Matt Cutts Talks About Coming Google Algorithm Changes

By: Chris Crum - April 2, 2014

Google seems to have announced some coming changes to its algorithm in the latest “Webmaster Help” video. Head of webspam Matt Cutts said the search engine is working on some changes that will help it better determine when a site is an authority on a topic. He didn’t give any specific dates or anything, but says he’s “looking forward to to those rolling out.”

Do you think Google is good at determining which sites are authorities on certain topics right now? Do you expect these changes to lead to better results? Let us know what you think in the comments.

The topic came up when Blind Five Year Old asked Cutts, “As Google continues to add social signals to the algorithm, how do you separate simple popularity from true authority?”

Cutts says in the video that the first part of that question makes an “assumption” in that Google is using social signals in its ranking algorithm. The rest of the time, he talks more about authority vs. popularity more generally, and doesn’t really get into social signals at all.

He did recently talk about Facebook and Twitter signals in another video. More on that here. CEO Larry Page has also talked about social signals in search in the past.

Regarding popularity versus authority, Cutts says, “We’ve actually thought about this quite a bit because from the earliest days it would get us really kind of frustrated when we would see reporters talk about PageRank, and say, ‘PageRank is a measure of popularity of websites,’ because that’s not true.”

He goes on to talk about how porn sites are popular because a lot of people go to them, but not a lot of people link to them, and how on the other hand, a lot of people link to government websites, but not as many go to them. They want the government sites to have authority, but porn sites not so much.

“You can separate simple popularity from reputation or authority, but now how do we try to figure out whether you’re a good match for a given query?” Cutts continues. “Well, it turns out you can say, take PageRank for example – if you wanted to do a topical version of PageRank, you could look at the links to a page, and you could say, ‘OK, suppose it’s Matt Cutts. How many of my links actually talk about Matt Cutts?’ And if there are a lot of links or a large fraction of the links, then I’m pretty topical. I’m maybe an authority for the phrase Matt Cutts.”

“It’s definitely the case that you can think about not only taking popularity, and going to something like reputation, which is PageRank, but you could also imagine more topical…’Oh, you’re an authority in the medical space” or ‘You’re an authority in the travel space’ or something like that. By looking at extra signals where you could say, ‘Oh, you know what? As a percentage of the sorts of things we see you doing well for or whatever, it turns out that your links might be including more anchor text about travel or about medical queries or something like that,’ so it is difficult, but it’s a lot of fun.”

Then we get to the part about the upcoming algorithm changes.

“We actually have some algorithmic changes that try to figure out, ‘Hey, this site is a better match for something like a medical query, and I’m looking forward to those rolling out, because a lot of people have worked hard so that you don’t just say, ‘Hey, this is a well-known site, therefore it should match for this query.’ It’s ‘this is a site that actually has some evidence that it should rank for something related to medical queries,’ and that’s something where we can improve the quality of the algorithms even more.”

If they actually work, these changes could indeed provide a boost to search result quality. In fact, this is just the kind of thing that it seemed like the Panda update was originally designed to do. Remember how it was initially referred to as the “farmer” update because it was going after content farms, which ware saturating the search results? Many of those articles from said farms were drowning out authoritative sites on various topics.

There is supposed to be a “next generation” Panda update hitting sometime as well, though Cutts didn’t really suggest in the video that this was directly related to that. That one, he said, could help small businesses and small sites.

After the initial Panda update, Google started placing a great deal of emphasis on freshness, which led to a lot of newer content ranking for any given topic. This, in my opinion, didn’t help things much on the authority side of things. Sometimes more authoritative (or frankly relevant) content was again getting pushed down in favor of newer, less helpful content. I do think things have gotten a bit better on that front over maybe the past year or so, but there’s always room for improvement.

It’s interesting that Google is looking more at authority by topic now, because Cutts has also been suggesting that blogs stay on topic (I guess whatever topic Google thinks you should be writing about) at least when it comes to guest blog posts. As you may know, Google has been cracking down on guest blog posts, and when one site was penalized, Cutts specifically suggested that the topic of one post wasn’t relevant to the blog (even though most people seem to disagree with that).

