An Exclusive Google Interview - Day 3, 11:30 AM (EST) [Archive]

Garrett

12-11-2003, 11:20 AM

Looking for ways to boost your Google ranking? Speaker Marissa Mayer, the Director of Consumer Web Products at Google, said during one of her speeches, "Have unique useful content. Have sitemaps. Make your site easy to reach with a text-based browser. Give your site a hierarchal structure. Have a single domain with mini-sites within, rather than having lots of sites."

Usability is a Must! Marissa says, "It's a good idea to design sites that are usable from any browser. That's something that Google may be taking into consideration - your cross-browser compatibility." Check out our Accessibility and Usability forum (http://www.webproworld.com/viewforum.php?f=12) for more tips!

Googlebot Still Isn’t Perfect. Some of the problems Googlebot has, according to Marissa, are JavaScript, session IDs, too many parameters, dynamic URLs, Splash pages, and frames. Also, if your site requires cookies to deliver content to browsers, then that's a serious problem because the Googlebot can't accept cookies and therefore won’t be able to reach the content.

Froogle. Many of you have probably noticed Froogle results are now appearing at the top of listings in Google. Marissa also mentioned this - which to me says, “If you are selling, get yourself into Froogle now!” Froogle is becoming increasingly important.

An Exclusive Interview. Yesterday, I caught up with Marissa after her presentation. We walked through the hallway together and had a short but exclusive interview as she carried her suitcase outside to catch a taxi to the airport.

I asked, “What should people do if their sites were totally dumped from Google?”

She replied, “If you dropped in rankings, go back and look at who you linked to and who’s linking to you. If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google.”

“Does this mean that new algorithm somehow measures the ‘neighborhood’ you're linked into more highly?”

Smiling, Marissa told me she couldn’t answer that question, because it’s a direct statement about the new Google algorithm.

We'll take that as a yes. :)

I asked the same question to Derrick Wheeler of Marketleap (http://www.marketleap.com/), and his response was, “Measure who's linking to you and see who you're linking to. Check keyword density. Check for duplicate content. Check for accidental spam. Don't try so hard to rank well. If you're taking a serious hit and losing money every day consider doing paid inclusion.”

My Take on Search Engine Strategies. There doesn't seem to be a lot of internet.com presence from what I've seen. I haven't found anyone whom I feel I can pull aside and talk to. But I have talked to several people who, like myself, are beginning to get the sense that the value of Search Engine Strategies isn't really there anymore, just because there's a sense of repetition in most of the sessions. Even much of what I've reported to you has been repetitive -- the speakers may be different, but the basic information that I've learned is all pretty much the same. "Get back to the basics." "Don't be so aggressive in Google anymore." I've heard these things so many times that I honestly feel like I could've gotten more information from spending a day reading over Danny Sullivan's articles on SearchEngineWatch (http://www.searchenginewatch.com) or reading through the content in the WebProNews (http://www.webpronews.com) archives.

Are three days really necessary? The vendors want to speak and in a sly way present their products, and in order to put it all together they must drag it out for three days. A better idea would possibly be a one day conference featuring a panel of speakers such as Danny Sullivan. People would be able to ask questions and get direct answers from the experts. If you're going to put a conference together do it the way people really want it!

Sure, I’ve gotten lots of business cards and contacts, but I feel that the true value for attendees at conferences such as this is being able to ask direct questions to the presenters. Yes, there has been some interesting stuff but I had to chase people down to get it. Personally, I question value for people like myself. Who should attend Search Engine Strategies? Search engine optimization newbies and people who are just starting out would definitely find a place here, but for me I don't feel I've gotten anything worth this kind of money.

janeth

12-11-2003, 01:21 PM

She replied, “If you dropped in rankings, go back and look at who you linked to and who’s linking to you. If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google.”

I have no control over who links to me. If who links to me effects my ranking then that is crazzy.

I can set up a domain name do everything wrong get that domain name banned then just link to all my competition and keep a good domain name so it will climb in the ranking.

T2DMan

12-11-2003, 03:59 PM

I can set up a domain name do everything wrong get that domain name banned then just link to all my competition and keep a good domain name so it will climb in the ranking.

This is exactly why Googleguy said recently in webmasterworld, that you can't hurt your competition by linking to them, so we have contradictory comments out of Google. When you use the text -asdf after queries, you find very large numbers of websites that have dropped out. Are ALL of these in bad neighbourhoods, or have bad links? I think not. My main site "city restaurants" not affected, but a page on the same site for "Search Engine optimisation City" was initially dropped, now around 30th (was first)(page still top for "SEO city"), "City Hotels" subpage was similarily dropped (still top for "City Boutique hotels"). I do not use any different strategies for any of the pages. All on the same domain. Main page pr6, other two pages mentioned were PR5. All in the same neighbourhood, all affected differently. Common factor = blacklisted commercial phrases, specifically optimised.

www.time2dine.co.nz

withouraloha

12-11-2003, 04:07 PM

What can you do about who links to your site?

