Google Panda Update: New Advice Directly From Google

[simonbuzz]

All webmaster read this new advice: Google Panda Update: New Advice Directly From Google | WebProNews

[omrishabbat]

The basic assumption stayed the same- Quality content! Google always improving their algorithm, and if you are contributing quality content all the time, you will probably just rank better and better.

[jyoticse804]

I have visited the link & read about the update. It's really a great news for webmasters..

[darren13]

Yep, it seems to be all in the content alright. Most of the senior warriors on here have been telling us this for a while anyway so its no surprise really.

[Andy Hart]

At the end of the day the advice is the same its always been - create a site for visitors.

As for Google, concentrate on creating "unique" content, as far as Google's concerned quality doesn't come into it even though they like you to think it does, how does a computer program determine what quality content is??

By the use of Keywords?
Using LSI keywords?
Content length?

You could do all that and the content is still garbage and doesn't benefit anyone, the English language is very complex and a computer program can't evaluate quality and what the content may bring to the visitor.

You could have a fantastic well written authoritarian style article but it doesn't contain the LSI keywords or be the length Google wants or be structured how they want etc, but it educates the site visitor and provides what they are looking for but Google slaps the content even though its high quality, why? Google uses a computer algorithm!

They can't figure out quality without humans, but they can determine unique content.

The reason you should always produce quality content is for your visitors NOT for the benefit of Google.

Andy

One last thing, Google is full of BS, its in their interest to lie to those of us activly trying to reach the number 1 spot for monetary gains.

[Tom Lazenby]

Cool...this is good news :-)

[BIG Mike]

Originally Posted by Andy Hart

At the end of the day the advice is the same its always been - create a site for visitors.

As for Google, concentrate on creating "unique" content, as far as Google's concerned quality doesn't come into it, how does a computer program determine what quality content is?? They can't figure that out without humans, but they can determine unique content.

The reason you should always produce quality content is for your visitors NOT for the benefit of Google.

Andy

You might be surprised Andy - while it's true that the term "Quality" can be subjective on certain levels, there are also clear indicators that a sophisticated algorithm can work with to flag poor quality content.

The most important point is and always has been visitor experience. That includes quality content (not necessarily all unique), ease of navigation, and the final destination for a user's search.

[Andy Hart]

Originally Posted by BIG Mike

You might be surprised Andy - while it's true that the term "Quality" can be subjective on certain levels, there are also clear indicators that a sophisticated algorithm can work with to flag poor quality content.

The most important point is and always has been visitor experience. That includes quality content (not necessarily all unique), ease of navigation, and the final destination for a user's search.

Mike, I think there's a fine line between giving Google too much credit and not giving them enough.

I have always struggled in working out where that expertly hidden line is, in the end I have given up even looking for it, in constantly worrying where that line is, I become frozen in paranoia mode and nothing ever gets done through fear of being watched. (even though I have done nothing wrong.... I think )

Maybe someone can get Matt Cutts drunk enough so he can actually give out some truthful and useful info??

You up for that challenge Mike? lol

Andy

[myob]

Originally Posted by BIG Mike

..The most important point is and always has been visitor experience. That includes quality content (not necessarily all unique), ease of navigation, and the final destination for a user's search.

^^ This.

Unique content has never been part of the alogorithm except when in context with content being duplicated on the same domain or mirrored. Article syndicators, for example where quality content is widely distributed unchanged over hundreds of thousands of websites, have not been negatively impacted at all. In fact, they will continue to be the primary benefactors of Panda.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by Andy Hart

At the end of the day the advice is the same its always been - create a site for visitors.

As for Google, concentrate on creating "unique" content, as far as Google's concerned quality doesn't come into it even though they like you to think it does, how does a computer program determine what quality content is??

By the use of Keywords?
Using LSI keywords?
Content length?

You could do all that and the content is still garbage and doesn't benefit anyone, the English language is very complex and a computer program can't evaluate quality and what the content may bring to the visitor.

You could have a fantastic well written authoritarian style article but it doesn't contain the LSI keywords or be the length Google wants or be structured how they want etc, but it educates the site visitor and provides what they are looking for but Google slaps the content even though its high quality, why? Google uses a computer algorithm!

They can't figure out quality without humans, but they can determine unique content.

The reason you should always produce quality content is for your visitors NOT for the benefit of Google.

Andy

One last thing, Google is full of BS, its in their interest to lie to those of us activly trying to reach the number 1 spot for monetary gains.

It's been stated by some experts that 90% of Google's algo is actually dedicated to removing spam (crap). In reality, removing crap increases quality. And crap is easier to detect than "quality".


As far as detecting "quality", there's still a number of things Google can do to detect quality:

- Human reviewers. No, they don't need to review all the SERPs. Using the 80/20 rule, Google can assign human reviewers to the 20% of the searches that result in 80% of their profits. Be sure to do the math before saying it is too costly. I've already done the math and no, it isn't too expensive.