Either way, this is another clue that Google really is looking at authority by topic. It seems like it might be as good a time as any to be creating content geared toward a specific niche.

Do you think these algorithm changes will help or hurt your site? Will they improve Google’s search results? Let us know what you think in the comments.

About the Author

Chris CrumChris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Follow Chris on Twitter, on StumbleUpon, on Pinterest and/or on Google: +Chris Crum.

View all posts by Chris Crum
  • JH

    Yes Google is great having all the largest companies in their field dominate the first few pages . . . Something they warned would happen if the USA signed treaties concerning the net. What they really meant was this is going to happen but we want to get paid for it

  • Jonny

    google is good in making money and destroying sites. But not in their “upcoming changes”…

  • beebob

    I think Google has made and then destroyed to many businesses and we need to get back to the old ways of visiting our clients and building relationships that way. One day their algorithm is in your favour and you are employing staff to keep up with the work and a year later you are retrenching staff to stay afloat as their algorithm has thrown you out again. Consequently a lot of “SEO” companies have sprung up selling you that they know what’s going on, but they don’t know much for very long and they really out to just relieve you on you money.
    Personally I think Google should stop playing God and making and breaking peoples lives – imagine if the telephone companies messed around with the telephone book like Google does..?

  • John

    Spam sites now update bits of their pages robotically to game the freshness algorithm.

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      I can say from experience that refreshing pages and content is vital to staying in Google. Leave a page for too long and you slip way back in the rankings, replaced by shallow pages of useless content from other sites.

      • http://www.business-website-designer.co.uk/ Business Designer

        Totally agree

        • DramaricGerboa

          Every day I see websites with few pages and no refreshed content listed on top and right in Google map listing and I think that is not fair for other businesses. I sent many screenshot of company listing twice in the first page but they ignored me.

  • http://www.couchespouradultes.fr/ Patricia

    Just another blabla to spread fear, just ignore Matt Cutts :)

  • http://fhaloanadvice.com cpruitt

    From a consumer standpoint, my search results have never been worse. Almost every search I do comes up with a list of crappy pages. From the standpoint of someone who builds sites, I also happen to notice that many of the sites I see ranked highly continue to do all the things we’ve been warned not to do, while at the same time I see other sites apparently penalized for minor issues.

  • Keith Johnson

    The popularity – authority – reputation equation is a challenge. Unfortunately without popularity, you cannot establish authority and build reputation. It seems clear to me that Google needs to publish much more about its content monitoring policies and practices – and the ways in which it protects privacy and freedom of expression. In the absence of clear policies, it is setting itself up as a target for government intervention and copyright contests about content management and restriction. I have written extensively about these issues – see for example: http://kjohnsonnz.blogspot.co.nz/2014/04/the-copyright-issue-my-fly-buzzed-beef.html

  • CedarRapids

    ‘OK, suppose it’s Matt Cutts. How many of my links actually talk about Matt Cutts?’ And if there are a lot of links or a large fraction of the links, then I’m pretty topical. I’m maybe an authority for the phrase Matt Cutts.”

    Wish they would make their mind up. Is it considered suspect if too many links use the same keywords or is it now an authority indication if they use the same keywords?

  • http://digitalmarketingonline.co.uk Derek Armson

    I think we have to remember that Matt Cutts is paid by Google to maximise revenues for them. Is he really going to give SEOs the full story? I think not. The same things as always (authority and relevance) will still remain vitally important to rankings. Otherwise Google would have to re-write the entire basis of the algorithm in order to do things vastly differently. I do think social will become more important,but all updates are simply variations on the original theme.

  • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

    I’ll believe it when I see it.

    It doesn’t seem to make a lot of difference how much unique informative content a site like ours has on a product or subject, we’re still consistently beaten on the majority of our top subjects by poor quality pages from corporate brands that just *coincidentally* happen to spend a lot of money advertising their products with Google.

