Have you been Google Panda-slapped?

Have you been smacked around the face and head by the world’s meanest search engine algorithm?

Pandas Are Not To Be Feared

Pandas Are Not To Be Feared

If so, sympathy for your cause is starting to wane.

After all, it’s been a year now since Google Panda first unveiled it’s sharp teeth.  You’ve had time to ‘fix your website.’  You’ve had ample time to improve your low-quality content.  Heck, you’ve had plenty of time to build a whole new website!

Yet here it is a whole year later.  And you’re still dealing with the ‘Panda problems.’  Your Panda-slapping has emasculated you and ‘destroyed’ your entire online business.  The truth is, there are all kinds of successful websites that weren’t impacted by this algo update.  In fact, some even claim that high-quality content has been justly rewarded.  If that’s true, the poor people still taking their beatings from Panda might really consider the fact they have to start over with a new website.

It’s Time To Move On

There’s nothing more to do for your Pandalized website. It’s dead, Jim. Say a few prayers and leave it go. How many more hours do you really plan on spending resuscitating old content? After all, let’s face a few facts about online content.

  • It usually doesn’t get better with age.
  • Lots of people are creating it, because of the low barrier to entry.
  • Yours isn’t as good as you think it is.
  • Great content contains pictures, videos, and is socially shared by many people.

When all is said and done, unless you’re really creating top-notch content every day, you can’t expect to be rewarded.  Stop using Google Panda as an excuse.  It’s 2012 now and you need to recover your income.  A whole new website could be the answer!

Good luck!

 

 

So far in 2012, it looks like Google has moved away from its ‘Panda’ algo that struck such fear into the hearts of people every where. This algo was said to be aimed at ‘low quality’ websites. It changed the game for many people, especially anyone with an outdated style. Google said they plan on changing their algo 500 times this year, which seems to imply that webmasters should focus on the quality of their websites instead of trying to game something that is increasing in complexity.

The quality issues seem to boil down to these:

Infrastructure – the server, IP, and ‘neighborhood’ your website is located on
Niche – many ranking issues are now very query specific
Freshness – you need updated content to rank in Google. QDF is now real.
Competition – Sometimes you’re getting your ass kicked by competitors, not by Google.
Design – Your design must be updated to reflect today’s surfing choices

All of these seem basic, because they are.  It’s important to gain control of all the most basic element’s of your website’s SEO before worrying about more advanced techniques.  That’s how lots of people end up doing it, though.  They skip the basics and move on to other things.  This can cause the foundation to crumble, resulting in a tragic end for rankings.

Anyways, please share if you were impacted by the update on the date mentioned in the title.  If so, please explain what happened.  Thanks.

 

 

Google remains a bit of a “black box” when it comes to understanding how it ranks websites. But over the years many people have managed to devise certain principles that will help a page rank high in their SERPS. These principles aren’t hard and fast rules, but following them generally gives a page a chance to succeed. Well optimized pages tend to rank higher than ones that haven’t been touched. Let’s take a look at some of these core concepts of Google search engine optimization.

Effective basics

1) Google loves websites with many backlinks. Of course you can enter into the debate on whether Google loves quality or quantity when it comes to backlinks, but suffice it to say, backlinks are still a huge factor in Google. Most people recommend foregoing quantity in favor of “high-quality” links. This phrase is subject to interpretation, but to most people it means links from related pages. The older the domain holding the related page, the better. Quantity of links tends to be in the form of many unrelated links in footers and blog rolls. From what I’ve seen, both methods are still valid if followed with enthusiasm.

2) Careful on-page construction is a key to a high ranking. Most pros don’t overlook the careful construction of the on-page factors that lead to high rankings. On-page factors are something that webmasters have complete control over, so it’s definitely an area to consider. One nice thing about on-page optimization is that you can easily tweak the pages and experiment. There’s no good reason to ignore the obvious.

3) Google loves “authority.” In the last few years Google has become enthralled with the concept of “authority” and “trust” and has created a rather convoluted system to measure it. Once a website has been conferred authoritative and trusted, they seem to get a boost that helps lift even mediocre pages on their domain to a higher status. This is opposed to how it was several years back when Google would let each page fight it out on its own. The concept of authority and trust are well worth investigating if you’re looking to optimize your site for higher rankings.

