Google Universal Search, algorithm update 'Important Topic'

[Clint1]

If you weren't already thinking that new content is important to your web sites success, then you are so far behind the 8 ball you should probably either close your web site down, or get ready to spend a lot of money.

New content including video, podcasts, news feeds and more has been on the list of important things to do for a web site for quite a long time.

Leaving a page or web site alone is not okay any longer, and building a better mouse trap is the only way to win in a competetive world.

If your site doesn't get that unique media is key to success, and creative content and fresh content is big, then it is going to be tough to catch up.

Content is king, and we've been saying that for years. HTML, Video, Audio, News, Blogs...it is all growing and moving forward.

I have to say this again. "SEO'ers & bloggers" here and at other forums continuously lose sight of the simple fact that not every site owner has a site about news, blogs, SEO, etc. Believe it or not, there are websites out there that sell static consumer products and for those type sites, there is no need or use for videos, audio, podcasts, etc., nor any new content unless you happen to get in a new product. Those areas are only specific for certain niches or genres. Once a product's webpage is up, some kind of consumer good, there is not only no reason to change it, but you can't change it unless its specs should happen to change. This is again how G is harming those site owners that sell static unchanging goods.

"Content" is not king. It should be, but it's not. What is "king", is having a big name and or high PR website, that's a site to which other site owners will have a need to link. I can show you hundreds, even thousands of results in the G SERP's where their "content" sucks, it's hideous, yet they show up 1st or on the 1st page just because of their "name" or high PR; where the sites with the real relevant content are much deeper back in the index.

I do not disagree that video, audio, news, blogs, etc., are growing and moving forward. What I'm saying is that not ALL websites can benefit from that, and it is these types sites that are (AGAIN) going to be harmed by G.

[Clint1]

There is a theory that this will only relate to this Google Video

Now that makes sense.

[coolguy27]

I think it's because of Social Media Optimization which is new strategy for SEO....That's why Google Videos are somewhat in the rankings....

[Clint1]

Originally Posted by ctabuk
There is a theory that this will only relate to this Google Video

Now that makes sense.

Apparently that's not the case*. In my niche this doesn't appear to be going to harm me, and it would hurt the users' experience because when someone looks for any of my products to buy, they want to buy them not see a video on them. But I haven't seen any other types of results show up other than the normal for my searches. *However, a couple of days ago I tried to search google.com for something about a Criss Angel trick and the first 2 or 3 results were videos! This was not at video.google[dot]com but at google.com . So obviously they are putting these results in their main index and not at their video site.

[kgun]

I have to say this again. "SEO'ers & bloggers" here and at other forums continuously lose sight of the simple fact that not every site owner has a site about news, blogs, SEO, etc. Believe it or not, there are websites out there that sell static consumer products and for those type sites, there is no need or use for videos, audio, podcasts, etc., nor any new content unless you happen to get in a new product. Those areas are only specific for certain niches or genres. Once a product's webpage is up, some kind of consumer good, there is not only no reason to change it, but you can't change it unless its specs should happen to change. This is again how G is harming those site owners that sell static unchanging goods.

"Content" is not king. It should be, but it's not. What is "king", is having a big name and or high PR website, that's a site to which other site owners will have a need to link. I can show you hundreds, even thousands of results in the G SERP's where their "content" sucks, it's hideous, yet they show up 1st or on the 1st page just because of their "name" or high PR; where the sites with the real relevant content are much deeper back in the index.

I do not disagree that video, audio, news, blogs, etc., are growing and moving forward. What I'm saying is that not ALL websites can benefit from that, and it is these types sites that are (AGAIN) going to be harmed by G.

Well said.

When will GoogleBOT taste the difference between Coke and Pepsi and rank the outcome?

Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:13 pm
Use Google video links to improve SEO.

Related WPW threads:

SEO by video submission

Online Ad: Page views and clicks no longer reliable metrics

[seolee]

I have to say this again. "SEO'ers & bloggers" here and at other forums continuously lose sight of the simple fact that not every site owner has a site about news, blogs, SEO, etc. Believe it or not, there are websites out there that sell static consumer products and for those type sites, there is no need or use for videos, audio, podcasts, etc., nor any new content unless you happen to get in a new product. Those areas are only specific for certain niches or genres. Once a product's webpage is up, some kind of consumer good, there is not only no reason to change it, but you can't change it unless its specs should happen to change. This is again how G is harming those site owners that sell static unchanging goods.

"Content" is not king. It should be, but it's not. What is "king", is having a big name and or high PR website, that's a site to which other site owners will have a need to link. I can show you hundreds, even thousands of results in the G SERP's where their "content" sucks, it's hideous, yet they show up 1st or on the 1st page just because of their "name" or high PR; where the sites with the real relevant content are much deeper back in the index.

I do not disagree that video, audio, news, blogs, etc., are growing and moving forward. What I'm saying is that not ALL websites can benefit from that, and it is these types sites that are (AGAIN) going to be harmed by G.

Great point!

I noticed this when I searched for "IT Support". There is a company that ranks number 2 out of 2 billion sites and it has only 1 backlink, yet a high profile client in the IT Support industry has great content, masses of articles, RSS feeds and lots of quality backlinks, WHY???

[Clint1]

I noticed this when I searched for "IT Support". There is a company that ranks number 2 out of 2 billion sites and it has only 1 backlink, yet a high profile client in the IT Support industry has great content, masses of articles, RSS feeds and lots of quality backlinks, WHY???

FWIW, that's 2 million sites. If you're talking about the 2nd result for that search: uh.edu/infotech/php/template.php?nonsvc_id=89, they may have a lot more IBL's than that because G's link: operator doesn't work. Yeah, in Y they (the domain) has over 371,000 IBL's. Yahoo! Site Explorer . If that's the site, that could be why. You must be getting a different result on your end because G shows that site has having a bit over 2600 IBL's. A lot more than 2, but still WAY fewer than 371,000. Now that exact URL shows 3 IBL's at G.

[hawash]

U mean that one should include photos ( named with keywords ) related the site?!

[qh4dotcom]

Here comes troubles for all SEO, I've seen and read that many website that were on top were now on 2nd, 3rd page results or nowhere.

Because of adding Videos and Images to its page results, it push previous top ranked website to lower rankings.

Now SEO will be hard to work, you'll need to think of Video, Image, Books and News contents.

Tell me what do you think, will website ecommerce owners lose money not being on top anymore, adsense earnings drop, seo professional must look for new techniques..... Edit inclusion by ctabuk - please see HHI Golfguys post on this with his link. Poster advised of edit. Thanks David

For me, it won't make much of a difference as I get almost all of my Google Traffic via Adwords...no images and videos appear on the right side of Google search results

[Clint1]

U mean that one should include photos ( named with keywords ) related the site?!

To whom is that addressed?