    Then, of course, there’s the scourge of YouTube videos appearing for absolutely every single search term where a video might remotely exist in connection to it, further pulling the searcher into Google’s own family of sites and earning them more money through ads.

  • http://www.markgoodge.com/ MarkSG

    One problem with “authority” is that authority and usability are not always the same. Take government websites, for example. They are, by definition, usually authoritative for their content. But they aren’t always the best site to go to for the average, non-technical (or non-legal) reader. A third party site which provides accessible, non-technical information based on government data may be preferable.

    Another issue with authority is in the field of online retail. If three different online stores sell the same item, which has the most authority on a search query for that item? Maybe the manufacturer site, instead? But that’s not a lot of help if you actually want to buy.

    Similarly with news. Does the BBC have more authority than CNN? How do you rank authority where multiple sites are, quite legitimately, presenting the same or similar material independently?

  • Harald

    If Matt Cutts really wants to fight spam he should start with his own company as the worst spam are Google result pages. How many of us can tell about that when performing searches in their own business sectors? Search result pages full of – sorry – bullshit. Google has left the field of serious search when they put intangible things as “authority” or “reputation” on top of content.

  • http://www.clicktapmedia.com/ Click Tap Media

    never was so little said using so many words.. Matt on form again

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      Always keeping you scared, keeping you guessing, keeping you desperate and more willing to chuck money into the bottomless pit of Google ads.

  • Dolce Vita

    Basically we will all have to pay to rank, just wait, it’s coming if not already here. Those with the deepest pockets will win and Google doesn’t care about the businesses who have closed and the employees that have been laid off.

    • CedarRapids

      ‘Don’t be evil’ is actually a shortened form of the true Google slogan. Its actually ‘don’t be evil, unless you can get away with it’

    • Denise

      I totally agree. Let me know when Google offers pay per purchase. I am not paying for PPC when my competitors can click on my site to run up my bill. Personally, I think Google is as bad or worse than our government.

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      The recent link attack method has been used in the same way. By threatening webmasters, many are now voluntarily removing all their links whether they’re nofollow or not, making Google gleeful about now being able to manually play with the rankings and force smaller non-paying companies down the pages in favor of their corporate buddies.

      You can bet Google has some great little friendly meetings with Amazon, Ebay and Walmart before making any changes.

      • Daniel_Webster1

        I don’t doubt that considering Amazon ALWAYS ranks numbers one for any product they sell. They already dominate the marketplace and don’t exactly need the free publicity. People already know to go there when they are looking for something. If someone is doing a Google search, it is because they are trying to find an alternative to Amazon.

  • http://gastricbandfrance.co.uk/ geofflord

    Seems to me we had all better start to make our plan “B” ready. If his past updates are anything to go by many genuine good sites will suffer yet again and the spam crap sites will win yet again because they will ensure they have authority and other social signals to cheat the system ready to go in the pipeline. Every time Matt makes changes he just makes the situation worse !! They (“Google”) get richer whilst we all scramble around licking up the crumbs.
    Geoff Lord
    http://gastricbandfrance.co.uk

    • CedarRapids

      I’ve seen our sites disappear from the rankings to be replaced by the big player’s (walmart, sears, etc) search results pages that sometimes dont even have the item that the search term was looking for. I mean come on, a dynamic search result page carries more weight than an entire static site dedicated to the product in question?
      I am convinced Google is accepting payments from these big companies to get preferential rankings.

      • http://gastricbandfrance.co.uk/ geofflord

        Yes, Same here, but in our case we have been outranked by newspapers who run articles about our topic. They (the newspaper sites) will even appear above our site when you search for buying terms when it is patently obviously to anyone that the newspaper articles don’t “sell” the products !! So my question is :- how can a newspaper article that is not “selling ” anything be more relevant than a site selling the product/service when you searched for “Price “of a product” ??

      • Denise

        A lot of where the store is but can’t find the website. I know where the store is, I want to know if they have what I’m looking for. Besides, this is the Internet! I only have an online store!

