If Google Indexing Goes Real-Time, What Will it Mean for Ranking?

To PuSH Content to Google, You'll Need Trust

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:

[ Search]

Last year, we saw the emergence of the technology PubSubHubbub, which provides real-time notifications to subscribers of content when there is new content or updates being made. There has recently been talk about Google developing a system that would use this technology it its indexing process.

Do you want your content indexed instantly? Share your thoughts.

In fact, Google’s Matt Cutts spoke with WebProNews about this, among other things:

"Maybe some small site, you might only find a chance to crawl its pages once a week, but if that site is blogging like every 20 minutes, boom , you hit the submit button, and the search engines can find out about it," explained Cutts.

"Now the tension is that more spammers would use this as well, so you can’t just say, ‘I’m gonna index everything that everybody pushes to me.’ So finding the right balance there is tricky, but the potential is really, really exciting," he said.

"You can definitely imagine the reputable blogs getting very fast updates – the ones that we think are trustworthy, and then over time, maybe ramping that up, so that more and more people have the ability to do…just like, instant indexing," he says.

And here we see another way Google may end up looking at the trust factor, with regards to ranking.

Can We Learn from How Google Does Real-Time Search?

Liz Gannes at GigaOm recapped a few things Google senior product manager Dylan Casey said at SMX last month:

Casey said perhaps the most complex project in real time is to determine when to trigger the appearance of real-time results in search results. "We have huge internal debates on: Is this a good answer to this question, or are we just creating a tool for low-quality content?" he said.

Casey spent some effort justifying Google paying to include Twitter’s real-time firehose of tweets, saying it was an intensive technical integration on both sides, and that tweets are a fundamentally different form of communication due to the restrictions of their form. For example, Google has developed a ‘complex system’ for removing users’ public tweets that are later deleted or marked private.

Earlier this year, Amit Singhal, who has led development of real-time search at Google talked about how Google ranks tweets. According to him, Google ranks tweets by followers to an extent, but it’s not just about how many followers you get. It’s about how reputable those followers are.

Singhal likens the system to the well-known Google system of link popularity. Getting good links from reputable sources helps your content in Google, so having followers with that same kind of authority theoretically helps your tweets rank in Google’s real-time search.

"One user following another in social media is analogous to one page linking to another on the Web. Both are a form of recommendation," Singhal says. "As high-quality pages link to another page on the Web, the quality of the linked-to page goes up. Likewise, in social media, as established users follow another user, the quality of the followed user goes up as well."

Now Google’s current real-time search product is separate from the whole PubSubHubbub-based system that isn’t in place yet, but Matt’s comments about blogs being trustworthy, indicates to me that trust is going to be key in being able to push content to Google’s index in real-time. So, I wonder if a similar strategy to how Google ranks its current real-time and Twitter results will be employed in determining this kind of trust.

Does This Mean If You’re Not Trusted You Won’t Get Indexed?

"PuSH wouldn’t likely replace crawling, in fact a crawl would be needed to discover PuSH feeds to subscribe to, but the real-time format would be used to augment Google’s existing index," says Marshall Kirkpatrick, who spoke in a session on the real-time web at SXSW, which also included Google’s Brett Slatkin, one of the guys responsible for PuSH (he’s in the following video explaining the technology in simple terms).

Lots of sites out there already have PuSH technology in place. For example, WordPress and Typepad blogs have the ability to "PuSH" their content. That’s a lot of content itself. A lot of user-generated content, and that means the potential for spam is huge, which is why the trust factor is so important.

If PuSh is to be heavily utilized by the search engines, and you want your content indexed as quickly as possible, you’re going to want to do what you can to build community trust and a solid reputation. One more reason to engage in meticulous online reputation management, put out great content, and engage with the community.

Do you want to see Google index the web in real-time? Discuss here.

If Google Indexing Goes Real-Time, What Will it Mean for Ranking?
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://www.aquapoxy.com Concrete Floor Coating

    So far it sounds like just keep providing quality content & keep your sub pages near the root is the way to go for quick indexing by google.

