WebProNews Ad Rates Click Now!
Read WebProNews
With Friends!

Google Panda Update: New Advice Directly From Google

23 questions to ask yourself about your content quality

Get the WebProNews Newsletter!
By · May 9, 2011 · 172 Comments
Google Panda Update: New Advice Directly From Google

Google’s Panda update left a slew of victims in the wake of its warpath (the war, of course being on shallow and low-quality content). While Google has dropped some hints here and there on its philosophies for what it considers to be low quality, the company has now been clearer than ever as to what it’s looking at.

Do you think Google’s results have improved since the Panda update? Tell us what you think.

“Some publishers have fixated on our prior Panda algorithm change, but Panda was just one of roughly 500 search improvements we expect to roll out to search this year,” writes Google Fellow Amit Singhal on the Google Webmaster Central blog. “In fact, since we launched Panda, we’ve rolled out over a dozen additional tweaks to our ranking algorithms, and some sites have incorrectly assumed that changes in their rankings were related to Panda. Search is a complicated and evolving art and science, so rather than focusing on specific algorithmic tweaks, we encourage you to focus on delivering the best possible experience for users.”

Google lists the following as “questions that one could use to assess the ‘quality’ of a page or an article”:

  • Would you trust the information presented in this article?
  • Is this article written by an expert or enthusiast who knows the topic well, or is it more shallow in nature?
  • Does the site have duplicate, overlapping, or redundant articles on the same or similar topics with slightly different keyword variations?
  • Would you be comfortable giving your credit card information to this site?
  • Does this article have spelling, stylistic, or factual errors?
  • Are the topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?
  • Does the article provide original content or information, original reporting, original research, or original analysis?
  • Does the page provide substantial value when compared to other pages in search results?
  • How much quality control is done on content?
  • Does the article describe both sides of a story?
  • Is the site a recognized authority on its topic?
  • Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites don’t get as much attention or care?
  • Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?
  • For a health related query, would you trust information from this site?
  • Would you recognize this site as an authoritative source when mentioned by name?
  • Does this article provide a complete or comprehensive description of the topic?
  • Does this article contain insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond obvious?
  • Is this the sort of page you’d want to bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend?
  • Does this article have an excessive amount of ads that distract from or interfere with the main content?
  • Would you expect to see this article in a printed magazine, encyclopedia or book?
  • Are the articles short, unsubstantial, or otherwise lacking in helpful specifics?
  • Are the pages produced with great care and attention to detail vs. less attention to detail?
  • Would users complain when they see pages from this site?

The company is careful to note that it’s not disclosing actual ranking signals used in its algorithms, but these questions will help you “step into Google’s mindset.” These questions are things that Google says it asks itself as it writes algorithms.

Singhal also reminds webmasters, “One other specific piece of guidance we’ve offered is that low-quality content on some parts of a website can impact the whole site’s rankings, and thus removing low quality pages, merging or improving the content of individual shallow pages into more useful pages, or moving low quality pages to a different domain could eventually help the rankings of your higher-quality content.”

We’ve already seen victims of the update respond by taking this approach. For one, Demand Media announced a big new clean-up initiative, in which it is cleaning house on user-generated content used on its eHow site – deleting some articles, while sending others back through the editorial process.

I’m sure we will be digging into all of this more very soon.

Are there any of Google’s questions that surprise you? Let us know in the comments.

[Image Credit: Stéfan on Flickr]

RELATED ARTICLES:

Google APIs Explorer Gets Updated Look

Google APIs Explorer Gets Updated Look

One of the best things Google has done for developers over the last year was the Google APIs explorer. It allowed developers to try out the various APIs that Google offers while giving them tips on h...
Oracle Likely Spent Millions Suing Google

Oracle Likely Spent Millions Suing Google

It was reported yesterday that in Google’s trial regarding Oracle’s accusations that the search giant infringed upon Java API patents in the development of its Android operating system, the jury h...
iPhone Rules The Smartphone Market By Wide Margin [STUDY]

iPhone Rules The Smartphone Market By Wide Margin [STUDY]

In the smartphone wars it's often very hard to tell who's winning and who's losing. Often it depends very much on what metric you use. If you go by total market share, Android is the clear winner. ...
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
There are 172 Comments. Add Yours.