It seems to me there is no way I can stop (let alone even track down) anyone who wants to link to my sites!

Using this as a factor should put google on the last possible ranking for a search such as 'search engine' since so many crappy sites link to them. This can not possibly be a serious factor in ranking now... come on...

paulduffield

12-11-2003, 04:07 PM

I think it is important to listen to the full quote and not take part of it out of context...

i.e. Who you link to and who links to you.

I suspect that a key part in this the hint that it may be if you link to something iffy in Googles interpretation then you get a black mark for effectively promoting a "naughty" (in bot terms of course !) site which is against Googles interest of course. If that site also links back to you it looks even more sus to Google when they examine your site and so the penalty may well increase even more.

Just a thought.

Paul

janeth

12-11-2003, 04:18 PM

Hi Paul I think it is pretty plain

"and who?s linking to you"

Now she may not know what she is talking about or we can question Garrett maybe miss quoting her.

(Sorry Garrett)

But if she is right and the quote is right then we have no control over this at all.

As a matter of fact having a good site is bad because people will want to link to you.

jeffsnox

12-11-2003, 05:09 PM

Hi,

Just a thought, but perhaps both of the statements are true.

Obviously it can't be bad to produce a good web site; but obviously if you do you're going to get linked to by both good and bad web sites.

For the sake of argument, and to demonstrate what I'm trying to get at, let's assume Google have now started to record +ve and -ve page rankings (probably with more sensitivity than integers 1-10). You create a 'good' web site and it starts to get popular. Loads of sites link to you, some good, some bad. A bad (-ve page rank) inbound link has an effect on your _own_ ranking... but perhaps less of an effect (some kind of weighting system) than a good (+ve page rank) one.

Result of this is that a good inbound link is more effective at boosting your rank than is a bad inbound link... but if you have an absolute shedload of bad inbounds, and hardly any good inbounds then you're doomed.

Maybe that's how it works now.

So in answer to the queries:

-----------
Q. "Does this mean that new algorithm somehow measures the ‘neighborhood’ you're linked into more highly?"

A. Yes. They've introduced -ve as well as +ve page ranks.
-----------
Q. "I have no control over who links to me. If who links to me effects my ranking then that is crazzy.

I can set up a domain name do everything wrong get that domain name banned then just link to all my competition and keep a good domain name so it will climb in the ranking."

A. No. Only if the majority of those who link to you are baddies will your site be seriously adversely affected. Also, setting up a single domain, making it 'bad' and linking to your competition will not have much effect on them at all, you'd need to set up lots and lots of bad domains.
-------------
Q. "This is exactly why Googleguy said recently in webmasterworld, that you can't hurt your competition by linking to them, so we have contradictory comments out of Google."

A. No, this is not contradictory. See the previous answer.
-------------
Q. "It seems to me there is no way I can stop (let alone even track down) anyone who wants to link to my sites!

Using this as a factor should put google on the last possible ranking for a search such as 'search engine' since so many crappy sites link to them. This can not possibly be a serious factor in ranking now... come on..."

A. There's many ways to find out who's linking to your site... but anyway, see previous answers, this is not a problem.
------------
Q. "I suspect that a key part in this the hint that it may be if you link to something iffy in Googles interpretation then you get a black mark for effectively promoting a "naughty" (in bot terms of course !) site which is against Googles interest of course. If that site also links back to you it looks even more sus to Google when they examine your site and so the penalty may well increase even more."

A. Pretty much what I'm saying really, except my technique doesn't require the added complexity of tracking who links to sites that link back to them. That'd be a pain in the arse to track down!
-----------

There ya go. My 2 cents.

janeth

12-11-2003, 05:17 PM

Hi jeffsnox,

It is a black or white issue either someone linking to you can or can not hurt your site.

To say it only hurts a little makes what Googleguy said wrong. You can not say he was right because he said it did not hurt when it really does hurt.

One of the three are wrog either Googleguy, Marissa Mayer or (Sorry Garrett) Garrett

12-11-2003, 05:39 PM

Google gives me a headache.. just wish I wasn't so dependant on them. I dropped from 9 back down to near 100 again, and it's hard to know if it was the reciprocol links I put in there.. or if it's just that they want me to tweak my website every other day.

Don't they know I also have to produce, do the janitorial, do the designing.. do the paperwork.. do everything else besides updating my site too?? How often do they want you to tweak the sites anyway?

Maybe it's good to stay down awhile.. give me time to catch up.. and decide if I'm going to link to anybody that asks me to again..

