I have kept quiet about this for a while now, but after the Panda update I saw my traffic drop a little then normalize (as expected after any Google update).
However since I made the changes required by Hubpages (and I assume changes enforced upon everybody else) I have seen steadily declining traffic, until I checked in on Google analytics today to see a steep drop to my first day in a long time on Hubpages with less than 1000 page views.
I am not going to rage/quit, but I do think that Hubpages need to be careful with sweeping changes to an update, when there is still a lot of debate as to what the update changed (Keyfactors being supported the most at pubcon and AS 201l, and SEOmoz seem to point towards social signals and duplicate content being the biggest deciding factors, not amazon ratio's etc).
While I am all for improving Hubpages quality, I think the steps being taken need to be reviewed of other people (Not just me, in which case it is on my shoulders) are seeing similar drops in traffic post-update.
I must agree, it seems any search results return rubbish and are completely off the mark.
We humans searches for everything via search engines and now all we can find is nothing more than a few e answers that are weak and irrelevant. GOOD POINT!
google update has gone global from two days and so we are seeing huge drop...first update was applicable to google.com only but now it is applicable every where...
is the amazon/ebay capsule - words ratio implemented to increase SERP ranking or just to accommodate the new HP ADs program and google adsense ads - limiting outgoing links?
They mentioned it was down to hubs with high ad to text ratios being affected by the Panda update more, personally I htink this correlation has been missunderstood, since low quality writers are more likely to use high numbers of ads. Unfortunately the change scoops up higher quality writers, who use competitive ad placements.
I don't think it is to do with the Hubpages ad program.
Oli, and Maita, I haven't even seen a sniff of the new Ad program from Hub Pages and I don't know if it is any use. If you guys are trying it out, let me know... But reading this does worry me here. My website traffic has gone upwards in other areas but not in the hubs. I don't trust the Big G like I used to, and my hub earnings are reflecting that accordingly...
The use of "White lists" by Google and Bing is another source of annoyance to me. It makes the whole Panda thing a sick joke.
By ad to text ratio we are talking about the amount of text you need in relation to ebay/amazon capsules. The Hubpages Program is something different, that gives a fairly decent return.
What I'm seeing now is greatly reduced from how I was seeing the HubPages Ads perform in February.
I think we've got a few weeks before the full effect of the global Panda rollout permeates everything.
Are you still running it? I was hoping to get a month of comparison with last month by turning it off for this month - but - now my traffic has changed again I suspect it will be a worthless comparison and I will have to run the HP program again to get a better one.
I am still running it because this rollout is changing everything and I need fewer big bounces to see what's going on. I'm going on the road in May, which means I won't be touching any of my web properties for several weeks, so that's probably when I'll start doing some definitive experiments.
I can have a clean couple of weeks where I don't even look at the stats, then just come back and can view a nice chunk of data that accumulated while I was away.
Sounds like a plan. I have no idea where things are either. I ran it for a month last month then turned it off this month to compare. Oh well......
Yeah... I hear you on that. I figured the other Google shoe needed to fall (the international Panda rollout) or things were just going to change all over again.
And now they have.
Yeah - I was hoping to get a month. This second change has not really affected me as badly as the first one because I was making most of my income here with Amazon and when the US traffic went bye-bye I lost most of the income I was going to lose. A few hundred adsense dollars is neither here nor there and easily made up from increases on my own sites.
I am starting to sell my own banner ads instead. This business of waiting to see what Google/Amazon/Ebay decides to pay me this month is starting to wear thin.
Hi Cassie, I would like to cut the HP ads for four weeks to test it, but I didn't do it. Que sera. After the second Panda update, don't think O can test it more.
The mean earning is stable for the HP ads, doesn't fluctuate as much.
I think it's going to take minimum six months and maybe two years to get hub pages back to where it was. It depends on several factors, the biggest one being simply that Google changes its logarithms back to where content farms are given more recognition. I posted several news articles earlier today to show who gained traffic and who last traffic. Essentially, newspapers, print magazines, tv stations were given preference over content farms. There were a few exceptions. I truly cannot see an overnight change happening here...
Most media sites are thought to have experienced a boost in SEO due to high social activities with FB/Twitter.
Ah yes, and since everything posted on social network sites is always clean, accurate info, they should indeed be boosted.