  1. Chris,

    Thanks for writing this. I’ve sent the URL to all my clients and strongly recommend other SEOs read the piece. I suggest you’ve done us a service compiling these points.

    best,
    jim

    • Thanks JIm, I’d give Google more credit, but definitely appreciated.

  2. Wrong
    Reply

    What a joke. Letting a piece of code answer all those questions and ranking sites based on them. No wonder so many good sites and businesses are disappearing from Google. They should stick to indexing the web, not demanding site owners to comply with stupid requirements. They really need a good competitor to straighten their attitude out.

    • Mario
      Reply

      100% Agree, these are stupid requirements. They are simply asking us to do the cleansing of the internet for them. No Algorithm can determine this information. So far it has penalized heaps of good sites. Google keep this up and your gone, FaceBook is already moving in. Google don’t forget where your money comes from. People may just get sick of playing your games.

    • 100% agree!! there is not way that some machine can determine all these factors! Unless google have developed AI there is no way these can be the factors for current SERP!
      It is up to the user to decide if the information on a website are factual or not!
      Google of course can see if the content is grammatically correct or it has been duplicated (although you can only write about a subject in so many ways and without even knowing the subject has already once been written in the similar way somewhere on the internet before)

      • Google’s algorithm can’t determine these things? Visitors to the site can, and Google knows (of course they know) when a visitor jumps straight back to a search engine results page, having found nothing of interest.

        Bounce rate. Exit rate. Try a couple of google searches :-)

        Best,

        Nick

        • denzil
          Reply

          Not true. Web surfing means just that. Readers often want a selection of different opinions. Therefore going back to search results and clicking through on several different links is completely natural and says nothing about the quality of those sites or that useful information wasn’t found there.

    • I agree, how can some off these criteria possibly be evaluated without physically reading the piece.

      • VBCruiser
        Reply

        It’s funny how things change. When Google started they were kissing butt to get business. Now they want to control it all.

        After reading this post a Google boycott is in order.

    • ‘stick to indexing the web’?

      What does that mean? If you have 25 million pages which potentially have content satisfying a given request, how would you order them? ‘index’ ~= ‘order’ so there has to be a method to indexing no matter what, right? If you have a better indexing scheme, you are more than free to implement the technology and start competing.

      ‘need a good competitor’ is a nice concept, unfortunately in practice, every competitor that has tried to step up to the plate has had to sit down again. Companies even try to join forces yet combined, can’t stand in comparison.

      Or is the rant more along the lines of, ‘Everyone is dependent on air and so air is evil so someone should come up with a competitor to air!’?

      Also, they are not asking ‘us’ to clean up the internet for them, they already know that would be a waste of time. What they seem to be saying, as they seem to have all along is that they will base their actions in providing their service on experience that attempts to improve the quality of accessing the service.

      If you don’t like Google’s service, don’t use it or use the feedback system to improve it.

        • Read it. Basically, ‘access to ultimate information corrupts ultimately.’ or, ‘Someone could be corrupted by the access to data that Google has therefore Google must be corrupt.’

          A lot of supposition that could actually apply more to Microsoft or even your own ISP than it does Google itself.

    • denzil
      Reply

      Exactly true. Google say they are now examining long-tail search query results. But do they seriously think that every idiotic query a user can enter should bring up a well-researched, well written, well-referenced page about that topic? They obviously haven’t thought through the feasibility of what they are trying to impose on website owners. First rule “garbage in, garbage out”. If someone wants to ask, “How I drink a glass of water”, or “How I tie my shoe-laces” do they really expect an article from NY times or Harvard? The content farms were filling this gap, and how is punishing them for their content improving the internet or peoples experience? Quality is in the eye of the reader. Google should not impose its own standards on what the rest of us should be reading.

  3. It’s a great post, you really are a good writer! I’m so glad someone like you have the time, efforts and dedication writing, for this kind of article… Helpful, And Useful.. Very nice post!

  4. “Does the article describe both sides of a story?”

    Well the answer to that is going to be dependent on your point of view. Personally I think their statements are rubbish as mainstream media never present both sides of a story but still rank in the SERPS.

    This is getting pathetic. Google is playing with peoples sites now and I believe that they do not even know what they are doing.

    They are now presenting some code as being the master of life information. Seriously Google, you are making a mess of things now!

    • How is Google playing with people’s site? They haven’t changed one bit of code on any of my sites, have they on yours?