  • http://www.fwointl.com/ Rowdy Rhodes

    Personally I think that the Google search engine should remain separate from the real-time push of content. A search engine (defined for years) is a place to go to find web sites and blogs.

    PubSubHubbub is using the prefix Pub because it is publishing content. Google should simply create another site that is based upon publishing of content. A massive articles directory if you will that contains all of the published content it wants to have aboard from all of the various sources of blogs and feeds it can fine. Why mix the two engines? It’ll be a mess.

    Under real-time: e.g. Try and find a web site that specifically deals in widgets and you’ll get a million pages of sites and articles, and they could be one off-articles at a web site that simply wrote about widgets that month but happens to specialize in something completely different than what you’re looking for. It’ll be a user’s waste of time to use Google to search for sites in the future (in my humble opinion) and a good way to get me to start using Bing, Cuil, Yahoo and/or AOL search engines to find the web sites I want. This real-time idea is nuts. Keep a content search engine separate and it’s a pretty good idea though.

    Sometimes common sense just makes sense and to me a web site search engine and a content seach engine are two different things used for two different reasons.

    Pass this along to your Google contacts to consider if you will. It might give them a simple solution to the tweets ranking and capturing as well. “Google Tweets Search Engine” would be for individuals interested in Tweeter (I’m not one of them). So far they have kept separate all of their other projects, such as books, finance, apps, etc. why mix together now? Makes no sense to me.

    If they do go ahead with the idea then I hope they add a way to turn off aspects of their search so that users like myself can stick to using Google to find web sites. I already know how to find content – go to the site(s) that specialize in it and have good rankings and trusted reputations. I don’t need a PubGooGoo to help me find that.

    Rowdy Rhodes
    Site Director
    Freelance Writing Organization – Int’l.

    • http://www.webpro.in Bharati Ahuja

      Totally Agree.

    • Dave

      Quote: “Under real-time: e.g. Try and find a web site that specifically deals in widgets and you’ll get a million pages of sites and articles…”

      I think Google’s got it down when it comes to search for a widget vs “tiger woods’ scandal” and would have seriously taken your presupposition in mind back in the development stage of real-time search results. Google would never want to lose it’s credibility. Plus the odds of millions of irrelevant pages showing up in the search would seriously put Google at risk of being a spam result site.

      This isn’t going to be as much of a problem as you think.

    • just me

      I have to fully agree with you, Rowdy… let’s hope the powers that be over at google take another look at this.

    • http://www.everydayguide.com Al

      Very Well Said mate. This is sure gonna hurt us small guys.

  • http://www.webpro.in Bharati Ahuja

    I have a question. I have posted this on Google webmaster central also.

    With this PuSh Protocol for WordPress Blogs is it still important to submit the WordPress Blog XML Sitemaps to google webmaster tools?

    As the pages get indexed as soon as they are published.

  • http://blackhatuni.org Mandy G

    I think there is a place for getting results for the latest big thing, and maybe that could be in a separate bar away from the main search results.

    If Google gave up a few square inches of screen real estate to a pull-through of the latest news relevant to the search, then maybe that would work.

    That news banner could be in that wasted blue space before the Results 1 of 10 at the top of page.

  • Guest

    Here’s an idea. On the Google search page, at the top left where you can find “Images, Videos Maps” etc. “Add real-time”, “Tweets” etc. …pubsubhubbub… are you having a laugh…

  • http://www.blogginhealth.com BlogginHealth

    Yeah, it seems to be good but is there a way the “little” ones can benefit? After all we are all supposed to be equal under the sun.

  • http://www.ypraise.com kevin

    I use wordpress on some of my sites and for the last few months some blogs are indexed within 3 hours. I think that’s fast enough and close enough to real time to be effective.

    I don’t see the need to go to true real time for most sites. Perhaps google should keep this technology to it’s news and blogs sections rather than it’s full blown index.