Hence the argument that content farms should rank lower may have truth to it, but certainly shouldn't be penalized when social network sites are essentially gossip columns splattered with op eds from a few internet rags. Doesn't add up. But if it's that way, then the message is to capitalize on social network sites.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'media' sites. Content farms are also media sites..
If you take CNN and then take a look at the tweets/facebook activity (And yes number of organic backlinks) you will see a distinct difference to the social activity on Hubpages.
thisisoli. I have no idea what you are talking about. There is no way that you and I can measure what is happening. I posted some links this morning in a thread which measured which sites and increases and decreases. By measured, I mean software programs were used to do the calculations.
I'm also not sure what you mean by social activity on hubpages. Are you speaking about the forums? I also don't understand what that has to do with our articles losing traffic. Sorry, I think I've lost something here in the translation...
Sophia, I have a large portfolio of sites which allows me to make some pretty good guesses, and I am friends with some of the biggest names in IM/SEO which means I also get to know first hand what their results are showing.
I am also a member of sites such as SEOMoz which provide some very in depth information to subscribers, and they do a lot of technical research.
The data I am talking about has been discussed in depth at both Pubcon and affiliate summit, both of which happened just after the initial Panda update where I was able to talk and find out about the experiences of hundred of other large scale webmasters.
The Sistrix report is unfortunately woefully inaccurate, many people have reported on how it contains very poor results which do not actually match what actually exists in search results (Not to mention they have an incredibly small data collection to work with).
By social media I am referring in the most part to Facebook and Twitter. Both Google and Bing have publicly stated that they have purchased access to the twitter firehose, and both of them use publicly available Facebook data in determining the Algorithm for SERPs.
A story on CNN for instance would get at least a couple of hundred 'likes'. An article on Hubpages would most likely get one or two.
so, if the CNN articles gets more facebook likes and Hub Pages only gets two, doesn't that prove what Sistrix was saying? That CNN has increased its hits and most content farms have decreased their hits.?
There may be some correlations, I was merely stating that the source is unreliable.
No, as that particular metric would have already been leaning towards the big media sites. They could even have suffered less in the update as a result of the social integrity they display.
If HP and content farms lose search visibility they will of course also lose social "shares" but that is after the fact.
In HP's hey day , we still didn't even come close on the social media sharing front to any media site.
I think you are also missing the point of my entire post, which was that there is a lot of reliable data out there from webmasters to help us draw some pretty concise conclusions as to what has happened with the Google Panda update.
plus all the 'likes' and 'tweets' these sites (CNN, NYT, etc.) gain from their hundreds of articles. I remember reading that last month.
and the articles are retweeted by thousands...
This is because they employ a team of people to do this sort of work. I was offered a job doing this recently - the pay was lousy.
Already signed up for a service to click the +1 button google has added for the spammers to rate up their pages.
This is what I said in the first place. Rupert Murdoch pressured google in this by blocking the Google bot from WSJ and The Times. He threatened to block ALL his sites from the Google bot. As did all the other "media moguls."
They were caught out by the sudden rise in popularity of hubpages-type sites and want their traffic back so he can tell the sheeple what to think and who to vote for.
It is a new game and we need to adapt.
Money, sex and power.
All is right in the world.
This being forced by Rupert makes Google a disgusting and vile organization. This organization has no power to stand up to the crap sites.
Rupert Murdoch is a terrorist who knew about 911 before it happened. I suggest Google is being threatened by a very odious creature. People are not getting the best information from Google now. They are promoting pure propaganda at the top of their search.
For the record I know that Google Panda rolled out to English speaking countries on the 11th, however the traffic drop does not correlate accurately with this, and looking at my stats the drop I have suffered is in US traffic as well as other countries.
Oli -- My traffic had just about gone back to normal (sort of -- still lacking in US traffic) when Panda was rolled out to all of the other English-speaking countries the other day. My new downward traffic spiral is just reflective of the new rollout I believe.
I think the changes that HP made aren't enough as there's still waaaay too much old garbage out there to allow us to regain any credibility. I also think it's too soon for any changes to have any effect whatsoever, even if we had thoroughly cleaned house.
Just my two cents fwiw...
My traffic more or less recovered after Panda US. I am expecting it recover from the latest changes too. There are no guarantees of course. It's just wait and see. Then panic later. Or not.