      What they are ‘playing’ with is a service that they provide in a claimed effort to improve it. If the ‘improve’ it to the point where people find it worthless, it will become so. They don’t seem to be doing that though.

  5. Hiya Chris,

    Great effort to bring this post in people’s knowledge, I have/had been collecting email addresses of nearly every other SEO Company from all around the world, and they have been sent this URL to have a look at, I have also notified customers to have a look at your post….

    All the best and good weekend

    Tina

  6. Our other problem is that panda also directly references Google Places adn sometime competetors have added fake address locations E.G< within an Airport and there is no real way for Google to know.

  7. Mike
    Reply

    What does this mean for eCommerce sites though?

    I have about 1500 art prints, and as a niche retailer – a spider/algorithm might interpret these pages as being similar or overlapping in terms of the text. The main diference is the image (which a customer with human eyes will see) but now I worry that Google won’t be able to differentiate the pages and therefore rank the site lower. Although we’re the leading site in our market, we’ve just seen a 25% drop in traffic since Panda. This is really worrying. Any advice would be appreciated.

    • Fantatic observation there. eCommerce sites do not require essays of “content”, but as in your case, the image speaks louder, and the algorithm updates et al can NOT see this, and thus could penalise your site, whereas an aggregator of your content could thrive by adding nonsensical (but unique) content. Now, that is a travesty!

      Essentially, with all the self publicity that google seeks and geberates through these so called major updates (they are simply a purge of their index and a fresh re-indexation using new algorithms), coupled with the follow-up misleading “guides” from them, it is about time to start an open-source search engine, with profits going to a charity supporting / promoting the web.

      • JustRenaldo
        Reply

        I love the open source search engine idea and profits going to charity, hopefully someone with the knowledge needed to get this started will be working on it already?

      • I have been saying the same thing for years.

        Open source search will be the future if we make it happen.

    • I to have a photo website with lots of pictures that are different and unique but come under the same similar headings and similar text. My site has dropped from page 1 to page 3 or further for main key words. I would say my traffic has dropped about 40% over the last few weeks.

      If I describe a photo of a beautiful woman or a Florida Alligator the text I would use would be same/similar to a lot of other sites out there. What I am saying is the photo is unique but the text is not and never can be.

    • In your case with the pictures, I would recommend if you don’t already do so. Make sure your meta tags and picture text is included on all photo’s with descriptions as well. This way the spider won’t see it only as a picture but a picture with substance and relevance. Just my two cents, hope it helps.
      Chirs

    • If you use W3C Standards in a way in which your image content is accessible regardless of one’s sited capabilities, your content won’t have any problem.

      Consider using the alt=”" image tag attribute to describe the content of the image, if you don’t already do so in surrounding text.

      Building a search engined friendly site is more about making a site accessible to all potential visitors than it is concentrating on that pesky search engine visitor to the exclusion of all others.

    • I too have an ecommerce site. I try very hard to make each and every image unique by use of meta tags. The alt image tag does very well. I even had some images rank very highly themselves.

      I have unique descriptions for each product as well and I have not seen my site drop. I have seen all my articles that I spent hours working on and getting ranked disappear from the goog.

      My blog has disappeared as well – not sure what is up with that.

      I do still see many visitors are finding my site from the link in my articles. So I guess loseing them from the serps isn’t all that bad. After all, there were a lot of crap articles out there.

      I agree with others on here that the Goog doesn’t want anyone to make money except themselves. Yet they are content to take thousands of dollars a month from us for advertising.

  8. I have always wondered if google is not being biased. Most of the topics outlined seem to be biased and this is what I mean.

    There are millions on people out there who depend on internet marketing to make a living. They promote affiliate or their own products and target the English(the US for instance) speaking audience because of the large market. The non English speaking authors(like me) lose on this because they can not write articles the way an English speaking guy would.

    Spellings can be taken care of by using online spell checkers but then what about the LSI? What about misspellings which searchers type to querry google from SEO aspects?

    People really write good articles but have poor control of English. I have written series of articles for tech magazines in my language but the audience is just a drop of water in the ocean compared to the English speaking world. If I have to depend on this, them I would starve.

    Is google ready to learn my language spoken by less than 3 million people? I will just be too ready to teach them.

    • I feel your pain. I am also an electronics design engineer. At one company I was assigned to assist a Korean engineer translate documents into English. It was quite a chore. His english was really bad and broken. I even understood what and how the product worked and I had a hard time translating his writings.