How are we supposed to know what Google considers a spam website anyway?

Carrie <hoping it will post this time>

janeth

12-11-2003, 05:43 PM

AS long as you only link to web sites with a pr1 or higher you should be ok

City

12-11-2003, 06:13 PM

I read the interview. If a webpage or site is in trouble concerning links, then it should be ranked low on all keywords. Not so. I'm ranked well
for my 3 websites on the keyword filipina lady. However, on the keyword filipina ladies, I'm no where to be found. Why is that? If I'm following all the rules for the key word filiina lady for google and if all I do is change it to filipina ladies and make no other changes, why isn't my site ranked well on filipina ladies.

I didn't need all of my sites to be ranked well on one keyword, in this case filipina lady. So I did just what I said, I changed it to filipina ladies and nothing else and now my site disappears. Why?

That is why a lot of webmasters believe google is filtering out certain keywords to sell. For that matter, when you go to googlee and type in filipina ladies, the reults are garbage. Some sites in the top 20 have nothing to do with filipina ladies. So how can we believe it is just a link situation?

janeth

12-11-2003, 06:21 PM

I think and I have read some where else maybe in some of Garrett's post that Google is looking at links with in your site if you use the asme word over and over to link to a page then Google looks down on this.

You may want to try and use the word less so Google does not see it as spam.

When your using it in links from one page to the next.

12-11-2003, 06:29 PM

"If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google"

This is pure stockholm syndrome, google spams their serps to no end with "Adwords" (spam) and wants to berate the webmasters..okay, thats all fine and dandy if you can get away with it, but I do find it sad that the webmaster community buys into this whole scam.

Adwords is the largest spammer on the planet.

cripchick52

12-11-2003, 06:35 PM

But I have talked to several people who, like myself, are beginning to get the sense that the value of Search Engine Strategies isn't really there anymore, just because there's a sense of repetition in most of the sessions.

I'm glad you said this because it's the reason why I chose not to attend...well, that and the fact that I didn't want to go to Chicago in the winter! I'm cold enuff up here in Baltimore. I always thought the price of this conference to be a little steep. That's especially true if most of the information is what we're getting from Search Engine Watch and some other forums and blogs and from the search engine webmaster faq's anyway.

All this turmoil over Google...I for one am glad to hear that they are saying the old tried and true methods are the best way to improve your sites positions on SERPs. After an update in the spring, and I got clobbered, I decided not to stress over it anymore. With this November update, a couple of my sites are now buried in the results for some choice keywords, but rank well for others; a few sites stayed the same and others went up in results. My page rank on several sites increased however :-]

I think we all need to take the "expert" advice with a grain of salt. Remember it was the "experts" who told us to stuff the alt tags in the 90's. And imho, it's the unscrupulous "expert" seo marketers who cause the little seo gals like me so many headaches. Especially those that buy and sell links. No wonder Google got ticked off! Talk about manipulation of results! Sheesh...

That's my 2 cents for the evening :] ...Thanks for reporting back to all of us from the conference; your posts have been informative and I've enjoyed reading them......cripchick52

janeth

12-11-2003, 06:47 PM

Hi cripchick52,
Your talking about buying and selling links but is that not what Yahoo does.

For $300.00 a year you can buy a link. The search results come from google

cripchick52

12-11-2003, 09:10 PM

Hi cripchick52,
Your talking about buying and selling links but is that not what Yahoo does.

For $300.00 a year you can buy a link. The search results come from google

Janeth, no I didn't mean the 300 bucks Yahoo! charges for reviewing your site with no guarantee of a directory listing...I meant some of those seo and traffic builder sites that sell text links on high PR sites and similar tactics. PM me and I'll send you url's of sites that do this.

mzwizard

12-11-2003, 11:14 PM

Ok...so my site is listed on almost all the DS and WAHM directories. They post to the search engines. So i'm being penalized for this? What am I supposed to do, take all my listings down?

And I already HAVE paid google adwords..hasn't helped a darn bit!

I went from #1 to NO WHERE!

link guy

12-11-2003, 11:30 PM

Back to 'who's linking to you and who you are linking to...'
Obviously you cannot control who links to you, but you most certainly can control who you are linking to... seems that statement by Marissa was totally aimed at reciprocation.
If you link to a spammy site and they're linking back to you you've closed the loop and sealed your sites fate thanks to their wrong doing...
Check out your partners site... email them and see if they too were removed from the top of the SERPs - that would be one way to assist in determining who the bad apple in your link cart is...

janeth

12-11-2003, 11:39 PM

I would make sure all of them still had there pr's and wait until the end of the month befoer I started making any big changes.