I had no required changes to make as suggested by HP (no Amazon items or duplicate content to resolve), and only one Hub to change for having used too many tags. However, I did remove RSS and News capsules from nearly all my Hubs. After Panda my traffic decreased about 60 percent and has never returned.
My experience is much like yours. I had very little to change, and did not get anything banned, because I was in compliance with the new rules to begin with. I was also not that good at marketing, and my hubs were geared toward Google search, rather than products.
It's almost as if Hubpages now wish more people were like me, and are trying to make them churn out hubs more like mine. And yet they can't possibly make money that way, because I never made much money. Google and Amazon always rewarded the other style of hubbing much more, both with traffic and sales.
And I have suffered, too, because my traffic is way down, as the site is still being penalized.
I seriously doubt that all the changes are to do with the Google issue, beneath it is the new Hubpages ad strategy. Maybe the reason we are not seeing sound constant advice coming out of HP headquarters.
From SEO Moz and other authoratitive sources the changes that HP are making (in relation to Google) may not be close enough to the mark to make any appreciable difference - they will of course help to fill the financial void that has appeared I guess, and if I was being kind - would say for both HP and hubbers.
For what it is worth - my poetry hubs are getting increasing views every day it seems, coinciding directly with the Google changes. Tiny viewing figures in comparison to the money oriented people here - but doubling on the first change and rising steeply again on the second !!!!
My personal sites are all doing great after the update. Many of them did extremely well and then normalized. The only sites I owned which suffered were my test bed sites with no unique content. These sites also had little Social (FB Twitter) incorporation so looking back on what large scale tests have indicated, this may also have harmed them.
I stated from the get-go that a knee jerk reaction would be a mistake, most sites which just rode the wave have normalized (Though I did agree with removing duplicate articles (While allowing exceptions for quotes, lists, etc)).
My worries at the moment are that the mass changes have caused some serious issues with SERPs, and a huge concern is that the unpublishing of many users pages to do with ad unit ratios (I know several high traffic hubbers over here only managed to get some of the portfolio fixed before their hubs were unpublished) has drastically reduced the amount of traffic generating content on Hubpages, which is negatively affecting us all further.
I have enjoyed Hubpages for a long time, but I am not seeing any other site where I have high traffic portfolios suffer as much as here right now.
Trouble is, Oli, I'm not able to find any real alternatives to HP right now, that aren't also potentially take some hits during this bitch-slap fest between Google and Bing/Yahoo. I think in the end, everyone is going to get penalized at least briefly till the dust settles, and as long as Bing/Yahoo gain ground, we could all get slapped around a lot. So I'm sitting tight, not doing much here, but trying to develop other options in other areas as well.
are your other sites older than HP perhaps?? and no duplicate content. Here they are currently cleaning up the site, take some time perhaps to recover. Plus they just introduced FB here less than a year ago. Some duplicate contents, spam, over promotions/using HP as backlinks hubs here are putting down other hubs!! Content farms are being replaced by UGC.
@recommend1 Congrats on your poetry hubs, like Mark Knowles religious hubs (assumption - Xtians don't duplicate or copy content), perhaps they are less copied, LOL
Don't be silly - most of their hubs are copied out of the bible. I would bet the majority is duplicate content.
A few of my sites are older, but many are younger, than hubpages.
K. I think that Google can't really rank contents based on what they are saying - just quality content. I gather from what I read and researches that results are varied. The G likes to point out that we are the ones rating sites by how we interact with it when we visit a site, layout, content, duration of visit, block the site or not, likes - Facebook or we tweet them - twitter. The Google employee Biswanath Panda who studied "learning tree" (there was a forum before stressed by SF about the learning tree) and whose study was probably used by these updates implied that this is an unfinished and ongoing updates, so ranking is never permanent. It is updated everytime a user visits a site. (this is just my opinion).
And of course there are some politics which we will never know. G is a business.
Plus of course, we are coming to an age where some technology and gadgets, somehow contents and ads must comply to the specifications.
As mentioned, I know the panda update rolled out to all English speaking countries, however the drops I am seeing include a huge amount of US traffic, not global.