      You might try translating your articles as best you can into English, then hire an American to help re-write them to make better sense to the English speaking customers. We all know that spell checkers don’t work very well. Kind of like the help instructions in Microsoft products – they are great help if you already know how to use the product.

      Just my two cents worth.

  9. Nick
    Reply

    Google is not a Democratic search engine. Like the regime in Egypt it worked to topple, it is not of the people, for the people, by the people.

  10. marbou
    Reply

    Thanks for the post. I agree with Google that everybody must maintain good quality content. It would not be fair for a searcher to get junk site. This also will allow and encourage good writing and info.

  11. sachin agarwal
    Reply

    google says improve your content quality and at the same time it also says that they dont know who own the content. there are number of cases where, duplicate content is ranking high then the original owner of the content, and google does not respond to the DMCA. Google just count high quality links, nothing else….

    • I know the internet is evolving fast all the time, but how can Google make such sweeping changes overnight ?

      They are telling us to spend so much time (which is money) fulfilling their ever longer list of requirements, but why should I bother as they keep moving the goalposts in all their future hundreds or thousands of updates ?

      • But the demands have not changed. They have always had the same goal; to provide relevant and useful content for a search query.

        This has been the ambition of Google since they began, but people keep focusing on the SEO tactics rather than actually doing what Google need them to do.

        Believe me, I am no fan of Google and their domination. But since the very start all they have wanted to do is present the best of the Internet in response to a search. This ambition has not changed.

        If people focussed on what Google is looking for rather than constantly trying to game the system for a quick $ most would not be affected by these updates.

        Work on making your site the best in its field, and you won’t be harmed by any Google update.

        • In response to gay Writers comment.

          If that’s the case then why is sponsored content at the top of the results page?

          I see Marketing still has it’s uses.

        • Mae Johns
          Reply

          I haven’t found that to be the case at all. Quality sites are no longer at the top of Google search pages. Not when Wikipedia, which has a dubious record of accuracy at best, ranks at the top of most search strings. And I recently did a search for “flavor food without salt”. One of the highest ranking sites was a collection of Biblical phrases about salt, which was totally useless.

  12. It’s ridiculous questions like, “Is this article written by an expert or enthusiast who knows the topic well, or is it more shallow in nature?” that will put an honest blogger out of his ‘home business.’

    Google is obviously is much more than a search engine, it looks like they want to dictate who deserves to be on the www, hijacking an average person pursuit of online success.

    Now one can only be successful on the Google god’s terms.

    I guess unless you’re an expert, a recognized authority and spend big money on your website you are screwed.

    Welcome to Google tyranny.

    Brian
    http://www.healthalkaline.com

    • So how would people find your web site were it not for Google or any of the other search engines? Besides following the links to your site you post all over the place.

      You don’t think other search engines don’t have methods, to a greater or lesser degree, to filter results based on what THEY think is most relevant?

      If one asking one’s self if the article one just wrote sounds reasonable and written by someone who knows what they are talking about is too much to be asked of an ‘honest blogger’ than one would have to ask the question of just what is it that honest bloggers do write about? Things they know nothing of?

      Actually, I’m starting to see your point. ;-)

  13. I work with affiliates of gay adult content, and there has been a massive shift in the adult blogosphere because affiliates refused to accept that copy/paste of sponsor content was now unacceptable.
    Many of them still focus on keyword placement, 50 word posts with ten links out to the sponsor, and ads all over the sidebar. They had built their traffic through links alone, and now that Google has refined its criteria, they’re watching their ten year-old site crash through the floor.

    I have been preaching for months that affiliates need to step up their game and actually WRITE in order for their site to survive. They need to provide more than simply sponsor posts, and they need to be more than just 50 words.
    Many of them have continued as they were, and these sites are now failing because they either don’t have the time or they don’t have the imagination to write enough for each of their updates.

    Basically, Google has been saying for years that websites need to have a personality and offer something of value, and that this value has to be seen. This can only be done through providing relevant and lengthy content, with the audience able to offer their thoughts, providing that opportunity through Tweeting, commenting, rating and sharing.

    This is not new, but people prefer to try to game the system because they’re lazy. You don’t need the SEO games and tactics, you just need to provide good content and allow people to do the other half of the work for you.