  • http://www.parstvs.com Nick

    And here again, it is a matter of good content.

  • http://www.qwinki.com/search.html Search

    Looking forward to real time Google search.

  • http://www.priorityresults.com Brian Bierbaum

    Good analogy to link popularity. As usual, it sounds like a focus on good content, link building and reputation management strategy will keep most sites ranking well.

    If you are looking for some quick tips on link popularity and back links you can check out this recent blog post: http://priorityresults.com/blog/seo-backlinking-the-backbone-to-an-effective-search-engine-optimization-strategy/

  • http://www.collegeofpublicspeaking.co.uk Vince Stevenson

    I’m not sure if real time is absolutely necessary. Our web promotion activities are long term projects and we do pretty well. Real time could give you an initial boost, but in the long run it should all even out.

    Rgds Vince

  • http://www.syndicat.com Niels Dettenbach

    Who really need this?

    Nearly each at least partially modern website which offers time critical informations (news) in any way usually provide their own services / interfaces to inform users about more or less important changes.

    Shure – most of them (like RSS/RDF/Atom feeds or xml sitemaps) – are not really real time – but Google will not acting “realtime” too.

    Providing web updates in quasi realtime needs a “push” protocol or system where webmasters can send in updates on web pages if they want – but it won’t makes any sense to send such updates to Google alone as Google is (and will be) just one web robot / index. I see a much more suitable solution to provide a generic and fully open implementation of such a “update by push” protocol including open implementations of servers and clients which will allow singe access points for webmasters to send in their updates to any “recipient” (recipients could be search indices, informations service providers or end users). Such a implementation may implemented in a cloud (like PGP keyservers) or over single nodes which could be operated by anyone in a free manner.

    I see no advantages to bring more and more informations to one company like Google as they have their own hardly closed politics and business concepts. Google is not the internet nor the leader of that network. I can’t understand the current hype around Google as theirfew own ideas and contributed ideas to the Internet are still around 10 years old and their business concept is alive only because of huge fund of money they have to invest (and to collect on the world market). If the hype is going on further it won’t let me wonder if the next world market crash will interferred or initially started by a Google crash.

    I see the future of internet searching in a fully open (rfc) standards / protocol based web of robots, indices, information providers and “search” frontends i a very different manner.

    Searching ny one or a few keywords is a very old and a very simple – but in many cases very inefficient – way to look for information ressources and even keyword based searching could be much more complex and different then google does it.

    If just google is there all web users have to be happy with the search results google spokes out. The internet allows much more then one search engine could work out in a nearly perfect way for any user – in any usage or application.

    A main danger is that Google will get more and more power to censoring content which is not “business conform” and google is still censoring a lot – even in europe (where i’m come from). The must do censorship as long as it is a commercial business concept and company which has to do business in the majority of countries worldwide. A free “search network” or “web” allows anyone to build his own “search solution” from the back to the front and the users got their power back to decide which services they want to use for what.

    If someone here is interested in working on a new and fully open protocol suite and implementation pls feel free to contact me.



  • Guest

    I’m in agreement with those who question the wisdom of adding real time indexing to the normal Google search.
    We are a small (read family) business, and real time indexing, in my opinion, would drive us out of search engine marketing altogether. We’re already competing with millions of other sites, and right now we’re holding our own, but if Google makes this change we’re gone. We can’t afford to hire people to keep updating for us or spend our time only on thinking of ways to add more, more, more to keep it fresh…. or to Tweet every five minutes on our own or with an automated program.
    I believe, as others have said, that real time search should be in a league of its own. Add real time as an option, but don’t integrate it!

  • http://danielleparsons.com Danielle Parsons

    As a commission sales person, I like the fact that Google will show fresh content at the top of the searches for competitive keywords. I like the Word Press apps which strengthen SEO and I have seen the results just this week with a new site.

  • http://www.blackballonline.com Dave Durbin

    We see an amalgam of all things coming. The question is “Should a tweet outrank a website?” Probably not, other than news. I can see the spam train coming. If the intention is to rank for highest quality content for a given term, then how do tweets weigh against a proven site? Real time indexing is the way of the future. There’s no way around that.

