Google Wants You To Tell It Specific Sites To Rank Better. Will It Listen?
Assuming that Matt Cutts’ Twitter account wasn’t hijacked, Google wants you to tell it if you know of any small sites that should be doing better in Google rankings.
Do you think Google will really listen to this feedback? Do you think many will suggest sites they’re not affiliated with? Let us know what you think in the comments.
If you’ve ever thought Google is giving too much weight to big brands, I guess this is your chance to weigh in on the better alternatives, wait, and see if your suggestion did any good.
If there's a small website that you think should be doing better in Google, tell us more here: https://t.co/s80BibIBhN
— Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) August 28, 2013
Cutts points to a form, which says, ‘Google would like to hear feedback about small but high-quality websites that could do better in our search results. To be clear, we’re just collecting feedback at this point; for example, don’t expect this survey to affect any site’s ranking.” Emphasis added.
You simply enter the site, and then in a box, explain to Google what makes it better. Here’s what it looks like:
Reactions, unsurprisingly, are a bit skeptical:
— Ben Cook (@Skitzzo) August 28, 2013
@mattcutts *sigh* well, at least it looks like you care, Matt.
— John Scott Cothill ☭ (@omfg_followme) August 28, 2013
— Jacob King (@IMJacobKing) August 28, 2013
.@mattcutts $40Billion and how many PHD's? And you still want us to do your job for you
— Chris Dyson (@ChrisLDyson) August 28, 2013
— Menachem Pritzker (@mdavep) August 28, 2013
@mattcutts just secured his job for another 10 yrs with the "which small site should rank higher" form. Have fun sorting through all that
— Nico de Nooijer (@nicodenooijer) August 28, 2013
— John Swindells (@swinny) August 28, 2013
My guess is that a lot of people will be giving votes for their own sites, and few will be submitting others’. Maybe I’m wrong.
Do you expect Google to obtain valuable information from this effort? Tell us what you think.
Note: this post has been updated from its original form.