  • http://www.mcccode.com/ MCC Code

    Related to another video that matt did, they have the assumption that a blog or site is only rolling on one topic, where the reality most of them have really good contents on off topic and not directly related assumed content.

  • http://www.enviroequipment.com Enviro Equipment, Inc.

    We’ve strived very hard to become an authority in our industry niche, so we welcome any algorithm change on Google’s part that helps to boost the popularity of quality, “authoritative” websites.

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      When Google says it plans to support “authority websites” it really means the pages of the largest paying corporate advertisers who it sees as an authority over small businesses.

      Just wait and see, you’ll be beaten by their corporate buddies, the ones who already spend millions advertising with Google.

  • Tim

    Google prefers big brands and professionally managed content farms spewing out bland regurgitation of sameness and “accepted” doctrines on any topic. No room for originality or innovation. I guess it is a better business model for them with only one other competitor at scale in search, not much to incent any creativity on their part.

  • http://crokes.com/ Shaun
  • http://www.interpreteremployment.com pharvie72

    Well, as always, on white paper the idea looks grand. It is always nice to see Google state that they are searching for the perfect AI algorithm that will place the exact perfect results on page one.
    They say this with every update; that it will strive to bring forward the authority sites,it will bring forward the best information and strive for good results on page one.

    In defense of Matt Cutts, I think his plan, and his ideas are genuine. I think the problem is is that he has been holed up in an office for so long, that he actually doesn’t really know what is relevant and what is NOT anymore.

    A search algorithm only can do so much though. Now I am not suggesting that we get people to do it either. I think they need to continue developing algorithms, but they should focus them far more on relevancy, and less on the size of the pay check they are collecting from the big businesses.
    I think, given the recent failures of Google’s other algorithmic updates, the dictators at Google should spend some time doing Google searches. I still find more irrelevant garbage on page one than I find good results, so maybe if the powers that be at Google spent some time using their OWN search engine they might have an epiphany about what actually needs to happen….

  • Patti Paz

    NO!!!!!!!!!!! It has declared, and the people have allowed it, KING. However, ever king has its day, and then the people wise up and cast them out . . . .

  • Michele

    I can only hope. I’m in a very niche market for a very specific product 3 years ago, the top ranking sites were 5-6 small companies just like me. All authorities in our field providing slightly different takes on the same base product. Now, maybe one of us still ranks in the top 10. We are trumped by large party sites, Wal-Mart and Sears. They are NOT authorities for our keywords but they certainly are more popular. The Panda update KILLED my site and livelihood. Sales are down 90% in direct relation to rankings. Were told to be popular with fresh content. You know what…..that doesn’t work for EVERYTHING. I don’t want to waste time playing the popularity game. Let me focus on what I do best….producing my products and servings my customers. Let’s hope this update helps determine what sites are authoritative. Maybe I can get my livelihood back.

  • Bob Teal

    Sure now that our traffic is smaller than ever in 15 years you will now say oh your traffic is low and drop our traffic even more. Thanks again Matt. With friends like you who needs enemies Pal.

  • http://www.sbwebcenter.com/ Steve B

    Google has favored big business in its search results, and now this…

    This is only going to hurt the small guys even more.

  • SS

    As with all schemes, Google is at the top of their game. As I read the comments, most are spot on; content, freshness, new updates, popularity, ranking, etc., doesn’t mean much when Google’s algorithm just assigns a minor or non existant keyword to a web page and burys it in the back of its search results $$$$$.

  • Mark Lamendola

    Please replace my previous post with this one. Sorry for the mixup.

    Unlike Microsoft, Google is good at creating an operating system (Android). And its Chrome browser is better than IE. But on the search engine front, Google loses badly to Microsoft. And why? Because Google goes ever deeper into excluding and penalizing, while Microsoft (and Yahoo and several others) take a more positive approach. This is why the results are vastly superior on Bing, Yahoo, etc.

    People who “google it” get page after page of sites that are underdeveloped and/or overly cautious and thus don’t suffer the wrath of Panda and Penguin.

    So no, Google isn’t good at determining authority. It isn’t good at differentiating spam from content, either.

