Quality Content

[Ben Armstrong]

In the midst of all the Panda update hysteria I keep hearing that as long as you have original, "quality content" you'll be sweet.

Can someone explain to me how google's algorithm's determine what quality content is?

I find it hard to believe that they can determine the quality of an article by the content of that article alone.

In fact, I'm pretty sure I could write 2000 words of complete gibberish with poor spelling, punctuation and grammar and as long as it wasn't obviously stuffed with keywords and I backlinked it with quality links it would still get google love.

There seem to be a lot of SEO experts and Gurus who pretend to know what's going on.... What will work/what wont work now. But I'm yet to here any advice that isn't just generic terms like "quality content"

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by Ben Armstrong

In the midst of all the Panda update hysteria I keep hearing that as long as you have original, "quality content" you'll be sweet.

Can someone explain to me how google's algorithm's determine what quality content is?

I find it hard to believe that they can determine the quality of an article by the content of that article alone.

In fact, I'm pretty sure I could write 2000 words of complete gibberish with poor spelling, punctuation and grammar and as long as it wasn't obviously stuffed with keywords and I backlinked it with quality links it would still get google love.

There seem to be a lot of SEO experts and Gurus who pretend to know what's going on.... What will work/what wont work now. But I'm yet to here any advice that isn't just generic terms like "quality content"

There's a number of ways Google can determine "quality"...The first is to determine "crap" and not include it in the index.

Also, why assume that Google can't run spell and grammar checks and use them as part of their algo? They don't have to be perfect, they can just score grammar and spelling by using "red flags" and some measurement to determine the probability that a red flag is an error. Then factor this into the algo.

Here's a few ways Google could also determine quality:

Is the URL typed directly into the address bar?

Is the site accessed by the browser "favorites" or "bookmarks"?

In Google's SERPs, what's the bounce rate?

What is the click depth through a site? Does a visitor click to a site, then click back to Google's SERPs 5 seconds later, or do they click through a site 2-3-4 links deep, spending time on each page?

How far down a page does a user scroll?

How fast do they scroll down a page?

All of the above can be done easily by Google through Chrome or through their toolbar. And each has some merit as a judge of "quality".

Google can also use real human reviewers on their most popular/valuable keywords.

[Ben Armstrong]

Originally Posted by Kurt

There's a number of ways Google can determine "quality"...The first is to determine "crap" and not include it in the index.

Also, why assume that Google can't run spell and grammar checks and use them as part of their algo? They don't have to be perfect, they can just score grammar and spelling by using "red flags" and some measurement to determine the probability that a red flag is an error. Then factor this into the algo.

Here's a few ways Google could also determine quality:

Is the URL typed directly into the address bar?

Is the site accessed by the browser "favorites" or "bookmarks"?

In Google's SERPs, what's the bounce rate?

What is the click depth through a site? Does a visitor click to a site, then click back to Google's SERPs 5 seconds later, or do they click through a site 2-3-4 links deep, spending time on each page?

How far down a page does a user scroll?

How fast do they scroll down a page?

All of the above can be done easily by Google through Chrome or through their toolbar. And each has some merit as a judge of "quality".

Google can also use real human reviewers on their most popular/valuable keywords.

Thanks for the response Kurt.

You've provided me with a few things I wouldn't have thought of.

As for the spelling and grammatical checking thing... I'd always hoped that they had checked for that as it wouldn't be hard to do. Unfortunately though, I still see a lot of poorly spun garbage on sites at the top of the SERPS in some of my niches.

And if google are using things like bounce rate (I've heard arguments for and against this), scroll rate etc then I'm all for it.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by Ben Armstrong

Thanks for the response Kurt.

You've provided me with a few things I wouldn't have thought of.

As for the spelling and grammatical checking thing... I'd always hoped that they had checked for that as it wouldn't be hard to do. Unfortunately though, I still see a lot of poorly spun garbage on sites at the top of the SERPS in some of my niches.

I agree...There's some stuff that doesn't make sense. Sometimes I think Google adds a random factor or two just to mess with us.

[vvsingh]

Leave aside Google for some time and think about the usefulness of quality content. If your content is useful , interesting and informative people will like it, bookmark it, share it.... that is called quality content. You can become a great brand if you are really original otherwise you will keep beating the dust others have left behind. Think of sites like Search Engine Land or SEOMoz they are popular in competitive field of SEO due to their content not the prowse of cheating search engines.
If you content is really useful , people will link to it thus helping you get good rankings and page rank..

[JaySam]

As Google updates its algorithm last June 27, 2011 the issue on "quality content" is very important because the search engine is more on analyzing between crap and quality content. Google changed its ranking criteria for better performance in search query.

[BarryWheeler]

Quality content doesn’t necessarily have to refer to the written words themselves.

Look at everything that Google has at its disposal right now. It has a wide variety of things it can collect data from with respect to how people are using “content”. It can collect data from search, toolbar usage, bookmarks, sidewiki, Chrome, Analytics, Android for mobile, YouTube, image searches etc.

One can only imagine all the other sources it uses and all the other factors that come into play such those mentioned by Kurt.

Google can easily get a sense for not only what people are searching for but how they are using what they find. They can assess and quantify a social factor in determining “Quality”.

[paulgl]

Google did a post on quality a little while ago
Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: More guidance on building high-quality sites

The list is very long, and most look like an algo would be a hard thing. But
they do say this about the list:

Writing an algorithm to assess page or site quality is a much harder task, but we hope the questions above give some insight into how we try to write algorithms that distinguish higher-quality sites from lower-quality sites.

Things they can check(?):
duplicate or rundant content on pages (not referring to syndication, etc)
spelling, factual errors
authority(maybe, if your site is an authority)
quality control(not sure about that )
comprehension, length
ads that distract from content (notice "distract," not just lots of ads)

Who knows? Google always has loved doing things 99.99999% by auto algo,
so they probably have one in use or in the works that they think does
a good job.

I have always thought they they give authoritative sites a pass. Get
an authority site, and you probably will have no problems. Wikipedia
comes to mind. There's not much quality there in the real use of the word.

In their latest blog post
Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Beyond PageRank: Graduating to actionable metrics
They also mention bounce rate and conversion rate. Conversion rate
is interesting. Do people surf around and click in your site?

Now that does refer mostly to SERPs. Interesting they will also be tracking which
sites in SERPs get clicked. If your site does not get a click, it will probably drop
for that given searched keyphrase. Sounds like QS from adwords.

Paul

[smwordsmith]

Originally Posted by Ben Armstrong

Thanks for the response Kurt.

You've provided me with a few things I wouldn't have thought of.

... Unfortunately though, I still see a lot of poorly spun garbage on sites at the top of the SERPS in some of my niches...

That is so true and very frustrating, especially when it is obscuring the results you are looking for. Google is aware that this junk is out there, thus the continual improvement of its algorithms.

[BarryWheeler]

Originally Posted by paulgl

In their latest blog post
Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Beyond PageRank: Graduating to actionable metrics
They also mention bounce rate and conversion rate. Conversion rate
is interesting. Do people surf around and click in your site?

Now that does refer mostly to SERPs. Interesting they will also be tracking which sites in SERPs get clicked. If your site does not get a click, it will probably drop for that given searched keyphrase. Sounds like QS from adwords.

Paul

Interesting points Paul.

Could this be totally revenue driven from their perspective rather than maintaining the true integrity of their search index as they want us to believe? I'm sure a part of this has to do with wanting more revenue and they are getting pressured from Facebook on the search front as well as losing the social internet battle.