Just because Google tried to threw it back on the web site does not mean that is whats going on

link guy

12-11-2003, 11:45 PM

Absolutely - I'm actually telling my clients not to touch a thing just yet as some of this may shake out - as it's done each year when an upheaval of this nature happens in Google

simonm

12-12-2003, 04:49 AM

From the initial interview post..

Have a single domain with mini-sites within, rather than having lots of sites."

Reading between the lines - have a big site. Also I think, and this has been my experience, don't have the keywords in the domain name!

citypublife

12-12-2003, 04:58 AM

Simon

"Also I think, and this has been my experience, don't have the keywords in the domain name!"

I have just asked that question in another posting. I have also read that you should have keywords in your sub domains. Can you go into further detail?[/b]

12-12-2003, 05:52 AM

Keyterms in domain names. In fact, two keyterms in the search.

Though this is inconsistent, which seem sto be a function of Google not doing a consistent update across its complete database.

A case in point. I have a site www.multi-utility-uk.co.uk which used to be 2nd on a Google search for "multi Utility". Now it doesn't appear on either a web or pages from UK. The same applies to other sites where I have had previous significant success through matching domain name to product or service name. Looking at the entries on the Google search returns, they are very unfocused and give a greater weight to single words and PR.

Turn the search term into three words in the search string and everything changes. Try "Multi utility" with UK, Services, Kent, business!

Try the same with Scroogle to find where these should have been. The problem is, there doesn't seem to be a consistent result. I'm going to take a double edged approach, retaining the focused web sites while duplicating the content on the main corporate web site.

But, consider another equivalent web site which is found by doing a search for "Climate Change Levy" - the key thing here is THREE words. Two of my sites including www.climate-change-levy.info appear in the Google results.

Then do "emissions trading" a TWO word phrase and the above rules are immediately broken, see my site www.emissions-trading.info though this could be due to a partial Google database update or perhaps something else!

Fundamentally I will aim to have a bigger main web site promoting my key terms. the site size and page optimisation working for me, I hope while not showing a domain name that google might interpret as spam. The collaborative links that I include throught my sites will mix between pointing at the corporate site and its sub page and the focused site.

I will also pay great attention to what happens during Google's next update which will be near Christmas - I hope a good Christmas present.

simonm

12-12-2003, 09:29 AM

Not sure how it went on as guest?

janeth

12-12-2003, 09:39 AM

This is my two cents.

If you use a domain name most people will link to that domain name like www.webdesign.com when Google see's all the links coming to the same key words like web design they think something is up the filter comes on and you do not rank well for web design.

Now if some people link to web design and other people link to building web sites your ok.

The only reason having your key words in your domain worked so good is because most people linked to your domainname not because Google gave credit for the key words in the domain main name.

Brittany

12-12-2003, 09:47 AM

Not sure how it went on as guest?

We've enabled this forum to accept guest posts so unregistered visitors can express their opinions, too ;) Your session most likely timed out and so it posted as "guest" instead...

Brittany
WebProWorld Forum Host

simonm

12-12-2003, 09:51 AM

Thanks Brittany

WDS

12-12-2003, 10:18 AM

Back again to "who's linking to you and who you are linking to". Here's my opinion. We all figured out a while back that incoming links were a good thing for web page ranking (depending on the site they came from of course). Because of this, we all started reciprical linking - you add my site, and i'll add yours. Some even went as far as to pay for an incoming link from a quality, well ranked site. I assume Google figured this out a while ago as well, and has now added something in their algorithm that can tell if an incoming link is reciprocal or not. I think that non-reciprocal links to your site are weighing much highly, while reciproical links may be affecting your ranking negatively. So when a Google rep says to pay attention to "who's linking to you and who you are linking to", they're really saying - we know what your doing, so stop trying to trick us. A link for a link won't fly anymore, it's going to be the non-recip links that count. With that being said, I was lucky enough to make it through this nasty re-arrangement remaining in the top ten, but we also have about 100 reciprocal links, and about 8,000 non-recip links.... Wonder if that has something to do with it?

Jill

janeth

12-12-2003, 10:40 AM

According to Google and GG

If someone links to you it can not affect your ranking.

Now they may not count it but it can not have a neg. effect on your ranking.

Ride_The_Lightning

12-12-2003, 11:52 AM

Hi Everyone,

Thought I would join the whole 'Google' event and dip my toe in here.

First off I've enjoyed reading all the posts and comments, makes for some interesting thought!

I agree to some extent with the whole linking opinion, but I have never been over eager about linking, it's not been my number one thirst (unlike some). Yes I do have quality links, and yes some are very key word rich, and yes they link to high pr sites, but I only have a max of 25 links for each site that I control. Out of these sites I am pleased to say that I only lost one main search term in the whole shake up.......lucky?, maybe not as I never set out to target very high competitive terms. I stuck to targeting terms that get me quality traffic, not silly amounts of traffic that lead to nothing!