    Nor is it any good at removing outdated content from its index. Some pages that have been dead for over a year still show up in our Webmaster Tools (Webmaster Fools?) account. Google tells Wall Street investors its index has X number of pages, but being a “Do more evil” corporation neglects to tell them that a huge number of those pages have not existed for a long time. So Penguin uses grossly outdated data and somehow we are supposed to believe it improves the SERPs?

    Google, if it were an ethical company, would roll back Panda and Penguin or just exist the search engine business altogether. Google should focus on what it’s good at. Running a search engine is not one of those things. Maybe instead it should devote all existing search engine resources (except the spam team) to developing a workstation operating system since Microsoft does such a crappy job of that.

  • JK

    We own two websites and were attacked and penalized by Google a year and a half ago for something our seo person that we hired did to improve our rankings. We have not been able to rebound back even after spending thousands of dollars to revamp both websites. Even when people you hire promise to be doing white hat methods, you have no idea if they really are. My point is: Google should get off their dominant attitude and at least give people a chance to explain, but of course, as you know, there is no way to get in touch with these people. What’s wrong with this picture? They have hurt a lot of decent people and I’m sure they feel no remorse for any of it. How many website owners have gone from Middle Class to the poverty level because of Google?

  • jwtravers

    Another super-duper level of filtering isn’t going to fix the problem that Google has largely created. I’m not sure whether Google is being incredible naive or incredibly arrogant but the evidence so far is that their ham-fisted efforts to gauge a site’s quality by “high level quality measures” is fundamentally flawed and doing more harm than good. Bing and Yahoo are beginning to look better because they filter out nothing and leave it to the user to decide what he/she wants to look at – a far better user experience surely than one in which the search engine arbitrarily ditches half the sites in its sample, including quality sites, simply because they fall down on one of the quality measures.

    Also, why all the complexity? Why doesn’t Google simply refuse to index a page if it has no content at all, or, say, less than 100 meaningful words. This will wipe out a large swathe of the junk that keeps coming up in my SE results.

    I fear Google have got it wrong, completely wrong, and just cannot see that what they are doing is progressively destroying what was quite a powerful and reliable search engine, whilst impoverishing the internet in the process. It’s the same old story. The arrogance of power.

  • http://www.admain.co.uk AdMain

    Authority = less room for the little guy.

    This is the pisser with how it’s going. Jack for instance is the best, quickest, most cost effecctive plumber on the planet, however he is out fixing sinks, showers and bath tubs all day.

    When he gets home he devotes all his time to his three kids. When he has them safely tucked up in bed, he is shattered and goes to bed himself only to get up in the mornning to fix more sinks and drains, but not as many as yesterday.

    He’s not fixing as many as yesterday because some national company that pays crap wages for largely unskilled workers and offers a shody job BUT can afford to have a full department devoted to social media and link building (yes they are all still at it, buying links) have dislodged Jack for search terms like “plumber at Jack street address”.

    Jack eventually has to register unemployed because he just doesn’t get any work anymore because he is a plumber with a small family who hasn’t got time to manage all the online stuff, or the resources to emply someone to manage his online profiles as well as doing his plumbing job too.

    • http://www.admain.co.uk AdMain

      And further to this authority site thing. There are certian newspapers with article that are almost a decade old still ranking highly. When it s something that changes constantly like in the finance sector, how is an article from 2007 still relevant today?

      It’s not, but because it comes from s broad sheet / national print publication it still ranks.

    • http://gastricbandfrance.co.uk/ geofflord

      well said !!! that just about puts it in to perspective about the reality of what google’s marketing master Matt Cutts has done to many thousands of small businesses all over the World !!

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      And this is exactly why Google should be broken up under anti-monopoly legislation.

      No single corporation on the planet should be able to arbitrarily destroy the livelihoods of millions of people overnight, without any oversight or regulation.

      People would never accept regulation of the internet by governments, but we would certainly accept the introduction of anti-monopoly laws to reduce the potential corruption and damage done by such a massively powerful corporation.