Another thought worth mentioning is that if Hubpages made all these changes to rectify for the Panda update, and yet they still lost traffic for the UK/other english speaking countries rollout, then it would indicate that the changes made did not target the key factors that were in the original panda update to US searches.
There are two roll outs, the first is the international panda roll out, but Google announced a roll out of another algorithm update in the US at the same time (one that will affect 2% of query, extending the panda algorithm to longer tail searches)
Will take a look in to this, is there an official google release? I must have missed it!
See http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot. … -goes.html
". In some high-confidence situations, we are beginning to incorporate data about the sites that users block into our algorithms. In addition, this change also goes deeper into the “long tail” of low-quality websites to return higher-quality results where the algorithm might not have been able to make an assessment before. The impact of these new signals is smaller in scope than the original change: about 2% of U.S. queries are affected by a reasonable amount"
Thanks, will look further in to this today!
I'm curious - even though this quote indicated that it would affect a very small percentage of queries, would it still be worth deliberately using the Google site-blocking tool to give input to the G algorithm? I generally avoid using G as a search engine. But, I'm thinking that if I'm willing to spend time in Hub-hopping and flagging (which most Hubbers seem to agree has a limited impact so far), then maybe I should install the Google toolbar so that I can communicate to Google which sites I truly do not want to show up in my search results. Would that be worthwhile - that is, if enough people did that?
I don't know. I think Google is more crafty than that,,, probably. To block the site you need to be logged in. While logged in, google pretty much knows your biases, because it has access to the adsense data... it is unlikely to rate your view of your competitors highly.
That's what I get from the phrase 'in some high-confidence situations".
But... I have no idea, I have none at all, at this point no one has any solid analysis of Panda at all... let alone this new algorithm update.
Boo. Bummer! Sure, that makes sense.
If G can figure out which clicks are intentional and which are accidental, then I'm sure they could figure out which site-blockings were attempts to downgrade a competitor.
But I actually do run numerous searches on topics that I don't write about at all, and I thoroughly dislike seeing certain specific sites show up at the top of the search. Since Panda, I've taken to simply skipping down the page past those hits, until I get to something else that looks more reliable and promising to me. I really wish Google would take note of that - but, of course, I'm not normally logged-in to Google when I do that.
Hmm. Thinking, thinking.....
Depending on how the long tail keyword changes were configured, this can have a big impact on sites like Hubpages where keyword research and looking for the long tail keyword for writing prompts is a large factor.
As long as I have been with HubPages it is simply growing pains. Things will settle down, hang in there all will work its way out.
My numbers continue to worsen. There was a brief rebound, but that has completely gone. While I understand what Google is trying to achieve, I believe they have effectively created a similar scenario as big banks in America: made sure the money flows to the already internet rich, while the common internet earner figures out how to avoid financial disaster.
The issue of quality content is very real, but I think Google is stacking all things internet in a direction they want. In the end I think it will bring them down since Bing/Yahoo are gaining ground. The writing on the wall is simply that a war is going to ensue for control/domination and the common internet earner is going to be penalized even further as this fight ensues.
One of the things I'm considering is teaming up with a couple of SEO people and trying to get away from the content farm assumption the algo makes, and do some experimenting.
At this point, even youtube becomes suspect under the new algo, which begs for high ranking competitors to move in and stir things up.
I don't like the scenario. But it's clear I have to deal with it.
I think it's such a huge chaotic change that it will take months to see what will develop in the online world. But personally, I wouldn't put all my stakes in online anything, it's too unpredictable. Look at all the people who have hundreds of hubs that are doing nothing, or sites that barely get traffic.
I think it's wise to take your talents and use them offline as well. The traditional work world is gone for good. I don't think we can depend on any one source of income as security.
Darkside gave Waynett excellent advice in that regard on a recent thread.
recommend, good for you. I do know it's National Poetry Month here in the US, I don't know if it's worldwide, but it possibly could be one reason for increased views.
It usually takes a while (ie several weeks) to shake out the results.
I would expect that we will see changes gradually, as pages from various sites move up or down in the SERPs.
--Search Engine Results Page(s)--
Here is something funny: under traffic sources I had a -1 from google.com.au.
I can't say I am happy with being pandalyzed, but I do not see near as many blatantly BAD hubs in the inventory any more. To me, that is a great step in the right direction.