On the note about keywords in domains, then I have to disagree on this one, some sites I control have never been affected this way, I have one site with the main key phrase as the domain name and the main business is the key phrase and the business name is also the domain name.

As I will always continue say.......quality content, content and more content will overcome all!

stationaryobserver

12-12-2003, 12:46 PM

ADS-President

12-12-2003, 12:50 PM

Google has always relied primarily on the quality of inbound links to your webpage.

If their Page Rank is high and your link is available very close to their home page, then you will get a good portion of points towards your own PR.

Simply put "if they are using spam techniques they may be..." means that if they have been caught 'cheating' if you will, their own PR will go down, and, likewise your inbound links from them will also decrease in value.

"Check the links coming to your site...." because a good portion of your more valuable inbound links may have dropped in value, and so would your page score.

There is a very easy way to find your Inbound links.. actually two that I can think of:

1) Alexa.com - simple enough.
2) The Google Toolbar allows you to track backwards links.

Go spend a day surfing your inbound links of high PR and make sure they arent over optimized. Google is constantly expanding its knowledge of the many differnt tricks you can use to get a high rank and we always have a rough couple months after they update. Dont look so Glum!

If this update is truley what google hopes it is, a cleaner algorythm which brings better results, then simply increase the value of yor site, offer more Free Content and lighten up outbound links

Find quality JV partners and if you have a Bad Inbound link, simply write their webmaster and ask to have your link removed.

Any questions?

jybwatson

12-12-2003, 12:51 PM

I went from #1 to NO WHERE![/quote]

I have done almost the same, I was number 1 in "wholesale incense" and 7 with "incense" over night I can not even find myself on most keyword searches.

SPAM seems to be relitive, I have check source codes with my competitors and using the word "incense" 50 times (in some cases even more) in a 300 word page seems like SPAM to me, but they are still ranking.

I hate to say this or think it but it looks like big busniess has taken over google. Amazon ranks #1 on Incense search.

ADS-President

12-12-2003, 01:00 PM

Reciprical links may be affecting your rank, so get a new Free webhost and a New Domain name and share the reciprical links 3 or 4 ways instead of two so no two sites are linking to eachother

Offer link from Site B (New Domain) --> Partner Site --> Site A (Main URL) --> Partners Secondary Site --> Site B (Your New Domain)

It will become a trend so get ready now =)

HillsCap

12-13-2003, 02:34 AM

Only if the majority of those who link to you are baddies will your site be seriously adversely affected. Also, setting up a single domain, making it 'bad' and linking to your competition will not have much effect on them at all, you'd need to set up lots and lots of bad domains.

Or, use your automatic submission software to submit your competitor's website to every FFA site out there... WITH the specific keywords you're trying to knock him out of the rankings for...

HillsCap

12-13-2003, 02:51 AM

And with my automatic submission software, I can design templates that let me submit to pretty much any site I want, so all I'd have to do is find the absolute worst sites out there, and submit my competitor's link/keywords to those... all done automatically once a week... or once a day...

Measuring a site by who links to it is asinine... consider this analogy...

A movie star... millions of people know of him and endorse his work as an actor... some of those people are criminals who sit all day in their jail cell, watching movies... they all say this actor is great, and you should see his movies. Do we condemn this actor simply because he got a recommendation from someone whom he doesn't even know, doesn't even know exists, let alone endorses his work as an actor, but are criminals?

I've got spam sites out there linking to me... simply because we're a high PR site and they think it'll make them 'authoritative' for our key words / phrases. I've written these people and told them not to link to me... do they comply and remove the links? Not on your life... Should my site be diminished in any way because some scummy site wants to ride our coattails?

If this is the new Google way of doing things, Google won't be around much longer... I can think of several ways of seriously messing up competitor sites if this is the case. I'm a whitehat, and if I've thought of it, the blackhats out there will be doing it, and messing up the relevance of Google's SERPs.

As goes the SERP relevance, so goes Google.

HillsCap

12-13-2003, 03:06 AM

In fact, if Google IS measuring a site's worthiness (even in a very fractional amount) by the sites linking to it, I hereby coin the next Googlism... ready? Here it is:

Google Spelunking

You've heard of Google Bombing before (adding or changing the links on all the sites pointing to your site so they all say the same thing... it gives you a temporary boost for whatever key word / phrase is in the link text).

Well, imagine that in reverse... initially putting a competitor's link and key word / phrase onto thousands of FFA / scummy sites... which would drive them so far down in the rankings you'd have to dig out the spelunking gear to find them... then changing those links (or adding new links for that site's other key words / phrases) every week to keep pushing them deeper and deeper.