How about things that can be done through an algo:

- Click rate in the SERPs. Yahoo did a study years ago that showed user behavior concerning click rate in the SERPs was a better judge of quality than an algo.

- Bounce rate and speed. Did the searcher click a link on the SERPs and then return to the SERPs and click again? How long did it take?

- Scroll depth. How far did the person scroll down a page?

- Scroll speed. How fast did a person scroll? Normal reading speed or a fast scanning speed?

- Click through depth. Did users click through the site a few times instead of clicking the back button? This may indicated a qualtiy site.

- Bookmarked. Was the page accessed through the browser's bookmarks/favorites? If a page is bookmarked in the user's browser is a likely judge of quality.

Actually, there's a number of ways Google can try to analyze quality...

[masterjani]

Mostly all the methods have some loophole even google's +1 method will be ustilized by a robo.So what we need is quality content with some high authority backlinks to gain the serp.Will see the improvements.

[Andy Hart]

Originally Posted by Kurt

As far as detecting "quality", there's still a number of things Google can do to detect quality:

- Human reviewers. No, they don't need to review all the SERPs. Using the 80/20 rule, Google can assign human reviewers to the 20% of the searches that result in 80% of their profits. Be sure to do the math before saying it is too costly. I've already done the math and no, it isn't too expensive.

How about things that can be done through an algo:

- Click rate in the SERPs. Yahoo did a study years ago that showed user behavior concerning click rate in the SERPs was a better judge of quality than an algo.

- Bounce rate and speed. Did the searcher click a link on the SERPs and then return to the SERPs and click again? How long did it take?

- Scroll depth. How far did the person scroll down a page?

- Scroll speed. How fast did a person scroll? Normal reading speed or a fast scanning speed?

- Click through depth. Did users click through the site a few times instead of clicking the back button? This may indicated a qualtiy site.

- Bookmarked. Was the page accessed through the browser's bookmarks/favorites? If a page is bookmarked in the user's browser is a likely judge of quality.

Actually, there's a number of ways Google can try to analyze quality...

I can see which side of the line your on :

I think there's a fine line between giving Google too much credit and not giving them enough

This is what I mean by being "paranoid", I'm not for a second suggesting you are but its very easy to give them way too much credit.

I'm sure they do take what you mentioned above into consideration as part of their ranking algo but I also feel they are very small indicators compared to the other more talked about ones.

The factors above still can't analyze the actual content itself and determine quality, as you say they are "indicators" and can be manipulated.

I think we are all on the same page though, create quality content for your site visitors, however, I create quality content purely for the site visitors and not because apparently Google can detect what is or is not quality content. (not aimed at anyone in particular, just generalizing)

I focus on giving Google what it wants in other areas, in terms of other more easy to monitor for effectiveness type of SEO practices.

It does seem as though I'm kinda out on my own with the whole "cant detect quailty" statement, but hey each to their own I guess

Andy

@Kurt - Thats a good list of ways to detect quality that I didn't think of, I was thinking in terms of the actual content (the written text) and not the ways in which users interact with the content, that throws a few spanners in the works in a good way

[yukon]

That Google article was a load of crap!

I'm running a couple of sites that have less than 10 words (total) per page, & have never wrote a single article. My sites are still doing good in the SERPs.

Do your own testing & stop reading so much BS.

Do you really think that Google cares about you & your site, lol, keep on dreaming!

[BulkFacebooklikes]

Guys just note this. The main reason for the panda update was the content. If you have you content written out straight high quality you'll get your lost ranks back.

[yukon]

No you won't!

You'll sit there looking at your watch, waiting, waiting, waiting...

Meanwhile the people that don't care about this panda propaganda will be smoking your sites/pages in the SERPs.

Don't read, Test!

Originally Posted by BulkFacebooklikes

Guys just note this. The main reason for the panda update was the content. If you have you content written out straight high quality you'll get your lost ranks back.

[packerfan]

Doesn't google get over 1 Billion searches per day or something crazy? You really think a human is reviewing 20%? The chances of that happening are slim and none. Maybe a human reviews the SERPS for .000001% or something. What is much more likely is that human intervention comes into play when enough people complain to the big G.

Obviously I have no better insight than anyone else. But it's all but impossible for humans to review the top x% of google searches, regardless of how small x is.

Originally Posted by Kurt

It's been stated by some experts that 90% of Google's algo is actually dedicated to removing spam (crap). In reality, removing crap increases quality. And crap is easier to detect than "quality".


As far as detecting "quality", there's still a number of things Google can do to detect quality:

- Human reviewers. No, they don't need to review all the SERPs. Using the 80/20 rule, Google can assign human reviewers to the 20% of the searches that result in 80% of their profits. Be sure to do the math before saying it is too costly. I've already done the math and no, it isn't too expensive.

How about things that can be done through an algo:

- Click rate in the SERPs. Yahoo did a study years ago that showed user behavior concerning click rate in the SERPs was a better judge of quality than an algo.

