Let’s Play With The “Ads Above The Fold” Panda Filter

Category : Google, SEO

It’s hard to be frustrated with Panda filters when you do SEO that abides by the great Google Webmaster Guidelines. I’ve actually seen better results come from my main shady competitors getting their links devalued. It makes sense for Google to be going forward with this filters, as they’ve done so many times before (usually with much less publicity).

bad rankingsOutside of my normal day job and clients, I dabble in the dark arts. I have a few sites that I tinker with to see what I can get away with. They’re not high revenue drivers. Let’s just call them experiments. One experiment had 3 Adsense ad blocks above the fold, making it nice and easy for Google to see what I was up to. It was pretty much a usability trap. You search, you click, you land on my page, and you have nowhere to go but click an ad.

When Google hinted that they’d be deranking these kinds of sites, I made adjustments to all… but one. And sure enough, last week (some time before January 23), my site got the beat down. A total of 16 rankings in the top 10 dropped an average of almost 20 positions. Unlike some past filters, there doesn’t appear to be a rhyme or reason. Some dropped 5 positions, some dropped as high as 47 positions. There wasn’t one single rank gain in a week, despite some typically effective link building.

Today the template was changed (I was using WordPress). My obnoxious ads have been stripped 2/3 down. There’s now only one Adsense block above the fold. I’m going to persevere with the steady link building.

Stay tuned!

Popularity: 1% [?]

Search Engine SPAM With Facebook (Round 2)

2

Category : Google, SEO

In early November Google promoted their ability to execute AJAX/JS to index some dynamic comments.  A few years ago, Jed Singer and I did some digging to see just how well Facebook pages were crawled and indexed.  The answer – not very well, but Facebook still enjoyed decent rankings for profile and brand pages alike, despite spidering issues.  Our review suggested a heavy dose of domain authority and backlinking signals, and not necessarily on-page relevance.  

Then, suddenly, Facebook pages started to show up less and less (somewhere around the time “Google Me” was the rumor) except for specific people and brand searches.  I assumed a manual algorithm tweak to clean up the search engine result pages, and make general Facebook pages less of a player.  The same kind you saw with Digg pages, Amazon subdomains, etc.

But when I read that Google is getting better at interpreting Facebook comments, I assumed they also got better at reading all Facebook’s public tabbed content.  Still, I assumed they wouldn’t change their algorithm suppressing Facebook rankings. 

Wrong…



This is one of several examples I found.  It worried me about my long-tail for my websites, and sure enough, Facebook SERP SPAM there too.  I don’t know if Google took their eye of their algorithm and made some changes without considering their prior intention, or if this is a real decision (can’t imagine why, though).  I expect it won’t last long.

In the meantime, black hats will go at it, and white hats (and shoppers) will need to be annoyed by it. What a thoughtful holiday gift, Google!
 

Popularity: 3% [?]

When Google Gives Us Lemons…

2

Category : Google, SEO

Both Avinash Kaushik and Jeff Jarvis tell us that we don’t own our sites. In fact, our visitors / customers don’t even own our site anymore. Google owns our site.

Need proof? Ask your mom to name her favorite store in the mall. Then ask her to their website online. If she doesn’t use the search bar in her browser or go directly to Google.com, I’ll give you a dollar.

We know people are creatures of habit.  Search engines have become the main touch point in their online day-to-day.  For many people, if you restrict their access to a search engine, they’ll fall apart like I do when I’m given an O’doul’s at a party. Why didn’t your mother try to type the website directly into the URL bar?

On the bright side, when 50% of your natural search visits are from variations of your brand name or URL spelling, at least your numbers look good – that may give you some job security if you spin it right.

But Google is a pain in the ass because with all this ownership and inside data, they don’t really play well with others.  They don’t share.  Take WMT for example – it’s very thin data in the grand scheme of things. It’s like giving a free sample, but never letting you buy the product.

And what’s with the rich snippets?  I give you the content, and you post it in your result pages?  I want people to click through.  How do I know they’re not clicking through?  Because I’m not even clicking through on my own site. I’ve been sucked into the Google vortex.

Don’t get me started on feeds, schema.org, or Google Places.

Granted, there’s a lot to gripe about. When I go to a search convention, I see I’m not alone.  I never skip a panel with a Googler – it’s always a fun beatdown.  But the same thing happens every time.  By the end of the scolding, the Googler – be it an engineer or product manager, essentially commits social suicide, as he throws his hands in the air with the answer, “I don’t know.”  As hard as he tries, he can’t answer all the questions he gets.  It’s not always because he’s not allowed to, but I think it’s because he doesn’t know how to.

I think there are ghosts in the machine.