4) Outgoing links. Not only are the links that point to you important, but so are the websites you point to. It’s easy to understand this concept as “the company you keep.” If you link to low quality resources and your website is linked to from low quality websites, Google could infer that your website is also low quality.

The progression of the years has seen Google’s algo get more sophisticated. But at its core the same essential principles that always applied still do apply. Your website is judged by a number of criteria that is not fully understood by anyone outside of Google. Based on continued observation, certain core principles have emerged. If you follow these principles, success will likely follow.

Google has a remarkable aspect to its algo these days. That’s the phenomena where a website either ranks for terms or it doesn’t. And we’re not talking about hardcore competitive terms, either. For lack of a better term, it looks like “Trustrank” comes into play when a website loses it’s rankings. First you need to check a few things.

1) Do you still have pages indexed in Google? If not, you’re likely banned. If the site command shows nothing, you have probably been dropped from their index.
2) Do you rank for your own unique domain name? If you don’t, you likely have incurred a penalty. It’s not severe enough to keep you completely out of the index, and can probably be fixed on its own.

But if you still rank for your own domain name and you have plenty of indexed pages and incoming links, the problems gets a bit murkier. Add in the fact you may even have “sitelinks” to your website and the situation is downright cloudy.

“Domain trust”, “authority,” and “TrustRank” are all concepts that explain away the symptoms, but with no official word from Google, it’s all speculation.

In any event, I witnessed this phenomena again on 4/8/2009. Something “removed the filter” from one of my websites and a massive amount of long tail traffic returned to the logs. By the 12th it was gone again.

To me that looked like Google did some testing of user data signals and shit-canned the results for further study. Of course it could be something unrelated. Since I’m not privy to Google’s internal thinking, I can simply guess.

I have to admit that “All or nothing” form or ranking certainly does appear Draconian.

After experimenting with several SEO techniques in 2009, I’m definitely feeling that “less is more” when it comes to what techniques to use. In the past, fairly heavy handed SEO used to do a great job to land rankings, but Google has developed a more subtle algo as the years have rolled on. If you try to “force-feed” Google, you very well might choke as a result.

On-page optimization along with gaining TrustRank work well. Of course these terms are relatively meaningless for many, and YMMV, but obviously Google likes well structured web pages on domains they “trust” to rank. Take a gander at any of the millions of pages that rank in top spots for WikiPedia. These pages are text-dense, have a wide variety of incoming links, and reference external trusted web pages.

Your website won’t have anywhere the “trust” that WikiPedia has, at least not for broad terms. But you can work on gaining trust for subsets of important keywords. The way to do this is to stay topically focuses on a specific niche. If you devote your time to top-notch content creation, make sure your mechanical SEO is in place, you’ll likely acquire the bank link profile needed to rank well for a wide variety of keywords in a given category.

Search engine optimization is only one part of the internet marketing puzzle

It’s no secret that the fields of search engine marketing, public relations, and SEO interlap in many areas. To be ignorant of the capabilities of any of these disciplines is a way to short-change your online efforts. The people who use a synthesized approach to the task of online marketing don’t neglect one area in the favor of another. They attempt to balance their efforts across a multitude of mediums from social networks to offline publicity.

Google follows success and builds their algorithm around what they know historically represents “quality” in websites. That’s why you see so many of the same types of pages presented in their search engine results year after year. Their model for what constitutes authoritative pages doesn’t seem to be changing that quickly. Building your websites for long term success is the simplest way to build web pages with durable rankings.

The secondary online advertising market has been drying up a bit

Lately, second tier ad companies have been announcing troubles at a quickening rate. Blog networks are shutting their doors, and less ad money is going out to the throngs of bloggers who have started up in the last few years, intent on making money during the internet Gold Rush.

Less money going to online advertising might just mean increased revenues for SEO companies, who give customers a chance at lasting traffic, rather than just selling them disposable clicks. These near-permanent effects are enticing to advertisers who have to decide how to effectively spend their online budget. SEM, social media optimization, and SEO promise to have strong years because many of the leading companies have built ongoing relationships with clients who can clearly see the benefits of their online spends.

31. January 2009 · 1 comment · Categories: Google · Tags:

Do a search in Google. Notice anything strange? I did for my results. Next to every single result is the ominous message “This site may harm your computer.”

This is happening on every page for every result.