    One more tidbit – where’s the factual checking. Twitter and Facebook have long been affected the rumor-mill. Bad information and low quality content needs a filter. Tough to do in real time. Google, “PLEASE DO THIS ONE RIGHT”.

  • http://www.loudmarket.com Mike Gracen

    Rowdy just nailed it. Googlers, please wake up from your dreamland and read his post to see what us ‘other’ Internet users want in a search engine. Or not, and watch Bing’s user base continue to grow month over month.

  • http://www.avintel.com avintel

    deciding that THEY are “Trusted” in the first place? This is and always has been a major issue with Google; they say that visitors indicate trust, which increases results location which increases visitors. this does not promote better content, it promotes advertising, big business and “spammers” or people who try to use tactics to get around the first two. Is everyone that oblivious that we continually have these discussions about Google’s techniques and constant questions of why, why, why or what do we do?

    The answers are simple: you want a popular site? do one of the 3 above. Advertise, Be a big business like CNN or Amazon or Spam, like Wikipedia. WHAT? I’m calling a Big Business a Spammer? YES! They all spam, it’s just accepted cause they are TRUSTED. Wikipedia for example got millions of people to write anything about anything which provides content, pages and “Trust”. See, not so bad. I’m not saying spam is good, I agree, it’s bad. I’m just saying that Google is business driven, not trust driven and that encourages spam more than trusted content.

    • Guest

      What is your definition of spamm?
      It seems to me that Google calls Internet Marketers ”spammers”. It also seems that Google entertains the idea that anyone trying to make a buck online is a conn or spammer or just some sneaky snake w/ no morals.
      Well it’s not true. Who ISN’T trying to make a buck?? It’s not like there are plenty of jobs out there!!
      Don’t fall for the old paradigm that anyone w/ money (or anyone who takes it upon themselves & not just wait for some boss person to give them a break) is a bad person. Where do you think the money you’ve earned ever came from? That’s right; business. Where else would it come from?

  • http://serpeoseo.wordpress.com Philadelphia Website Rank-SEO

    I have seen sites like mine on wordpress take off from nowhere and get ranked from the push RSS feeds. I am a proponent of this type of search engine ranking. For the longest time many thought the use of the global “nofollow” would have negated the tweets but they were wrong. There are good systems in place to stop spammers. In reality everyone is a spammer, but where is that line drawn? Great content cannot be rejected and if you write well, you will be received with open arms.

    Content is getting more attention that ever before by the search engines and these social sites are pushing it fast and hard. Social sites pose a real threat to big search. These new doorways are becoming the entry point for many that used to go to the search engines to start their internet sessions. There used to be a moment for many folks as they decided for what they would search. Now that social media is in place, once online visitors are welcomed, challenged, intrigued, humored and directed by the powerful influences of their chosen peers.

    Google reportedly grossed 12 billion dollars last year on Adwords. Social media, with its hundreds of new doorways to the internet is threatening Google, so it makes sense that the search giant will figure every way to employ and to exploit the fluid nature of this new craze. Google has to make an effort because it will lose market share. After all, less use of a search engine means less pay-per-clicks.

    Social media is forcing Google, Bing and Yahoo to clean up the SERPS and they are responding with Google dumping tens of thousands of its paid advertisers that are suspected of using blackhat techniques. The power of social media is making the internet a better, even cleaner place. Real people cleanse the social sites. Real end users are what the search giants always wanted to attract and harness with the natural linking process that was ruined by self serving backlink strategies. Real people that push content, imagine that….

  • http://www.oldluxe.com/ Old Luxe

    I really enjoyed the interview with Matt Cutts, thank you.

  • http://www.b-seenontop.com Donna

    Another amen to Rowdy.