I envision Dali painting with a thousands of gears all clumped together.  Turn one, there’s no telling how many others will connect.  At this point, I don’t think Google knows.  They can try to reshape the monstrosity, but at this point the algorithm has to be pretty insurmountable.  Add on top of this, there are several other algorithms running different Google properties that are probably comparably unruly.

But let’s face it.  Google created this mess, and search engines created the SEO – both the good and the bad ones.  But despite the hat you wear, we’re all dealing with our own KPI’s against this mutant algorithm. So are our competitors.  Trial and error, testing, and patience are the key to building your experience. When you put together a marketing strategy, you’re typically trying to overcome an obstacle.  You’re putting together a plan to move past the immovable objects.  Google is an immovable object, so the SEO needs to strategize with that in mind.  That’s far different than what many SEOs do by trying to defeat or complain about it.  Since goal setting is the key to proper strategy, the SEO (and the employer of the SEO) need to plan touchpoints that accept these realities.
 
Things to ask yourself when choosing your tactics:
  • Why do I think this tactic will work?  (What experience or data do you have)
  • What will this affect if it does not work?  (Will your scheduled touchpoints be affected)
  • What is this tactic’s plan B?  (To stay on schedule, what is your alternative tactic and bandwidth)
  • What are the points where we measure and analyze?  (When do you take a break and make sure you’re on track)
  • When is it time to abandon the strategy?  (Sometimes your best plans fall flat – be willing to accept that)
With this clarity comes opportunity.  Again, many of our competitors are dealing with Google head on, and trying to plow through the algorithm instead of dance with it.  They’re probably granted the same amount of time and budget as you.  SEO is a household word in business, but it’s still rarely done right in the grand scheme of things.  Spend some time with a clear understanding of what Google really is to your website, and spend more time in the planning stage.

Popularity: 4% [?]

(not provided) – What’s That Mean, Google?

4

Category : Google, SEO

If you haven’t heard, about a week ago Google rolled out a change that affects your data in analytics.  I started seeing (not provided) as a natural search keyword.  Google has decided to go all SSL on us people who log into Google, and based on how they built it, that hides the keyword data from our analytics.  They’re telling us it’s for privacy.

(not provided)

Let’s put it this way – if you have 100 natural search visitors in a month, and they all come to your site by Googling a different keyword, you’d expect to see 100 different keywords in your natural search keyword report.  Now, if 50% of those 100 people were logged into Google (ie., logged into Google Plus, or Gmail, or Docs, etc.), you’d see 50 different keywords, and one (not provided) stat showing 50 visits.

Sucks.

When I first heard the news I looked at my Google Analytics.  The (not provided) only represented .001 of my natural search visitors.  I checked again today, and it’s up to .05 of my visitors.  I expect it to grow as it continues to roll out through data centers, and as more people started joining up with the Google products that make them log in.  Does this roll into mobile too?  I assume so.

Why Is Google Really Doing This?

I don’t know.  Right now it only affects natural search.  If a user clicks an AdWords ad from Google.com, the keyword referral data is still passed through whether the user is logged into Google or not. Speculation is that display companies are using natural search data to better target their ads, and since Google is focused on the display game now (trying to own it… which they’re completely on par to do), they’re possibly trying to lock away some of their keyword data.  But those same companies can normalize the same keyword data from Yahoo/Bing and still be close.

If (not provided) grows, and a percentage of your keyword referral data is lost, will people start getting “rank crazy” again?  Will people start scraping Google for rankings they think they should rank for, versus knowing they should (or shouldn’t) rank for with traditional ranking reports?  Google hates when we scrape them and inflate their AdWords numbers.

But what really ticks me off is that I use my keyword data to better my visitors’ experience.  With personalized search, social search, and all the cute little things Google does now, I get a lot of interesting queries in my keyword report.  Sometimes they’re things I wouldn’t normally rank well for, but because there’s”some relevance” with my site, I get these rare keyword entries.  They often inspire me to create content.

If I had a site for plastic sneakers, and I got a one time natural search keyword visit for “how to run with plastic sneakers and not get blisters,” I might assume there’s a pocket of people with that same question. I might write a blog post and answer the question.  I might put an article on my main site to attract visitors. In the end, this might provide a great value to searchers, and my own website.  But now, if the user who entered this query was logged in, I’d never see it in analytics.  Inspiration may never hit. Everyone loses.

Ok, maybe right now it’s not something to freak out about.  It’s another “Google wait and see” game, but we’re used to that now, aren’t we?  This is just an odd one.  Data is so important to content providers.

Popularity: 4% [?]