      • http://www.admain.co.uk AdMain

        There was once upon a time when Google results were brilliant. Probably for 5 or 6 years, you could actually trust them to deliver THE BEST quality.

        Whom ever they sacked, who ever moved on, what ever decisions were made, Google’s search resutls have deteriated for a few now.

        Very akin to Lycos or askJeeves before they disappeared.

  • http://weproms.com Zeeshan Sikander

    google will keep on doing these changes..

  • James

    How many website owners have gone from Middle Class to the poverty level because of Google?….Google you are drunk!!! go home!!!

  • Patrick Crosby

    I just hope my site has enough relevance to be considered an authoritative site.I would think so, but you never know.

    • http://gastricbandfrance.co.uk/ geofflord

      don’t hold your breath !!! make a plan B

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      Unless you have the opportunity to go and have a nice dinner with someone from Google, I wouldn’t count on you beating one of the many corporations paying Google for advertising.

  • http://www.hgpublishing.com Peter J. Francis

    Google has taken a number of steps to encourage webmasters to include specific information in websites by using the schema data format. In addition, it uses the rel=”publisher” link as well as the rel=”author” link. All of these things are ways to explicitly connect data points. I recently noticed that when the Google results include an author, it often includes the number of followers that the author has. I predict that gaining followers will be one way that authors will try to gain credibility. Well it doesn’t take a Google-level genius to see that following is the new linking. Where once a site’s authority was based on links, not an author’s authority might be based on followers. However, the Google+ profile also allows an author to list all the sites to which he/she contributes, which could also contribute to the authority of the author. But we’re still not sure if guest blogging is OK, so I’m not sure where the author is supposed to be contributing.

    • INSeducate

      Content management systems often don’t offer all those options (like ours doesn’t offer rel=canonical). So the complexity hurts there, too.

    • http://www.business-website-designer.co.uk/ Business Designer

      Interesting post shall follow you to learn some more… Tks

  • blackjack

    its pay for clicks or perish
    as simple as that

    i put in specific key words and get everything including the kitchen sink – something i dont want
    I have to really dig to get the results of my searches and this is not what a search engine should be about

    money rules this house

  • FrankLuska

    Do you think Google is good at determining which sites are
    authorities on certain topics right now? Do you expect these changes to
    lead to better results?

    Are these Late Aprils Fools Jokes?

  • Shakti Thapa

    Nothing new, always the bigger wins!

    • http://www.business-website-designer.co.uk/ Business Designer

      Agree, the hardest worker wins..

  • Somedude

    Is it just me.. or does google fiddle with its algorithm so much, that now in fact many search results turn up rubbish. I know with one of my sites which shall remain unnamed, its by far the most comprehensive and related site for that particular topic, but because of googles constant fiddling my site has not remained at the top. In fact the results above it are absolute rubbish. I feel if google keeps messing around like this its results will only get worse. Ever heard the saying, don’t fix what isnt broke mr google?

  • MP

    The only thing Google has been doing this year is giving full authority to big sites and little to no authority to smaller sites. Why? Because the bigger the site is, the more money they will be making. Also, the smaller sites that can’t seem to see this will just pay Google more than average to get back to where they belong. What does this solve? Nothing! Just gives more money to Google.

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      Because the bigger sites pay for Google ads. The smaller site sees this and has no choice by to try to compete with those bigger sites, spending money it doesn’t have against the bottomless pockets of the company already ranking for everything on your site.

      Have you not noticed that the same competitors come up for you again and again? In organic AND paid ads? Why would a company need to pay for ads when it already appears in position one for the keyword?

      It doesn’t seem to matter what products of ours I search on, the same two companies appear, with less content on their pages, less information, higher prices… and those same companies (surprise surprise) spend money on Google ads too. What a coincidence!

      This proves to me that Google is supporting the bigger businesses who already pay for advertising, making the small business even more desperate, and even more willing to spend money it doesn’t have attempting to compete against the bigger businesses already being promoted by Google.

  • wuzapro

    Interesting that porn sites and government sites were selected to demonstrate the difference between popularity and authority. Both sites guarantee someone’s going to get screwed.