    • STR82U
      Reply

      That’s about the gist of it. I have a pile of sites that got penelized for my laziness and I knew it was coming. The sites that have, “personality” are the ones that are making it.

    • Good Dog
      Reply

      You’ve been brainwashed by Google if you think that real value is only in written content. It’s only that way because Google says so.

      Not everyone wants to read on the net – and more especially in the adult content industry. Most of it is about live images and movies. So what the user wants to see when they visit an adult content site is PICTURES – not writing.

      Google dictate – and telling the adult content sites to add written content – is actually taking away from what most people are looking for.

      I have one crappy site – something I fiddled around with a couple of years ago. It contains junk and links and affiliates and feeds – I haven’t touched the content since I set it up and my traffic has slowly but surely been increasing since Google’s updates.

      So Google says one thing but they’re actually doing another. I am getting less and less enamoured with them. I don’t use them for personal search anymore because I am getting results dating back to 2007 which are outdated and no longer relevant too.

    • +10!

      I’ve had to worry about exactly 0 Google updates in the 10 years I’ve been developing web sites.

      Getting ranked is easy, provide compelling content that get people interested and talking and the positions in the SERPs usually follow fairly reliably.

      I do well in search engines probably because I don’t worry about them or try to take advantage of this short-lived quirk or that uncovered hole in how a given search engine works.

      All that said, Google has about the best guidelines for webmasters which if used well, helps to make web sites that are everything a visitor could ask for.

      Do the work for the visitors you hope to receive on your site, not for search engines you hope will drive visitors to your site because going that route usually ends up with short term results only leaving long term results to complaining about search engines changing this, that or some other thing while you weren’t looking.

  14. Thanks for the article on what Google expects. I know I have also a directory and some of the articles that are posted I read a couple of sentences, go to the next one and it is not much different. My question would be though, has Google put less emphasis on article writing when it comes to back links? I know spinning the article from some of them I have seen most times makes no sense at all.
    Thanks again for the article.

  15. Thanks, Very interesting article.

    If Google or any search Engine is able to differentiate between content pages based on above parameters, it would definitely drive away many dummy sites delivering no value but are able to rank high on search engine results by manipulating the ranking parameters

  16. bob
    Reply

    your article not explose complete information about this panda. google is big brother and last changes in search results making him less and less relevant. I personally already start using again also bing and yahoo because google search results sometimes stupid so much. and them need to drop wikipedia and “aboutus.org” simular domains

    • When my site dropped from position #2 to #30 on Google for the keyword “photos women” it dropped the same amount on the same day in Bing. How is that explained away? All of my serps are the same in Bing as they are in Google.

  17. Well, to me it seems Google wants every webmaster or content writer to be as genuine as possible without worrying too much about any keyword usage or tactics (black hat or even white hat…better if we can throw the hat away…lol).

    Well, good sign for those writers who strive to provide only the best quality and authoritative content to their users.

    Overall a great news..at least for me.

  18. jilo
    Reply

    I do not understand what Google do with search ranking Some time u get up to 4 list for one si te for one keyword just easy example just
    search for
    /happy birthday wishes / you get one site 1-4 search result . my search experience.

  19. I think some of the questions are only relevant to certain sites. Why have considerations on whether you will buy from the site if the site is not selling stuff?

    Some sites are meant to be more conversational and despite the fact that in general it should be readable, social sites will not fall into this category. How would google evaluate those sites then?

    Feels like although the points they propose can good, they’re not applicable across board. I don’t see how they can automate it.

  20. google is getting harder and harder to please. how can their results be so different than the others? i have sites that are #1 on yahoo that don’t even show up in googles first pages.

  21. Google are not only penalising what they say is poor content but also other search engines and meta search engines, they are doing this simply for one reason: profits slide.

    • Why should one search engine index another search engine???

      If you want information, do you want to go to the source, or at least what can somewhat reasonably be determined to be the source or an index of sites which indexed the information you are looking for?

      Would not the more direct method be quicker, try to determine who is ‘the’ source and index them?

      Determining the source may not be 100% fool-proof but it has to be better than just listing anyone who has even obliquely mentioned or indexed or indexed an index of information pertaining to a given search string.

  22. Mark Hagerling
    Reply

    Why not have a search engine where the algorithms are totally public and there can be different “algorithm sets” you can click on to have the search results reshuffled according to a particular set. This way you choose and you’re not subject to a particular search engine’s bias.