Get out your miner's hats and your ropes, boys... we're going Google Spelunking!

janeth

12-13-2003, 06:04 AM

I agree 100% HillsCap that is the same thing I have been saying.

If Google did that then the fight is over and I know Google is a lot smarter then that.

Anyone that thinks for one second Google is doing that would have to be crazy it makes no sense.

Also Googles web site says different

HillsCap

12-13-2003, 09:29 PM

Look what I got in my mail today (bolding added by me)...
-----------------------------------------------------
Hello,

This e-mail has been sent to inform you that your
web site URL has been submitted to our search engine
database. This is the URL that will be added.

URL : www.hillscapital.com/
DATE : 12/13/2003 20:15:30
IP ADDR : Unknown IP. User had used an automated software for url submission

In order to complete this request we require that you
click on the web site link below. This will confirm
that you do wish to be added to our search engine.

http://www.global-submit.com/confirm.cgi?xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If you feel that you received this message in error
or you did not have your web site submitted to our
search engine, please click on the link below. We
will make every effort to make sure that you are
no longer bothered by this automated system.

http://www.global-submit.com/clipout.cgi?xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thank you and please have a nice day

Global-Submit.com tech Staff
www.global-submit.com
1 819 571 4943
-----------------------------------------------------
Looks like someone is already experimenting with Google Spelunking...

ronniethedodger

12-16-2003, 12:49 PM

If this is the new Google way of doing things, Google won't be around much longer... I can think of several ways of seriously messing up competitor sites if this is the case. I'm a whitehat, and if I've thought of it, the blackhats out there will be doing it, and messing up the relevance of Google's SERPs.

As goes the SERP relevance, so goes Google.

I don't believe that would be the case. All they need is the appearance of relevance.

Regardless of what you and I think is relevant at Google is irrelevant. Let's face it, the majority of users who do millions of searches each day at Google are not doing it just for the relevance of those searches solely. Most of these people are not even aware of these little battles that are going on behind the scenes.

The casual user will probably not even notice any change that has been going on at Google. While the trained eye picks up on the nuances of these changes, the majority do not. And we only notice these changes when one of us takes a dive in the results into never-never land.

CNN used to be the most trusted name in news, once upon a time. Now they are pure tabloid content in my opinion and seem to follow the beat of someone elses drum. I do not watch it anymore, except for a couple of responsible anchor newsmen.

With all of those changes over time at CNN, have they lost any of their viewership that they built on unbiased hard news. Not. They are going more and more into the gutter in my opinion. Their viewership is still strong, if not more so.

Such will be the way of Google !!

I hate to interupt you Senator, but I want to show our viewers a live picture of the door that President Bush will be walking out of shortly.

Is it my imagination, but doesn't Wolf remind you of Robin Leach when he speaks?

janeth

12-16-2003, 01:44 PM

Hi ronniethedodger

That was a great point comparing CNN to Google

Maybe Google wants to be the CNN for the search engiens

ronniethedodger

12-16-2003, 02:25 PM

Hi ronniethedodger

That was a great point comparing CNN to Google

Maybe Google wants to be the CNN for the search engiens

I don't think you would be too far off the mark in saying that.

The question now is how do we become one of those retired NATO Commanders, or ex-White House Spokespersons .... or (ugh, even more repulsive) a Nancy Grace from Court TV who keeps showing up on CNN as one of their authoritative experts?

...pardon the interuption again Senator, but we would just like to show our viewers who are just now tuning in ... live video of the door that President Bush is about to walk out of to make his address to the Nation ... Technical, can you make that full-screen please?

By the way, I am not making these statements up. This was actually the third time Wolf cut into a Senator's response to his (Wolf's) own questions, prior to President Bush making a delayed address to the Nation just the other day. (Can you tell I like to engage in Wolf Bashing?) ;-)

mm99

12-16-2003, 03:42 PM

She replied, “If you dropped in rankings, go back and look at who you linked to and who’s linking to you. If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google.”

I think these words are going to haunt many people that were big on getting as many links as possible to artificially gain rank. I've felt for some time that the 'link = better rank = higher se listings' was a bubble about to burst. In many things I've read of late, caution has been urged about who you link to and rightly so.

I've never been real big on getting a whole load of people exchanging links with me and most of my site's link pages are not really that big. I have quite a few sites and have not noticed any real problems with any of them.

I had little to no damage done, so something moderate and realistic looks like the best path to take. I recall posting a while back that people that are having problems should look at the statement "Was my se ranking artifically high because I got a boost from all the work and value I place on linking? Are the number of people linking to me unrealistic for the content and usefulness of my site?" It looks like the people that got of on that tangent are the ones that got hurt the most. They are also the most likely to exchange links with a 'bad neighbor' without knowing it.

