I have found that it is best to not worry too much about what Google is doing. They from what I have read, change things up so regularly that it is almost impossible to know for sure what is true, and what isn't. Matt Cutts did mention that Google changes things up hundreds of times a year. I have read they cycle through a series of algorithms in order to trick people that are trying to gain an unfair advantage in the search results. They are following an "Elitist" mindset. Favoring big corporate brands, by hand picking them for top google search results is just sickening. My passions, and dreams are on the internet. One of my favorite things to do is trial and error with getting a website of mine to the top page rankings of Google. I wish Google would not be a monopoly anymore and some other small fish comes along to take up a presence, of course providing a more fair, advanced search engine would be nice too!
Matt Cutts on Social Media Links in Google
Possible Changes to Social, But Not Specifically FOR SocialGoogle's Matt Cutts has really been taking the bull by the horns when it comes to reaching out to the community. He's posted another answer to a user question (yesterday we looked at his response to one about Google's spell corrections) via YouTube video.
This time the question strikes a pretty timely and relevant topic that WebProNews has discussed a few times in recent memory. That is the relationship between social media and SEO/link building. The question Matt tackles is:
Has Google Changed the relevancy it awards to social media sites in the last six months?
Matt implies that Google doesn't look at it like social network links are different from any other links. "We tend to think about links, and whether they're useful," he says. No surprise there. Why should a link get any more or less weight just because it's social?
Matt does say that he was in a meeting where they were talking about a change that does "slightly different weihgting" for how they do some types of links and anchors and that could have an effect on social media sites, but that was not the intent of the change.
So when it comes to the question at hand, he basically says yes, they've probably changed the way social sites are weighted, but not for the reason that they are social media sites. "It hasn't been....'oh let's change how we think about social media sites,'" he says.
It's all about the user experience, and that shouldn't come as a shock. Matt says Google's open to doing what they need to do in this area. More on the relationship between social media and SEO.
Social Bookmarking sites and the back links value
Publish A Comment
| Popular WPN Business Resources |
-

Latest Features from Digg and StumbleUpon
Although news outlets continually bring reports about new features on... -

What's Next for Twitter API?
Although Twitter's homepage gets a tremendous amount of traffic, it... -

The Rise of Horizontal Content Sites
Over the last year, the search industry has seen a large rise in...
iEntry 10th Anniversary
RSS
Newsletter
Advertising




















There shouldn't be any
There shouldn't be any differences in the weight for social media links. A link is a link, if it comes from a quality website, then its worth the weight as it always has been.