Even the word “Help” turns up the same warning. HELP! It looks like I better be careful where I click, or I could end up in dire trouble.

What a scary place Google is today.

I feel like I can finally put a nail in the coffin of cross-linking websites. Let me be specific, cross-linked, thematically unrelated links appear to push little or no value to other websites. In fact, it’s fair to say excessive cross-linking surely hurts in Yahoo and is very much devalued in Google. Google, as always, seems to be adding to the “don’t” list as far as linking goes.

I don’t really care about the fact cross-links aren’t working anymore. All it affects is the need for a more diverse link-profile for each website on your network. Sure, it’s a bit more work, but it’s a common sense approach you’ll need anyway. Plus, it certainly does look “less spammy” to not present visitors with a giant list of unrelated links on your sidebar or in your future. Of course this kills the business models of many blog networks, but that business model has been sucking wind for years anyway.

Now Google should go one step further and dismiss the “reciprocal link dump” type posts that are so prevalent in blogs. Blogs who are linking to each in a one-to-one relationship for gain get away with it if they do it in a faux “editorial” way.

In any event, another small loophole has been closed.

Bounce rates are being discussed regularly by SEOs

Apparently SEOs have been having very heated discussions about the concept of “bounce rates” on SEO. Myself, I figured a high bounce rate is meaningless. Consider blogs. Most of the traffic to a blog arrives from a search engine and lands on a single view post. They find exactly what they’re looking for and tend to bounce! It doesn’t matter what the subject matter is or how good your content is. People are using Google to find info. Much of the info they find is easily consumed.

Having a high bounce rate can’t be an important sign of quality in most cases. However, that hasn’t stopped people from arguing about it. Typical of most SEO arguments you’ll read online, there’s an awful lot of supposition and very little in the way of definitive proof.

This particular argument seems to be permanently ended when Matt Cutts comes in and lays it out.

Matt Cutts lays down the law on bounce rates

“Without reading the article, I’ll just say that bounce rates would be not only spammable but noisy. A search industry person recently sent me some questions about how bounce rate is done at Google and I was like “Dude, I have no idea about any things like bounce rate. Why don’t you talk to this nice Google Analytics evangelist who knows about things like bounce rate?” I just don’t even run into people talking about this in my day-to-day life.”

He didn’t even have to read the crap article to know it was bullshit. Hell, neither did I. In any event, the time to consider the “bounce rate” as a be all and end all of search engine rankings has lived a short and miserable life. Lots of high quality websites have high bounce rates and I’m sure there are plenty of people with low quality websites that have low bounce rates. The key is the type of visitor and the type of content. If matched perfectly, MANY will bounce. That’s the nature of modern search engine traffic.

Bounce rate shouldn’t be, and isn’t, a part of the Google search rankings and that comes straight from the horse’s mouth.

23. December 2008 · 1 comment · Categories: Google · Tags: ,

Can a blog be useful for SEO purposes?

It can, but blogs are a different animal than static websites, and must be treated as such. A blog is very useful because it provides a website with plenty of related fresh content. Considering many websites don’t have content that changes very often, a blog can be a way of commenting on related news and getting more search engine traffic.

Running a blog is hard work

But one thing about blogs is they take a lot of work to maintain. To establish any sort of quality on your blog requires making well written and cohesive posts on popular topics. If you have the time to update 3-5 times a week, than adding a blog to a website can be a fantastic way to build timely long-tail traffic.

If you enjoy writing, then a blog is something you can easily maintain. You might even have fun updating. When you blog, you “ping” the major blog search services, and they tend to take your content right away. Generally the main search engine indexes will also pull your content in almost immediately. Blogging is a way of telling Google that your website updates a lot, and is “in the know” on your subject.

If you have the time and the inclination, adding a blog to a website that doesn’t update much is a great idea. It will help you stay in touch with customers. It can help improve your website’s credibility. Updating often will give search engines the evidence they need to keep on visiting your website and sending in new prospects.

It looks like Google has updated backlinks again in the last few days. They seem to running on a pretty tight schedule as far as backlink updates go. At least in the search engine. Google Webmaster Tools (GWT) also shows a backlink update, but this one was a lot longer in the making. So far there’s been no sign of an export of visible Toolbar PR, but it’s not like those are ever good these days.

Continue reading “Google Backlink Update” »