which is why I would be a lot nicer if more people respected everyone else, rather than feeling quite so free (and "superior-in-knowing" enough) to treat "everyone else" as if they're a bunch of know-nothings. (Not only do those Paul's need to stick together - everyone else really could stand a little more "sticking together" too these days.)
The first part I don't understand because you said you don't use links and you think they still matter, so I don't know what to say there.
As far as you building a roof to protect from the plane, I don't really know what to say there either. And the plane really isn't the important issue there, read the other stuff. Instead of laying over and saying that we can't use technology if we don't want to be robbed of our personal information, why cant we say these type of acts need to be controlled? We did it with guns, why not malicious internet acts done by big business?
And yes, I am forced to use Adsense because Amazon affiliates strangely became illegal in California one day, like I said earlier. I could always go pick up another profession, but that is way besides the point.
And since Hubpages is such a simple platform to use it can only be expected that the wide majority of people that use it are unaware of how to actually profit through affiliate marketing, and rather just excited by the idea of it. Just because you say you know some stuff doesn't mean that I can no longer explain it to other people - avert your eyes.
"Search" is dominated by Google - "Panda" is Google's most recent update - ..search = Google = Panda.
Also, I mentioned that Google is stealing literary works and profiting from them without rights to these books, so there you go for other aspects of writing outside of Google lol they own entire University libraries literally.
E-book market is also dominated by Google and their control over "search" is control over a whole lot more than you think.
And I actually wasn't affected by Panda at all, I was saying the opposite.
Only the student can speak of the abilities of their teacher, and since you already know it all I guess you wouldn't be in the position to be the student - I think I actually explain things pretty darn well, but then again I am not the student here either.
Lisa: If you know all of this stuff then maybe you are not the average hubber - I am not categorizing anyone or attempting to make you feel as if I am talking to you directly, no harm meant really. I think your getting a little too caught up in the terminology I used instead of the point I wanted to get across. ALOT of people on HP and all over the internet think that the Panda update entirely changed everything we know about Google, and this is just not true. If you already know this then that is fantastic for you, not so fantastic for the people you are discouraging me from explaining it to.
i got suckered . i was like lets see what satub has to say . seems to be posting .
15 minutes ago !
by Katherine Tyrrell61 minutes ago
This is worth a read Updated Google Quality Rater Guidelines target fake news, low quality and clickbait"It includes a link to Google's REVISED (March 2017) Search Quality - General GuidelinesIn terms...
by Will Apse4 years ago
There is a lot of SEO related stuff about Panda in these forums, so here is something about quality and the kinds of content Google is trying to find and offer to searchers:It comes from Amit Singhal, Google Fellow and...
by Adrienne Janet Farricelli2 years ago
So if I look at my Google DMCA dashboard, several of the websites reported for copying my hubs show as "approved" and no longer pending, but if I go on the link, it's still live, and these are links I...
by Ellen5 years ago
1. Relevance to search query2. Quality of content3. User experience4. Relevance to search query5. Authority of author (I hope Hubpages gets rel="me" working.)6. Relevance to search query7. Who's linking to...
by Paul Maplesden4 years ago
We all know that there's so much competition to rank in search engines, and we've all heard that 'content is king', but what does that *really* mean?What it means is that Google is now placing much more importance on...
by FootballNut10 months ago
With the Ad Program service Hubpages offer, to benefit all writers and Hubpages what is the possibility of allowing Hubpage members access to the hosted Adverts in the Hubpages Ad Program?Is there potential that members...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.