    • Do you know how many algorithms search engines employ to qualify and quantify content? We’re talking thousands.

      Beyond that, the user would be required to know the operation and functioning of a given algorithm to know whether or not to turn it on or off and not only would the average person performing a search not have a clue, publishing the information as to what specific filters do and how they do it would basically render the filters useless as the more popular filters used by people performing searches would just get the most attention for trying to bypass them.

  23. Tommy
    Reply

    “Are the topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?”

    Attempting to guess?

    Google itself suggests (from http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769#1):

    “Think about the words users would type to find your pages, and make sure that your site actually includes those words within it.”

    So which one is it?

    • Apparently, there must be a right and a wrong way to guess.
      Next step for Google is to explain what is the googalically correct way to guess…

      • Both of you are being pedantic.

        A webmaster trying to guess what people are going to search for could be doing it so that he/she can write topical content based on their experience that they already know people are searching for or, use the knowledge to write low quality keyword filled content just so that it will show up in searches. See the difference?

        Google ‘Suggest’ has nothing to do with whether or not a given webmaster does or does not provide quality content. It is only provided as a way to make people’s use of their search engine more user friendly.

    • Beamer
      Reply

      “Think about the words users would type to find your pages, and make sure that your site actually includes those words within it.”

      Absolutely correct. No fan of Google, but this is how to get a site to rank and is what relevency is all about.

  24. This Panda comes with very slight difference from other Google’s systems. Quality of content has to be underlined by webmasters.

  25. Nathan
    Reply

    Rather than the article it was the comments that was revealing.

    One would expect a search engine to help web surfers find information. Google seems to be trying to develop an algorithm that will ensure this result.

    On the other hand, people who want to build a business using search engines want to game the ranking system rather than provide good content. They are naturally angry when their gaming efforts are nullified by algorithm changes.

    • Dianne
      Reply

      I couldn’t agree more. I don’t think that Google is asking too much, provide good unique content that you didn’t steal from some content farm. Anyone who does SEO and really researches the keywords and the competition for any given word has seen all of the spam and the same article showing up over and over again. I was happy to see some of the crap I am competing with shuffled out.

      I am just thankful for the hints I can use to make sure my site is good quality so Google will keep sending me traffic…FOR FREE! Geez…I could see people getting pissed about paid search…but come on, they send people to my site daily and all I need to do is meet the requirement of having quality content on a quality site. Seems reasonable to me.

      • +10 to both of you!

        Google even tells you how to build quality sites in the Google Webmaster Guidelines. Who could ask for more from them?

        Notice those are not ‘How to rank well in search engine’ guidelines. They are much more about the quality fo the content and making it accessible than they are about specific search engine foibles mainly because ‘quality’ doesn’t change, just our, and Google’s ability to determine it programaticaly.

      • gail
        Reply

        I read 30-40 articles a day on highly searched topics on the web. Of these I find at least 10 that are gibberish! Complete nonsense, I obviously do not select them to be highlighted on any of the 7 blogs that I personally write for and maintain. I think Google wants quality and they are battling this constant flow of garbage…I’m for anything that sucks out the garbage.

  26. thanks for this article…With this new advice I will try to make a new strategy for my site…

  27. Hi Chris, Another great update. When looking through Google’s latest comments, I must admit that not all of our articles are what you call top notch quality and given this new information I shall now be revisiting all of our articles to try and take all the criteria into account.

  28. Great article, very interesting comments! I have to agree that webmasters and bloggers need to focus on quality of content vs. the ever changing SEO algorithms. Providing value to your readers is the key in my opinion. Focusing on SEO does not add any value. Focusing on content quality without too many distractions does add value.

  29. I absolutely cannot wait for a competitor to step up and challenge Google. Bing has a long way to go, and IMO, I don’t know if they will ever ‘get it’. Duckduckgo? Blecko? The opportunity is enormous, and the time is now. Google’s days of dictating to the Internet using population what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’ need to end. Now.

  30. Writing good quality content for people, not for search engines may be the slow road to increased SERP rankings, but over time it’s the most successful.

What do you think? Respond.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

WebProNews Videos | Advertise | About Us | Newsletter | Archive | News Feeds | Terms & Conditions | Contact Us

WebProNews is an iEntry Network ® publication - © 1998-2012 All Rights Reserved.