Twitter/Facebook are considered social media, social sharing has a place in search algorithms now. Its quite easy to see what Oil is referring to.
Social Activity as shown by Facebook / Twitter
New Posts on CNN for example,
Today = 'Trump bid a political freak show?" 319 recommendations
Hubs in our top list have 20-30 shares after years of being here. Although, the "best" hub right now has 11k.
The Big Media Sites have a social interaction level that far exceeds HP. There are tools to track this if you are so inclined.
I'm thinking that we wont see a significant upswing until they do another algorithm change.
Then just pray HP is on the right side of it.
? You still talking systrix? Thats old news and as Oli stated not super reliable.
Keep in mind most of us webmasters do NOT share our hard data with anyone. Systrix and similar SE0 studying ilk just use their own little proprietary algorithms to try and make sense of search results and then sell services, when major publishers who know their own stats check against sites like systrix or even quantcast they often notice that the 3rd party stats are garbage.
I dont recall the purpose of this thread anymore, but in most cases, you can believe Oli's translation of an SEO situation over your own random findings and interpretations of possibly questionable data.
Its not that its not "a source that you would use" its a source that you cant use. Access to site stats across dozens-hundreds locations, niches and styles is very informative when you are discussing it with people who know how to interpret their stats. Its probably the most useful tool that exists. Humans with knowledge.
I also seemed to remember that sistrix had a highly limited data set, they only monitored 10,000, 100,000 keywords. Something like that. Now imagine the tens of millions of different keywords that are searched for every single day.
I would much sooner rely on what is actually happening to the webmasters out there than what a report based on a limited amount of data can tell us.
The changes we have made and are making (there's more to come) are not purely reactionary. We were already hammering out the kinks in changes we knew we wanted to make when Panda hit. I see it as unfortunate timing, since now of course whatever we do looks like a reaction to the update, but the team is working hard to make decisions because they're the right thing to do to improve HubPages, not because we're pandering to Google. Of course, we can't ignore Google, but it isn't good business to simply do the minimum; we want to stay ahead of the curve as far as making and keeping HP the best place to publish online. We're confident Google will recognize that.
Although I am one of the moaning types - your comments are much appreciated. As a small effort of my own to stem the tidal wave of garbage I will hold off from publishing a hub tonight.
Maddie, we appreciate the response, but you know what, it will just be something different with google again in 6 months. Their definition of quality will always be changing after people have given them content according to their last definition. Its really a huge game and we, the content providers, are the losers.
Why doesn't google just develop some bots to go make the content they want.
Exactly. That's why our attitude here at HP is not just to try to react to Google changes as they happen, but to make the best site we possibly can, and trust that search engines will figure out how to get the best content to bubble to the top.
If Rupert Murdoch is leaning on Google, propaganda will be at the top of search.
What is important to me is that HP is a site where I can get my non-niche writings read and recognized. I learned three years ago that my writings would get more exposure here than on my own website.
HP had been a door to positive google returns on searches for my articles when I started here and up to February 23 of this year. This is no longer the case. My traffic has tanked to 35 percent of what it was pre-panda.
But I think HP is visionary, as it was from the start. They had a good idea to start out with, and I don't see them as quitters when times get tough.
I'm hanging in here with my eclectic stuff.
In the UK the Google changes have had the effect of leading to a HUbpages drop of 85.72% over the last couple of days ( http://paidcontent.co.uk/article/419-go … ofts-ciao/ ). Look in the table at the bottom of this link.
While it's nice to know that some of these things were planned before the update, there was also mention of how things such as the ad capsule ratio limit was the result of statistical research in to the update. This in itself has caused the loss of high quality content that missed the deadline on fixing the ratio.
I think that this decision lumped high quality sales hubs in with poor quality sales hubs, and a lot of us have suffered because of it.
Don't get me 100% wrong on this, I support a lot of the moves Hubpages are making (Big thumbs up to dropping a large amount of the duplicate content out there). But by doing all these things at once you are limiting how you can analyse the beneficial and negative effects each change is making to Hubpages.
Despite the fact that Google made some changes that had drastic effects within a day, on this end of the equation effective change takes a lot longer.
After the Google devaluation happened to Squidoo in the summer of 2007, it really took about 2 years for the site to rebound, and it survived the Panda update much more strongly for how it's structured presently.