  • SM

    So based upon this statement, we should expect to see Yelp disappearing from teh top positions? They can hardly be called an “Authority” on Plumbing, Auto Repair, Legal Advice, etc…

    • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk/ BlokeToys.co.uk

      It probably depends on how much money Yelp pays Google for ads

  • INSeducate

    If you have a medical-query site with much searched-for key words you can tend to have a lot of spammy uninvited sites backlinking to your domain (often generating 404 codes by — purposely? — having typos in the part of the URL designating a specific page or file). So it would be helpful to be able to disavow those uninvited backlinks. It also swamps the signal so it is hard in Webmaster tools to wade through that and see what legitimate sites are backlinking to yours.

  • http://paradevices.com/ ZapperDave

    Google is actually very poor at showing relevant sites. It even brings up pages such as Amazon and when you click on it, Amazon has nothing related to the search. http://goarticles.com/article/Irrelevance-of-Search-Results-May-Cost-Google-Its-Position/8618299/ . Basically, Google is oriented towards the big money financial interests which is often the opposite of what searchers want.

  • http://www.frontlineweb.biz/ Frontlineweb suffolk websites

    What about all the paid ads we see at at the top of search queries? What is their authority or popularity Matt Cutts? Or is it a case of those with the deepest pockets ? If that is the case this new update has no validilty

  • TM

    I’d have to disagree with most of the commentators. I can’t speak for someone attempting to rival an Amazon, ebay or Best Buy, but I have had a small niche business online for over 6 years now and 98% of my traffic has came from google organically. I have always been in the top 5 organically for many key terms and have not noticed ever dropping below five or drops in income which has averaged a steady $12k each month for several years now. I don’t do any advertising with google or anyone/where else, neither have I paid any attention to SEO at anytime. So, with the proof of my own website historically, it’s all about finding that niche that others won’t be able to follow.

  • http://www.business-website-designer.co.uk/ Business Designer

    Love Google, look after us small businesses and are so helpful.
    Live submitting and work hard to get sites to the top of the front page, glad Google are watching all the cons. Team Google…

  • Billy Bob

    OK everyone we can cry the blues all day long and no one really cares. What needs to happen is an organized petition addressed to congress with a class action suit against Google for their monopolizing and manipulating practices that are having a negative effect on all small business and our economy. Does anyone know anyone or how to kick off or execute such a task?

  • https://restore.solutions/ Numus Software

    I have also seen our sites disappear from the rankings to be replaced by the
    big player’s (walmart, sears, etc) search results pages that sometimes don’t even have the item that the search term was looking for. Just the mention on the smallest font at the bottom of the page of an item that is NOT supplied with the computer, and walmart outranks us our sites that are dedicated to the product!

  • Guest

    Why do no one get it? Google is destroying the internet. My own website, a niche site with 1000s of pages of entirely original content, assembled over 15 years, has virtually disappeared in Google’s SE results. How can it add to user experience to systematically set out to nuke quality websites? And if Google is genuine about the ‘user experience’ how come almost every search results are totally dominated by their ads – in some cases taking up the entire screen? I hate to say this but we all made Google to powerful and it is now massively abusing that power for profit, wrecking as it does so one of the best information resources we have. I’m afraid nothing other than political action on a massive scale will thwart this Evil Empire in its bid for world domination. Don’t do evil? Google is the living embodiment of evil, the greatest threat to freedom in the civilised world since Hitler and his Fascist mob. Enough is enough.

  • http://eemes.com/blog/ Jack

    Page authority is what Google takes more into consideration. I know google is focusing more on authority but that can make brand pages rank more in google than the actual small business sites. Google needs to think a lot seriously on all the issues which webmasters & small business are facing.

  • JewelChick

    How can I possibly answer the question as to how I think the algorithm changes will affect my site until I know what the changes are? He says what the changes will be designed to result in, but nothing about what they actually are or how they will work.

    If everyone would stop trying to game the system and just market, it wouldn’t be an issue.