I have always had some sort of 'checklist' regarding anyone I link with. The real bad ones don't actually exchange real links, so they do nothing for you at all. That is always the first thing I check, is it a real link. If you exchange with someone that does not give you a real link in return, then there is no "loop". You are linking to them but they're not truly linking to you. They can exchange links with ANYONE with no damage to their site. They don't have to worry about who they exchange links with. You, on the other hand gave them a real link and boosted their popularity. If the loop were complete they wouldn't exchange so freely. In sum; they have protected themselves, you boosted their rank, and you may be linked to a bad neighbor that did your site harm without even knowing it.

peace...Paul

AussieWebmaster

12-16-2003, 06:57 PM

According to Google and GG

If someone links to you it can not affect your ranking.

Now they may not count it but it can not have a neg. effect on your ranking.

I think you are missing the answer. If someone is linking to you who is considered spam etc then because they link to you you cannot be responsible and therefore they do not damage you.

If you have a recip link to them then you can be hurt. You should know what you are giving your link to.

But as far as inbound links go, they are now valued... good relevancy etc have higher and pass higher to you... even the small links have aggregated power... the bad ones are just not counted.

So a large number of links were reassessed recently and people who had lots of recip links found they negated each other except where they were designated spam in which case you were painted with the same brush.

There have been other articles out there that support this theory and the posts from GG and Melissa support it.

AussieWebmaster

12-16-2003, 07:06 PM

You're all relying on your ability to manipulate the system. Obviously Google doesn't want their search results to be manipulated- they want to present their users with the best, the most informational site for each search query.

Google isn't here to put your website at the top of their search results. So when you 'reciprocal' link to 200 different people, it's false, it's not real. Don't cry when they change the algorithm and your hacks don't work anymore..rofl. The only way you're going to be #1 and stay there is by having some useful content that people want to see. Otherwise you're just another junk site and you should be listed at #199.

Hey someone has to be number one... until such time as the search results become randomized - which would take away from the best results being first - then there is going to be a method to getting good placement, the more strict Google is about what they require the better the listings can become for the searchers.
They should give a stronger guideline to what they look for... eventually they should just tell what the algorythm is and make it so that it negates the spammer etc and makes the sites the best they can be for the searchers.

fathom

12-16-2003, 07:32 PM

"If you dropped in rankings, go back and look at who you linked to and who’s linking to you. If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google."

So this means I can setup a set of garbage sites and link to competitors and if I use lots of spam tactics I can reduce the competitors ranking ability.

That sounds like a big contradiction since "there is nothing a competitor can do to get you penalized" - as noted by Google.

This past update is a algo test for sure but linking in can't harm you - at least according to Google engineers which I would give the [b]"the knowing edge to" every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

matbennett

12-17-2003, 04:49 AM

Must admit that the "spelunking" theory is not holding too much water for me at the moment, but this should be pretty easy to test.

1. Set up a single page domain optimised for an obscure term

2. Give it one good link and wait for it to achive good SERP for given term.

3. Publish the URL here and get everyone to add it to every dodgy link farm they can find.

4. Check the position now.

My hunch (no more than that) is that it would still do OK until return links were put in place.

JayDrake

12-17-2003, 05:29 PM

She replied, “If you dropped in rankings, go back and look at who you linked to and who’s linking to you. If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google.”

This statement makes perfect sense to me. Yes. I can see how the thought could get into our heads that this means they will penalize you in a guilt by association scenario, but more likely what it really means is simply that you -were- getting a lot of votes from all these spammy sites and now that Google's engine has been tweaked it doesn't give you near so much credit for the 'junk' that points at you. This is a great thing for you really as you don't have incentive to get on the billion junk sites to gain rank. You can spend your time working on your site and getting links from other quality sites instead. The hard part is convincing your boss or client of this.

The other thing I'm hearing that worries people is the devaluing of exchanged links. This makes sense to me. It's really easy to trade links. You only get links without trading if your site deserves them.

Grow your site, make it worth linking to and don't underestimate some of the age old advertising techniques like press releases. Magazines, newspapers and other media have web sites which generally have a high page rank. They do publish stories on their sites, many that they don't publish on paper or otherwise, and they generally provide links.

jimmack

12-17-2003, 09:25 PM

I a nut shell here is the scoop on linking if someone takes my link and puts it on their website without my knowing about it GOOD.

Even if their website is pure crap I don't care in the least bit BUT If I put their link on my website then I have a problem.

As far as the FFA pages go Google knew a long time ago that some people would try this trick and spam someones link to all the FFA pages.

What happens is this for a very short while you will get more links leading to your site then it all will go away as your site is rotated off the FAA pages.