Google’s New +1 Product One-Ups Facebook’s Like Button

Category : Google, SEM, SEO

Google, always trying to push social search (despite early missteps), has a good one here.  The new +1 button, rolling out now (when you’re logged into your Google account and choose to opt into the experiment) lets searches know how popular a listing is, ala StumbleUpon’s plugin.

After speaking with Google, this is not yet affecting rankings or quality score, but they said it will.  Straight from a product manager’s mouth.  He couldn’t tell me when – they need to evaluate, I’m sure.

But this is a useful thing to reinforcing CTR on a brand, not to mention owning more search engine result page real estate.  Thanks to social additions, my listing now pushes other sites below the fold even more than before.  If I own a few top listings, I can ultimately “black out,” or push a fourth or fifth under the fold:

Is it like Facebook’s Like button?  Definitely, especially since soon you’ll be able to add a +1 widget to your websites.  But this has something Facebook doesn’t have… the ability to “like” something in Google results.  That’s pretty big.

More info here.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Where Is SEO for Mobile Going?

2

Category : Google, Mobile, SEO

Updated: Feb 23 2011
Customers still rely heavily on search engines to find web-based mobile sites.  It’s not unlike traditional SEO in many technical ways (Google still cares about the keywords and the links), but is very different when optimizing for user or customer value.  To optimize for search engines on behalf of the mobile user or customer, you have to think about what the mobile searcher is looking for when searching on a phone.  The answer:  relevancy, speed, and good usability.  Identify your landing pages that are best suited for them and think about how you can optimize for the phone.  We’re trying to attract mobile users in addition to desktop/laptop users.  But mobile users have a larger sense of urgency.

Phones are not used like desktops and laptops.  They’re not even like iPads.  Customers on the mobile are on the move.  Assume they’re short on time; they may quickly be approaching a bus stop, or walking into a store.  Maybe the light just turned green (scary but true) and they need to get back to driving.  When we optimize for a mobile page, we need to identify and provide the key answer in the title, meta description, and body copy with as few words (and keywords) as possible.  We need to be much more concise and specific so the mobile user can identify the best results faster.  We need to spend closer attention to the query intent.  If that means more specific mobile landing pages (and less general, high-keyword frequency pages), so be it.  Granted, that goes against some traditional SEO strategies.  From the little data that’s been revealed from Google about differences in the way they approach mobile sites, it’s our best hypothesis that they’ll continue reevaluating your keyword choice from a mobile perspective.  You already get personalized, GPS powered mobile results from Google sniffing your smart phone browser now, so this isn’t really a stretch.

The mobile searcher is likely searching for a quick one sentence answer.  Or a  price.  Or a location.  Or a quick review.  Microformats and location tagging will likely take a larger role.  Mobile users don’t want to zoom in/out of a page all the time (if their phone even enables it); they’ll often back out and view other Google results for the best visual snapshot (even if it’s not the most relevant page to the query).  Usability plays a different, but equally as important role as it does now.  In general, if our goal as SEOs are about driving qualified traffic from the query all the way to the shopping cart, sometimes we need to be focused on design and usability.

Old school technical SEO still needs to be a factor.  Most developers create a different URL for mobile sites when it’s not necessary.  I see the “m.” subdomain used.  If you share your mobile link through an online social channel, you’re sharing the m. version.  If your logic properly redirects a user through that link to your desktop version, you’re still being served a redirect.  Some loss in link juice there even if its a 301.  At least use an /m/ directory and turn off internal linking user agent switching so you can get some links that help your overall domain authority.  Currently Google has their normal Googlebot, and Googlebot-Mobile which crawls content for traditional phones – not smart phones (with the exception of a recent iPhone Googlebot that’s been testing).  Google believes that smart phones can see the web just fine and doesn’t need their own bot.  If that’s the case, there really isn’t much reason to create a new URL anyway if the content you want a person to see on the phone is the same as the content on the desktop.  Just create a different CSS sheet to create a more mobile layout.

Mobile will only continue to grow.  Additionally, more iPad-like tablets are slated to come out, which blurs the lines a little more between what is a mobile device and what is a desktop device.  Google will continue to take the non-desktop search and web experience seriously.  So should we.

Popularity: 8% [?]

More Local Listings Equal More Ecommerce Traffic

Category : E-commerce, Google, SEO

The major web platforms are looking at targeting users with local functionality. Many see this as a major growth opportunity in 2011 due to the higher use of smart phones. Google is especially focused in this area as of late, arguably more than ever before. As online retailers, who may not have heavy connectivity with their brick and mortar counterparts, local SEO may not seem like something that provides much – if any – online traffic. But it does. Especially with recent Google changes.

If you haven’t noticed, Google changed the way they display their local searches. They appear to show up more often, and resemble traditional natural search listings. The result is that other non-local listings are getting pushed down under the fold, and more local listings are being clicked.