    When I’m looking for real time information I go to my trusted sites and read what’s happening. My trusted sites for breaking news and entertaining chatter are not the same as others. I don’t use Google search for this purpose and I don’t want to. The insatiable need for instant gratification isn’t a universal phenomenon. If Google feels the need to create a tool for this purpose they should respect the patient segment of their existing customer base and not muddy the waters.

    Think of their analogy “are we there yet”. Yes, I said that when I was 8 years old. No I don’t say it anymore and nor do I ask my trusted sites if they have anything new to tell me. I like the idea of fresh content being pushed to me but I can also wait without having to ask. I’d be willing to tell Google my trusted sites and ask for a real-time feed, but I’d also want to be able to turn it off and on, filter the feeds, and maybe if I can’t read I’d also like it read aloud to me.

  • Guest

    What used to be then Number 1 Page of Real Estate on the Net -used to be Google’s Page. However with the madness going on at the Goo these days, Page 1 consists of crap:

    1) Wikipedia listings – If I would have needed a definition for something I would have asked, this is redundant garbage.

    2) Corporate Sites: the reason people like Web 2.0 properties is because they can turn off the corporate garbage. If I wanted to see Purina, I would : Google Purina. But when I Google : Dog Food, I want to know what dog food is made of , not a corporate site pushing less than nutritious dog foods. Again – crap.

    3) Adwords Buyers – no – I don’t want to see sites that had to pay – for me to see them, because that means those sites are less quality sites and often are just Sales Page wanting my email address -garbage again. These days Google returns alot of corporate ad buyers – all greedily wanting clicks -but they won’t get mine.

    4) As a result – I don’t find much quality in the Caffeinated version of Google Search, and usually now, what I am looking for is on Page 2, 3, or 4.

    If I don’t find my search results in quotes or without – I search in other engines and that has become more necessary today. Also I don’t want an article on About Dot com …as it is a subjective site -also very corporate minded and full of Google adsense ads to click away. Seems like you spend your life on Google trying to find real quality sites, with real content, not regurgitated over and over again. I want unique quality sites, the bloggers have better articles than national networks. Speaking of news, the top TV networks must be buying up adwords like crazy – worth millions to Google I imagine but if I wanted to know what’s up on ABC News, I google ABC News, not : News Updates. You see -it is becoming more of a chore to see what you want -and more self serving for Google revenue to dish you up what they want, and that sucks.

    5) If Google’s Maps, Twitter’s Tweets and all the other Wiki, corporate listings take up prime search pages, the Google page is worthless….in so much that the diluted search returns are becoming less of what the user searched for in the first place.

    No, I don’t think Google is headed in the right direction and not using their heads, to me it is becoming more of a monopoly of the Internet and only returns searches that benefit its bottom line. In conclusion if Google follows the corporate path -tis doomed to lose money and so it should – WEB 2.0 is here to stay and hopefully we will not be so dependant on the Big G to monopolize our time -with redundant waste and crap it turns up for us.

    • http://www.ewindowwashing.com Window Cleaning San Diego

      I think its a great idea and I love that google is always looking for innovative ways to serve the user. This is exciting news and I am already looking into using it. Now I just need to have the content to give my readers.

  • http://str82u.com Str82u

    Good points today and thanks for my morning fix. I’ve been watching this with my researchers, you can tell when our results are coming from the cafine data, you can see discriptions or titles that are current but cache pages that are older than the titles. We’ve been using those results to tweak sites live… ISN”T THAT WHAT WE ALL WANTED? Live results to work with? Sandbox?

    In the end, the most common phrase after pagerank and pagespeed is Quality Content. If you have it there is nothing to worry about.

  • http://www.workwithgregtucker.com Greg

    I would have to agree with several of your commenters here. It has gotten to the point where little by little, Google is tweaking and restructuring themselves right into the hands of their competitors. It may take a while, but they’re needlessly giving away market share and ticking off niche marketers. Almost on a monthly basis, it seems they come up with a new supposed improvement that does nothing but drive away paying customers/advertisers.