- Bounce rate and speed. Did the searcher click a link on the SERPs and then return to the SERPs and click again? How long did it take?

- Scroll depth. How far did the person scroll down a page?

- Scroll speed. How fast did a person scroll? Normal reading speed or a fast scanning speed?

- Click through depth. Did users click through the site a few times instead of clicking the back button? This may indicated a qualtiy site.

- Bookmarked. Was the page accessed through the browser's bookmarks/favorites? If a page is bookmarked in the user's browser is a likely judge of quality.

Actually, there's a number of ways Google can try to analyze quality...

[Quattro]

It's all a guessing game in my opinion. I know of guys who are doing some crazy link building techniques with duplicate content and are ranking really well. And I know of people who are doing quality articles (100% unique) but aren't doing too well in SERPs.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by packerfan

Doesn't google get over 1 Billion searches per day or something crazy? You really think a human is reviewing 20%? The chances of that happening are slim and none. Maybe a human reviews the SERPS for .000001% or something. What is much more likely is that human intervention comes into play when enough people complain to the big G.

Obviously I have no better insight than anyone else. But it's all but impossible for humans to review the top x% of google searches, regardless of how small x is.

I used the word "searches" incorrectly, resulting in a flaw in your logic that Google has to review every "search". They don't. They don't have to review every site, either.

What they could do is EASILY have humans review the top 10 pages in the SERPs for 100,000 of their most profitable searches, every day.

And if you actually do the math, as I have, and try to estimate how much it would cost to do this, the question really becomes "why wouldn't they?".

BTW, it isn't really up for speculation as Google admitted so much in a recent suit in Europe, only my numbers are made up.

[JustaWizard]

I agree that experience and data trumps opinion and speculation.

I work in an SEM/SEO agency as the lead SEO, and the discussion "out there" boils down to 2 camps - one camp thinks Google is lying to us and the other says watch out, Google has hundreds of crazy-smart PhD's working for them who are continually figuring out how to make a machine smarter.

But here's the thing: in the end, it's roughly the same amount of work to create a unique, high-quality site as it is to create a scraper site that just pollutes the web.

It's not black and white here - crappy scraper sites are outranking original content / quality sites, and vice versa. Me? I err on the side of chasing what Google's chasing, a high-quality experience for a visitor.

[Ryan79]

I do agree with you Kurt, the panda is used for removing spam content.

[Chris Sorrell]

And it'll be much the same requirement in 100 years or so. Not much new there and there never will be.

[caseyscreen]

Google Panda is the New Google algorithm which is recently announced by Google. It's main role to remove spamming.

[usaimarketing]

i agreed that from new updates Google is now removing spam content, and also it works on removing low quality backlinks..

[guewarascoy]

I think google panda now fight site with low quality content..

[businesswarrior121]

i am really afraid of google panda. it can cause you a lot of loss to your sites and your sites income. be careful of google panda's action. it works to eradicate all spammers. :/

[GlobalMedia]

If Google panda eradicate all spammers then it's a good news. Why should we worry about that? Anyways, till now I have received good response about Google Panda disregarding the change which they have brought about.

[nicktyler]

I have lost out due to panda and I am not a spammer. I ahve lots of good backlinks but I have lot's of duplicated content on the site due to bad url structure and parameters. I will fix this very soon and if it has the positive impact and I get my rankings back like I hope then this will be proof enough for me either way on weather this is the major factor for Panda.

[Oneal Degrassi]

Originally Posted by yukon

No you won't!

You'll sit there looking at your watch, waiting, waiting, waiting...

Meanwhile the people that don't care about this panda propaganda will be smoking your sites/pages in the SERPs.

Don't read, Test!

How do you know? Didn't you just say that your sites are doing well in teh SERPS?

[paulgl]

LOL! This thread is pretty good entertainment.
Some people have good points, but then digress with their
own BS. Funny how people talk about an "update," when
it's really google doing what they claimed to do all along,
AND, telling you what to do. Listen or not, the choice has
always been yours.

I like this line the best,

The “Panda” algorithm change has improved rankings for a large number of high-quality websites, so most of you reading have nothing to be concerned about.

But the way people talked, you'd think the sky has fallen on everybody!

Can't agree with everything, Yukon, but this is golden:

Originally Posted by yukon

Do you really think that Google cares about you & your site, lol, keep on dreaming!

I have always said people think google thinks they are sooooo important!

If you chose to never violate google webmaster guidelines blatantly, you
have never had anything to worry about. Ever. But people have insisted that
they know best.

There's nothing new there. Just a reiterating of google webmaster guidelines.

How is this good news? You didn't follow it the first time, why are you going
to start now? If this is good news to you, then what the heck were you doing
before?

This line also is great. It's what have been telling you for years, and what I
have been preaching here for months!

Our advice for publishers continues to be to focus on delivering the best possible user experience on your websites and not to focus too much on what they think are Google’s current ranking algorithms or signals.

But in the same groove, people can and do fly under the radar. It's not hard.

Paul