In the end your not affected all that much if any to prove my point here is my link SPAM AWAY WHO EVER WANTS TO http://www.jrm-internet-marketing.com And you can also add my link to any website you want to.

James Mackinlay
JRM Website Marketing

HillsCap

12-22-2003, 07:05 AM

So, what about purely outbound links from my site (links that are outbound and not reciprocated by the other site)?

For instance, on my Links page, I have links to all the stock and commodity exchanges around the world... would this have any negative effect on my site?

jimmack

12-22-2003, 08:53 AM

The only effect having lots of outbound links on your site would be that when the search engine see's your website it is going to count all those extra words.

And all those extra words can and will have a effect on your keyword density and promience of your keywords that you want your website to be found under.

I have been doing a entensive study of Googles new ranking system over the last 2 weeks and have found that over 75% of what is important to other search engines are not to Google anymore.

Even the page rank is not as important to Google as it used to be when ranking websites and I have been saying this for a while in my newsletters.

A example would be the search term website marketing I have found websites in the top 20 positions who do not even have the word in their site that you can read.

BUT it is in the website only in the ALT Text and because of the 200.000 links going to their website with only a page rank of 5 that's telling me that their links are not related to the website.

But its the fact that their are so many links leading to their website is what got them that high ranking.

i have a few test sites out there I use to confirm my findings and on 1 I added over 200 links to it on the MAIN PAGE to find out what would happen.

NOTHING HAPPENED but I did make sure my keywords were still located in the same place on the site I added all these links to the bottom of the website.

James Mackinlay
JRM Website Marketing

HillsCap

12-22-2003, 09:39 AM

Thanks for the answer, James.

Next question...

We're using poor-man's DHTML (Dynamic HTML transclusion) on our website (using a hidden iFrame as a buffer to bring external content in, then cloning the Nodes from the Iframe to a DIV in our page). This technique allows us to keep our header, footer, and menu loaded, while dynamically changing the Content DIV's content. (Don't worry, I've set up all the links so they can be followed by SE Bots and screen readers).

But, the iFrame is deprecated, so I did some looking around, and figured out that doing Dynamic XML transclusion is pretty easy. So, I'm learning XML right now, and plan to change our site over to XML as soon as I'm able, using the same type setup as we have now (basically, the site will look exactly like it does now, but the underlying infrastructure will be radically modified... somewhat akin to swapping out a mouse on an exercise wheel for a 454ci Chevy big-block V8 engine). XML transclusion will allow me to do some things that are impossible with HTML transclusion, and will be cross-browser compatible on all DOM2 compatible browsers (our site right now only works in IE 5.5 and up).

Now, to the question...
How well do the search engines handle XML pages?

ronniethedodger

12-22-2003, 12:41 PM

XML transclusion will allow me to do some things that are impossible with HTML transclusion, and will be cross-browser compatible on all DOM2 compatible browsers (our site right now only works in IE 5.5 and up).

Now, to the question...
How well do the search engines handle XML pages?

Shouldn't your question be how do se's handle pages that pull in XML data? I have never (never say never) seen an XML page show up in the search results.

I don't know...interesting question.

I guess one would have to go out and find some pages out there that use XML data to dynamicly create pages with...then start doing a little research on how well they place in the SERPS.

I am following in your footsteps on this approach, so I guess I will be following this part of your thread too.

Another approach (for certain parts, not all) is javascripting in large portions of your page that does not change...such as the header. There are certain advantages to this if crafted correctly. It is not "loaded" but it is cached on the user side.

Prior to the scripted header, you would put in your <NOSCRIPT> stuff, such as navigation links and a tiny logo graphic. This will satisfy the spiders need to crawl and your pages will be lighter weight to boot.

Since, 98% of the hits in my logs show that javascript is enabled....I am throwing more and more of the non-essential overhead into a main.js file. This standard file is cached on the user side, and once loaded....well you know the rest of that story.

gone

12-26-2003, 11:56 AM

I don’t know much about this stuff yet, but from my observation small local sites are gone. Here in Gulfport Florida, a City of less than 12,000 and with maybe 100 businesses, no one local can get recognized with an entry of Gulfport Florida. It has nothing to do with content heck, the Chamber of Commerce isn’t even listed, nor is Stetson U. I get the Official City site Weatherunderground, (big google advertiser) and large national or regional sites with deep pockets. Our site has content, community involvement, as well as being an award winning service and it doesn’t show up on Google any more. Our links are sound reputable organizations and the links don’t seem to matter.

I put the full name of the company in and nothing is generated, but you can be sure that some High dollar real estate company will pop up without any relation to the topic.

I may be missing some nuances here but I didn’t just fall of the spam wagon, they’re focus is on capital, which is OK if that’s what they’re doing, but knowing their intent will help us focus our energy and capital in another direction.