  • http://amitkulkarni.info/pics/ Guest

    Rowdy good idea but all the users who are commenting on this are above average users/power users. That forms a small part of internet. Google has to think about the average user like who still cant make out the difference between a single click and dbl click …

    Catering to that user is very important for G and hence it will be difficult to have 2 separate pages/portals. Their universal search will remain on the same homepage till it sees the internet users have matured in usability and know what they want exactly

  • http://www.stuffdone.com Paul Kruger

    I am now in my 15th year developing web sites. When I started there was no Google but what engines existed then indexed instantly! I used to submit a new site, hit refresh and it would appear right away.

    This is really going back to where things began…with many more sites but also with stronger crawlers and more bandwidth and smarter servers.

    Are we judging this retro-trend in terms of the site owner or of those who search Google for content? Google’s model is to provide services to the viewer not the web master. We are only necessary to their success as the providers of content but advertisers pay the bills !

    Let’s see how this unfolds.

  • http://realityviews.blogspot.com/ sm

    yes this is the future
    nice article

  • Guest

    It seems to me that Google calls Internet Marketers ”spammers”. It also seems that Google entertains the idea that anyone trying to make a buck online is a conn or spammer or just some sneaky snake w/ no morals.
    Well it’s not true. Who ISN’T trying to make a buck?? It’s not like there are plenty of jobs out there!! I think that if Google continues this behavier, they will go down like a sinking ship and I hope the other big engines will stay clear of that and not just copy Google and go down w/ them.

    • http://www.u-need-ink.co.uk/ Mike Alter

      No i don’t think wat u say is true, Becz google thinks for users and not for spammers.
      There has already been lot of spam and google has tried to control most of them.
      No doubt in real time it would be much harder, but then nothing is impossible.
      Future is bright for google as it has a vast experience behind.
      So forget about sinking )

  • http://www.colorshosting.com Atul Deshmukh

    what i see still in the market is people still are not confident enough for the web generation. The people who are buying are sellers themselves in the open market. The common person is still to get hold of the internet. As it is still the land of uncertainties as the common person describes it. THAT IS THE REAL MARKET. REAL TIME DOES NOT MATTER OR IT MAY BE A LONG WAY TO GO.

  • http://www.gbrdirect.co.uk Rob L

    Being able to to push our content to Google, even once a day, would be fantastic. We have many changes to our company names index (contains 24 million names currently) every day and need to know that these changes will be reflected in Google’s search results. Currently, we pray they will…. and that is all we can do!

  • http://www.midnightgamer.com Cartoon Games

    This is crazy. If they implement something like this, the face of search engines could be changed forever. I have always hated trying to find out news about a very new topic but the search engines haven’t indexed them yet. This will be amazing.

  • http://richinwriters.com Steve

    No matter what way you slice it spammers will always find there way in. I like the idea i think everybody deserves a chance to get ranked in major search engines.

  • http://www.realtimecorporation.com Guest

    It seems to me that Google has quite the handle on core algorithm strategy such that refinement of sub-routine at closest path critical branch juncture would be an entertaining exercise with corollary search enhancement? Just my opinion…

  • Guest

    This is what RSS feeds and subscribing was supposed to be…..

    so what’s new?

  • http://www.neutrinobomb.com Guest

    Keep guessing. Google’s strategy. The more you dig into google the more involved and addicted you get. Google follows the simple cliche’ like “Curiousity kills the cat”. I wouldn’t be surprised if google stuns everyone by coming up with something totally novel and innovative.

  • http://www.statisticalconsultants.co.nz/ Dion

    If I want timely info, I would go to a news site or some other site where I am expecting it to be. When I

  • http://www.cardonatoys.com Mike

    Tweets is one thing, but indexing sites in real time is simply not feasible – there’s (imho) absolutely no point in this exercise in futility.

  • http://www.jprrealty.com/home.asp Judy

    I like the idea I think everybody deserves a chance to get ranked in major search engines. But getting google in realtime there are other avenues and programs like hootsuite that already provide real time for tweets. Is Google just trying to do to much?

