jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (21 posts)

Google cracking down on SEO?

  1. Pcunix profile image91
    Pcunixposted 5 years ago

    I havent watched the clip yet, but this ought to make one folks squirm: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-573994 … zed-sites/

  2. Eric Newland profile image60
    Eric Newlandposted 5 years ago

    On the upside, maybe my SEO strategy of just writing whatever will finally pay off!

    1. Pcunix profile image91
      Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, yes.

      1. lobobrandon profile image90
        lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Oh cool smile Finally! Hope it works well though tongue

  3. seoknow profile image60
    seoknowposted 5 years ago

    Yeah, from the time I saw Google changing their privacy policy I knew SEO was going to be affected in some way. Major policy changes are always the result of major changes in operations.

  4. Shadesbreath profile image85
    Shadesbreathposted 5 years ago

    Yeah, I like to think this stuff works in my favor too. I've always been too lazy to figure out how to spin articles or link farm or do whatever the stuff is that came out more recently anyway, so hopefully whatever I've been doing counts as satisfactory under the new parameters.

    1. lobobrandon profile image90
      lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      All i do is get some good keywords to write on and that's it. I write and then forget about them! But, the hubs are rising in rankings slowly and most of mine are now on the first page.

  5. CMHypno profile image95
    CMHypnoposted 5 years ago

    Seems like Google is cracking down on spun articles and private blog networks too

    http://www.webpronews.com/google-de-ind … ks-2012-03

    1. lobobrandon profile image90
      lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Just went through it. Seems good enough smile

    2. Pcunix profile image91
      Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I wonder what "in particular, we are turning off a method of link analysis that we used for several years" means.. could be really bad news for the backlinking crowd..

      1. lobobrandon profile image90
        lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I guess it won't depend on the number of backlinks as much anymore. Not too sure but I do hope it is that smile

  6. PaulGoodman67 profile image97
    PaulGoodman67posted 5 years ago

    Google has been cracking down on SEO for years and years.  The issue is always how effective they are, rather than their intentions.  As internet users, we want better search results.  As internet writers, we have to play the game - that doesn't mean becoming a black hatter, but it does require a degree of pragmatism.  I like HubPages because they effectively give you hundreds of backlinks without a great deal of effort, there isn't much need for additional backlinking anyway.  Downgrading backlinks would affect hubs, even if no additional backlinking had been done (although I suspect HP would find a way of adapting in the longer term).

  7. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image98
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago

    I don't care.

    Well, maybe I do.  I'm definitely Mr. Write Whatever - but my modern web geniuses tell me that sticking to niches is very important.

    ....but its too late for me so far as that bit of web philosophy is concerned on this website.

    I've got record Google traffic for two days running here - but that was after a definite dip the two weeks prior.

    I can never figure out if I should trust Google to "do what is right," or not.

    1. lobobrandon profile image90
      lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Hmm how do you know you got record traffic for two consecutive days?

      1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image98
        Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I'm just looking at my traffic stats from going to "account" - then over to the left sidebar "traffic sources."

        Google.com is always my number one source of traffic - and I just look at that total number for an overly generalized idea of how well I'm doing.

        I'm not looking at the "little Googles" - like Google Netherlands, or Google Australia.

        Of course those matter too...but not so much.

        But yeah, two days running - I'm at personal best levels for Google.com traffic.

        1. lobobrandon profile image90
          lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Oh!! I thought you got the highest google traffic on the whole of Hub Pages tongue

          My google traffic is the most always but March isn't  that good a month for me and the total views from HP just overtook Google again sad

          1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image98
            Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah.

            March isn't good for me either - everyone is NOT buying anything and I believe it is because they are all waiting to find out what their income tax situation will be like.

            I should tell you that for the very longest time HP traffic was my biggest traffic source, but here in the past five months or so is when Google finally overcame HP as my main traffic source, and since then it's only increased and increased.

            Older hubs started getting the search engine love they deserved...and I also increasingly learned what and how to make a good hub anyway.

            1. lobobrandon profile image90
              lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Cool smile For me just the first one month HP was leading then the rest upto March Google was all the way on top.

  8. Stacie L profile image91
    Stacie Lposted 5 years ago

    Does this mean all those SEO websites that offer keyword optimization techniques will be useless?

    1. Pcunix profile image91
      Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Who knows?

      Ultimately, yes, that is Google's goal - to understand what pages are really about so that the words found there and the words a searchers uses will match appropriately and usefully even if none of them actually match.

      Whether they can pull that off is not the question - the question is WHEN they will be able to do it.

      Think of it this way:  suppose you had a question that I have an answer to on one of my pages.  I could find my page for you quickly because I know what it's really about regardless of the words you are I used.   Now imagine it's not me, but some very smart computer that knows as much about the Internet as I know about my own pages.  I really doubt we are close to that now (maybe in another decade or two) but Google wants that eventually.  When they have it, keywords become completely irrelevant.

      In the meantime, keywords probably will become LESS important - and then there's the new wrinkle where Google intends to punish "excessive SEO", which could mean much more than keyword stuffing.   They MIGHT be smart enough now to spot an overly optimized use of phrases.

      How?  One method might to do linguistic comparisons between printed works (which Google has been busily digitizing for many a year now) and your web page.  If it reads 'false' - if it doesn't sound like a book would sound, maybe it is over optimized.    Right now, that kind of trigger might require a human review for a final decision, but as it gets smarter with feedback, who knows?

    2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image98
      Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Just last week a fella was asking a question in the Q and A - he'd been rewriting all his stuff to fit a specific keyword density, and he said that he'd done that, and that now all of his stuff was GONE from it's previous high search engine result pages positions.

      Google doesn't like feeling manipulated!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Also, I think focusing on something as boring and manipulative as some percentage of keyword density....is so obviously an attempt at gaming the system that anyone doing that ...will always get what they deserve.

      Nobody likes to read robotic mechanical looking text, and apparently Google doesn't either!

 
working