It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it takes a year or even a bit longer for HubPages to regain traction, audience and earnings.
I would suspect that you are quite right, relache.
Squidoo was hit with this Euro thing. Down 53 percent visability.
If you are talking from this update, my Squidoo has not been affected much at all.
I am talking about Squidoo as a whole. It was on the chart that showed Hubpages hit about 85 percent.
All these charts are interesting to see, but from what I have heard, most of the active Squidoo lensmasters were not really affected over their entire accounts by the last Panda hit. This one is a bit early to tell.
For instance, they may have had one or two lenses affected but others have made up for that. Nothing at all like the overall hit we are experiencing here. Once again, another reason to diversify.
Here in Australia I have seen two hit one when was it five weeks or so-then the figures started to restore. ago Now another hit this week. So that make me wonder about the global roll out when i was hit anyway five weeks ago
My overall traffic from all of my web 2.0 properties did not decline that much; however, my hubpages traffic seemed to drop tremendously!
Panda, Round 1, cut my traffic and earnings dramatically. Panda, Round 2, seems to have finished it off. Most telling to me is the immediate impact this has had on my amazon-style hubs. My views dropped off to <1 per hub on average. My clicks into amazon have dropped by another 50%.
At first, I thought this was an anomaly as this affected countries other than the US and I suspected that they did not use amazon.com, but rather .uk. It looks like I was wrong. I don't know if these style of hubs were impacted by the 2% additional change that Google was talking about, or if something else happened.
I am crossing my fingers for a long term recovery, but I think my time might be better spent on my own websites. I hope that management reports on the recovery status soon - maybe a weekly update?
In the meantime, "Go Bing!"
I think it is too early to tell what the latest change will do, but there is no question that watching and learning is part of the equation. In the meantime, though I am working on other projects, and adding stuff to drive some traffic here to specific related hubs.
Edited to say: Due to the fact that US income taxes are due tomorrow by midnight, it is not surprising that shopping has slowed this week. Many people here do them at the last minute. So we may see some rebound in the next couple of weeks just from that alone.
that's smart. Of course, the risk in NOT adding more hubs NOW is that we will lose the benefit of having an "aged" hub when the recovery DOES happen. I think about the opportunity cost of not adding more now, in prep for the holiday season.
This is a balancing act. I will continue to write hubs, but my first priority is to get my income back now. Second priority is to get future income.
Once I can assure myself that I have completed phase one (income now), then I can move on to phase two (future income).
Actually, taxes are not officially due till the 18th, due to Emancipation Day.
But the Atlas Shrugged movie opens tomorrow...
I have started to list my articles on Bing and yahoo myself...
So it is really only true this year. Never heard of Emancipation Day before.
by alternativeto 8 years ago
Hey guys, i think HubPages is losing it's rank on Google, i have multiple accounts here and all are experiencing decreased traffic by 50% !!! . Anyone experiencing similar problems? Or did Google introduce any new algorithms?
by And Drewson 12 years ago
Here's an interesting message from Seekyt, which mentions Hub Pages fondly."Important DecisionMake sure you've read the news to the right before reading this paragraph. ---->There is always a way to get around these things; however, do we really want to "get around it" and try to...
by Ben Aidoo 7 years ago
Is it true that Google is inundated by billions of articles that it's suffering from a system overload, and unable to give quality attention to new and better written articles? Just imagine, the poor Google crawler had to sift through 14 million articles to come up with 10 results on page 1 for a...
by Paul Goodman 10 years ago
Looks like Google made another algo change earlier this week. My traffic rose about 25% on my main HP account around this time, so I'm guessing the update was the cause. My traffic is still low by historical standards (down by more than a third from the start of the year), but I...
by FaisalKhan2121 10 years ago
I say thank you Panda for helping to restore quality content to search engine results. Hubpages definitely has gotten better-- the spam is gone and the cream is rising to the top. Also, I'm making more money than I ever have in the four years I've been on Hubpages so I'm a very happy...
by sunforged 11 years ago
*Be Nice*Wow, some really big sweeping reforms going on here, Mass Author Exodus, Confusion abounds , but its hard to keep track of all of it.The Panda bite has apparently led HP to believe that it is allergic to many of you! I would like to hear more about the individual treatment many are...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|