  • http://hidemobile.com Guest

    I will for sure give it a try but when it will go real time for sure we can have a spam problem and you will not be easy to control spam posts, scrap blogs and duplicated content.
    thanks for sharing.

  • marketingseo


    So far it sounds like just keep providing quality content


  • http://infolusion.blogspot.com Fherry

    in my opinion, if a blog has a high Page Rank, Google also will like the site and perform index every slightest change in the site. Google will be happy and index a site if that site is known. Philosophy of any link exchange is also a major wrench to raise the page rank. Because backlink will prove to the search engines, especially Google, the site is worth a visit by google for having known in the Internet world, because many other sites that refer to that site (backlink)

    by infolusion.blogspot.com

  • http://www.glosgiftsblog.com GL ONEAL

    I think its a good idea.

  • http://www.snerdey.com Snerdey

    So if a new or a part time blogger decides that they are going to increase their blogging post from 1 / hour / day to every 20 mins and the main stream bloggers increase their blog post even more — it’s basically all the same just worded differently.

    I’m all about improving the results but the real battle is between the real facts and fluff.

    Have a great week everyone.

    Follow me on Twitter

  • http://www.diamondrealestatebelize.com Frank Tull

    It makes sense to index instantly so that our updates can be recognized instantly.

  • Jasee

    I don’t think it should be separate (in response to Rowdy). I’d like to see it added as compilation on Googles search results, but maybe a separated section, similiar to their facebook/twitter live feeds.

  • http://phillips-hemphill.com Jacksonville Online Marketing

    I say crawl crawl, crawl, crawl. This is yet another way SERPS are going to get spammed. However, it’s also another profit center for online marketing companies..

  • http://newmymembershipempire.com/ albertblack

    Google will index and will look forward the rank.

  • http://www.metrovancouvertalk.com Vancouver Talk

    This is my first time hearing about PubSubhubbub (I guess all the good names were taken), but I’ve actually been wondering about something like this for a long time. I have a blog that I sometimes update once a week, and sometimes twice a day. When I do create a new post, though, it is usually a time sensitive thing, and unfortunately, it only seems to make it to Google around a week later (after it’s too late). Because of that, I’ve often wondered if there was something I could do to get my content into Google immediately. Real time indexing by Google seems like the ideal solution for that.

  • http://www.australiansites.com.au Australian Sites

    I’m with Rowdy Rhodes on this one.

    To become one of those “trusted” sites quickly is beyond the control of most webmasters. I do like the idea – but I feel mixing it with search will disadvantage us “little guys”
    Why do they need to mess with search yet again?

    As Rowdy said in his comment “a web site search engine and a content seach engine are two different things used for two different reasons.” I agree 100%

    Not everything new is a good thing. Im often frustrated by google as a search engine as it is. As an Australian, even using google.com is impossible as they seem to redirect my search to google.com.au when I had no desire to search for local results.

  • http://www.u-need-ink.co.uk/ Mike Alter

    Real time results will be the end of SEO’s.

    Becz Natural results that were shown won’t be shown, as now real time plays more important role. Google is already in implementation of a new ALGLORITHM that will judge Realtime Search results ( keywords, authority, links that are popular and revisited links) all this will result in New Results, Fast Results, Updated results.

    This is good in terms of Users becz if i need to find up updates or latest products prices, latest music, hotel booking prices then latest updates results would be more preferable.

    Just imagine when u are in airport – Updated timing of arrival and departure is flashed. That’s what users is looking for who want to know the latest update.

    If i was Google then, i would have made a GOOGLE FLASH Technology – Fast Index, Updated 24/7 results :)

    But if this Algo is applied then it would be the End of SEO’s, as then it will be time of Social Marketing.

  • http://www.neatnest.biz neatnest

    I think real time will be good but as you said, trustable is the main issue. spamers will always try to do something.

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sidebar Top
  • Sidebar Middle
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter
  • Sidebar Bottom