Google has announced the +1 button yesterday, similar to Facebook Like button.
A small percentage of Google search users on Google.com in the United States searching in English will now see a +1 button next to search listings, when they are logged in. They can use the +1 button to publicly show what you like, agree with, or recommend on the web.
When a person clicks the button, he/she’s “+1′d” it. When they do a search when logged into Google, any results that they’ve +1′d — or which have been +1′d by those in their network — will be enhanced.
- Those with Google Profiles can “plus” things; everyone else cannot.
- Google account holders who are signed in will see all the +1′s and personalized “recommendations” even though they cannot add their own pluses without a Google Profile.
- Also, +1 buttons are not available on Internet Explorer 7.
More information on participating in +1 is here.
Effect of +1 for Paid Ads
According to Christian Oestlien, Google’s Group Product Manager for Ads, +1 will appear on all Google search ads by default. However advertisers will be able to opt out by submitting this form.
Advertisers will be able to see stats about which ads are getting the most +1s.
it will not impact ads quality and paid rankings.
Google's early tests showed there was a lift for ads that featured +1 annotation.
A user “plus-ing” (endorsing) an ad will not count as a click to the advertiser.
Users don’t need to specifically endorse ads for their pluses appear on ads. There’s a common infrastructure for social +1 on both the organic and paid side. So, if you +1 a particular page in organic results, then for the paid ad that uses the same URL, +1 appears.
In the future Google intends to cluster URLs so that the +1′d URL and the AdWords URL don’t have to be identical for +1′s to appear in the ad.
+1 and Organic Search
Google is working on a +1 button that you can put on your pages, making it easy for people to recommend your content on Google search. If you want to be notified when the +1 button is available for your website, you can sign up for email updates.
Google notes that they will “start to look at +1’s as one of the many signals [that they] use to determine a page’s relevance and ranking”.
At this point, we don’t know how much traction it can get from the consumer side. And, it is very likely that the feature will get abused quickly by spammers.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
White Hat SEO
Our clients always seek our our expert opinions in the findability arena. As a white hat findability company, we always keep our clients safe by sticking with Google’s webmaster guidelines.
Last year, one of our clients approached us and asked our opinion on Conductor. One of their board members had suggested Conductor as an SEO firm for companies with a large number of keywords/SKUs.
We advised our client that Conductor operated more in the gray-black hat arena (i.e., borderline “spammy”) and did not feel it aligned with our strategic/content-oriented/white-hat approach.
Our client understood the difference (they had heard us refer to black and white hat SEO often, including in the roundtable) and agreed that our approach was preferred.
Fast forward to this year: on 2/16/11, Matt Cutts, head of webspam at Google, posted at the Google webmaster thread
Conductor Exits The Paid Link Network Business
Matt Cutts’ comments seem pretty clear. Using Conductor’s paid link network is seen by Google as a manipulation of their ranking algorithms and is against their guidelines. Conductor appears to have seen the writing on the wall because just days before this discussion, Conductor posted to their blog that they will no longer be offering any link-building services. They have sold the assets to another company (whose services will presumably also be in violation of Google’s guidelines).
Lastly, we are happy to see only positive impact to our clients’ results with Google’s recent, big algorithm change that has affected 12% of the search queries.
Last year, one of our clients approached us and asked our opinion on Conductor. One of their board members had suggested Conductor as an SEO firm for companies with a large number of keywords/SKUs.
We advised our client that Conductor operated more in the gray-black hat arena (i.e., borderline “spammy”) and did not feel it aligned with our strategic/content-oriented/white-hat approach.
Our client understood the difference (they had heard us refer to black and white hat SEO often, including in the roundtable
Fast forward to this year: on 2/16/11, Matt Cutts, head of webspam at Google, posted at the Google webmaster thread
People on this thread have already mentioned Conductor, and I've confirmed
multiple times that paid links that pass PageRank via Conductor violate our
guidelines.
Conductor Exits The Paid Link Network Business
Matt Cutts’ comments seem pretty clear. Using Conductor’s paid link network is seen by Google as a manipulation of their ranking algorithms and is against their guidelines. Conductor appears to have seen the writing on the wall because just days before this discussion, Conductor posted to their blog that they will no longer be offering any link-building services. They have sold the assets to another company (whose services will presumably also be in violation of Google’s guidelines).
Lastly, we are happy to see only positive impact to our clients’ results with Google’s recent, big algorithm change that has affected 12% of the search queries.
Tuesday, March 01, 2011
Google's Recent Algorithmic Change
Background
In recent months, Google promised that it would take action against content farms that were gaining top listings with “shallow” or “low-quality” content.
In a blog post, Google’s Matt Cutts said that the search giant has made great strides in the spam game:
Last Friday, Google announced a change to its ranking algorithm that is designed to disregard such material:
Google says this update is meant to reduce rankings for low quality sites and to provide better rankings for high-quality sites—sites with original content and information such as research, in-depth reports, thoughtful analysis and so on.
Industry Talk
Some people argue that Google should use personalized search to decide how to return "content farm" search results. For example, if you have a history of ignoring or backing out of pages on SiteXYZ.com, Google can simply stop showing you results from SiteXYZ.com. In other words, Google can let you make the editorial decision about SiteXYZ.com instead of having to "kill that site."
But, most end users will be happy with Google’s method, which will save them a lot of time clicking on junk sites and this is what matters to Google.
Implications
We have seen many content farm sites taking a hit, and sites that were at the edge of that line have also been affected.
This is one reason DBE always sticks with the white hat guidelines recommended by the search engines, and as such, we are glad to see only positive changes with our client results.
In recent months, Google promised that it would take action against content farms that were gaining top listings with “shallow” or “low-quality” content.
In a blog post, Google’s Matt Cutts said that the search giant has made great strides in the spam game:
As ‘pure webspam’ has decreased over time, attention has shifted instead to ‘content farms,’ which are sites with shallow or low-quality content. In 2010, we launched two major algorithmic changes focused on low-quality sites. Nonetheless, we hear the feedback from the web loud and clear: people are asking for even stronger action on content farms and sites that consist primarily of spammy or low-quality content. We take pride in Google search and strive to make each and every search perfect. The fact is that we’re not perfect, and combined with users’ skyrocketing expectations of Google, these imperfections get magnified in perception. However, we can and should do better.
Last Friday, Google announced a change to its ranking algorithm that is designed to disregard such material:
Google says this update is meant to reduce rankings for low quality sites and to provide better rankings for high-quality sites—sites with original content and information such as research, in-depth reports, thoughtful analysis and so on.
Industry Talk
Some people argue that Google should use personalized search to decide how to return "content farm" search results. For example, if you have a history of ignoring or backing out of pages on SiteXYZ.com, Google can simply stop showing you results from SiteXYZ.com. In other words, Google can let you make the editorial decision about SiteXYZ.com instead of having to "kill that site."
But, most end users will be happy with Google’s method, which will save them a lot of time clicking on junk sites and this is what matters to Google.
Implications
We have seen many content farm sites taking a hit, and sites that were at the edge of that line have also been affected.
This is one reason DBE always sticks with the white hat guidelines recommended by the search engines, and as such, we are glad to see only positive changes with our client results.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