Each listing provides 2 destination links: the main link (which leads to your main site), and a places page.

When you show up in the local searches, the main link provides pretty good traffic. In most cases, the searchers that click a local link were looking for local information. The destination of this link doesn’t satisfy, but it’s a chance for your homepage to capture the users interest and maybe persuade them from getting off their couch and driving to the store to buying online.

The other link, Places (formerly called Local Business Center), is a nice thing to have because it provides opportunity to really sell your local store. You can provide an exclusive coupon, or promotion. Within the Places page, there’s yet another link that you can control.

There’s opportunity with this link since you control it. Maybe design a landing page displaying synergies between your web and brick and mortar stores. Can you buy online and return the product in the store if you’re not satisfied? Promote that here. Do you have exclusive in-store printable coupons? Display that here. Experiment with this traffic, and develop something special knowing that these are local-minded shoppers (at least they were at the time of entering their first query into Google.

Popularity: 6% [?]

Why I Think SEO Is Marketing

4

Category : E-commerce, Google, SEO

I was recently asked in an email why I consider SEO a marketing channel. Among several things, good marketing and advertising work to get messages out about the value of an item, and provide you with information. Most subscribe to this definition. Marketing helps those who are interested see if they really want and need it, and helps inform producers.

So does Google.

SEO helps those people who have interest, and are qualified enough to make a digital inquirey, find this information. SEO also helps create that two way, open engagement that more people are expecting of the maturing internet.

I work with a lot of huge brands, typically in the ecommerce space. It all holds very true for them. Doing SEO work is about caring for the customer more than the product. Hopefully the product was made with an audience segment in mind; SEO is bridging the gap using the internet’s elected hub – Google.

Yes. It’s textbook marketing taking you back to college. But it’s breathing on land now, and doesn’t require gills. The nervous system hasn’t changed. The song remains the same.

Once you make the site technically crawlable and findable, you need to make it work. Sure, you can pass it off to merchandisers or usability or any other group that should have an interest in what to do with the search traffic you deliver, but they won’t know what brought them there like an SEO will.

As far as I’m concerned, marketing is part of the broader definition of SEO in the modern age, still keeping it your most powerful acquisition channel by far… If done right.

Popularity: 7% [?]

The Difference Between Google And Bing Users

2

Category : Google, Other Search Engines, SEO

According to Hitwise, 81% of the searches done on Bing and Yahoo resulted in an actual visit to a website. Google only showed a 65% rate. This suggests that either Bing/Yahoo is more relevant and providing the best results more often for the bulk of users, or that people search differently with Google. I’m assuming the latter.

I think most people who use Google expect to do a little digging. I think the results you’re given require you to refine your search, and as a Google user, you’re used to that. You’ve come to expect that.

Andy Beal at Marketing Pilgrim says, “Google offers more opportunities right upfront to refine the search by time, type of result, even result loca tions. Because of this, I’d bet many people take a second or third try at finding exactly what they want before they start clicking through.” That makes sense. I also think without the options, google users would be more apt to refining their search anyway.

I believe Google’s results are more detailed in nature and require your queries to be more specific as well. I feel like I get broader, safer results out of Bing. Thats what theyre going for per their marketing, but it feels a little “Fisher Price” to me. Not my style. Maybe Bing users are more casual.

Google and Bing have segregated the search audience. Like democrat and republican, NFL and MLB, or beer and wine, the two parties are different, and will continue to be shaped by the structure of the engine to some degree. It’s interesting, really, just how big a role search engines play, and what we can tell about people who use them. It’s not just an information retrieval system, but an extension of your brain. Much like a car.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Google Adds Reading Levels To Listings

1

Category : Google, SEO

I found a new feature on Google.  If you click advanced search on the search page, you have a ‘reading level’ option. In the drop down, you can choose to annotate your search results. When you search, you can now see the reading level Google thinks these (and your) pages are at.

As a father of a six year old, this seems interesting.  It could potentially help me find pages that he would understand and enjoy.  Unfortunately it doesn’t seem to work as I had hoped.  Apparently my about me page is at an intermediate reading level.  Hardly.  So is sesamestreet.com.  Wow.

Maybe this is just more Google fluff, and maybe it will improve.  But it has me wondering about the signals and algorithm that determines this labeling.   Are there any clues here for the reverse engineers to understand more how Google thinks?  Likely, Google would be very careful putting this out… but still.

Update: Looks like Google gave us a little insight. Looks like a model was built off decisions made by teachers. I’m now thinking this is simply another algorithm strand layered into the Google rope.

Popularity: 5% [?]