63 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
63 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Matt Cutts: Google algorithm change launched

by TristanPerry
53 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Hi all,
As you might know, Matt Cutts of Google is fairly active on Hacker News. He just posted up the following announcement there:

Earlier this week Google launched an algorithmic change that will tend to rank scraper sites or sites with less original content lower. The net effect is that searchers are more likely to see the sites that wrote the original content. An example would be that stackoverflow.com will tend to rank higher than sites that just reuse stackoverflow.com's content. Note that the algorithmic change isn't specific to stackoverflow.com though.

I know a few people here on HN had mentioned specific queries like [pass json body to spring mvc] or [aws s3 emr pig], and those look better to me now. I know that the people here all have their favorite programming-related query, so I wanted to ask if anyone notices a search where a site like efreedom ranks higher than SO now? Most of the searches I tried looked like they were returning SO at the appropriate times/slots now.
Source (on HackerNews)
Source (on his blog) - thanks jasonboom for the blog post mention, didn't see it


So if you have an auto blog/content scraper, consider checking it out since it might be affected by this change.
#ago #algorithm #announced #change #cutts #google #hour #launched #matt
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    I was expecting the change to come, but not this soon, and not to this effect.

    It looks like the original source is going to gain the most value, so that long-time myth about you must publish on your own website first, might finally be true.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265834].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TBInternetMarketing
      I guess this is a good one if you write your own reviews/content.
      At the end of the day as an end user in google, the last thing you want to see is identical content on the first page of results.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265843].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author wsotoolz
    I saw some of my sites move up recently and all of them had original articles. Many other sites that do not have original content have been long lost and I don't make those types of sites any more. I think original content is the way to go.

    Now I wonder how much spinning of an article is enough to make it look original... As I often do spin content to use on m blogs or articles sites for backlinking.

    Regardless it will be interesting to see how this change effects everyone long term.
    Signature
    Brand NEW pinterest tool launched - Repininator - Thousands of visitors to your site per month!

    DONT IGNORE PINTEREST - IT SENT 4,000+ VISITORS TO MY BLOG LAST MONTH!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265872].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paleochora
    Tip: Only buy an autoblogging tool with an inbuilt spinner in future. lol
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265878].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
      If true, that would be awesome!
      Signature

      Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

      Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265888].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TZ
      Originally Posted by Paleochora View Post

      Tip: Only buy an autoblogging tool with an inbuilt spinner in future. lol
      Yep. And it better have whole phrase rewriting too.

      None of my autoblogs have been negatively affected by the algo change so far. 4 of them are getting more traffic now.

      If you are using a powerful phrase and word rewriter and have auto-internal linking, you will be fine.
      Signature

      $php_coding = "consistent cash";

      echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266433].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    Sooooo.... If I publish an article or press release on my own site, get it indexed, and then send out submissions for press releases, will that boost my site up?

    I wonder how this is going to work.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265896].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author M Thompson
      So hope this actually happens and has some effect, not seen too many rank changes in the past few days though
      Signature


      If you are serious about online marketing come and Join our free community The Foundation
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265909].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lotsofsnow
    Hello, ding ding ding here comes the wagon!

    Matt Cutts and Hacker News: wrong source!!!
    Signature

    Call Center Fuel - High Volume Data
    Delivering the highest quality leads in virtually all consumer verticals.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265912].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
    This makes a lot of sense. No more debates on EZA first or blog first. And for avid 'spinner' fans, it's time for you guys to spin and spin REALLY hard.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265918].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wiseworks
      Does this mean using article spinners like Article Wizard will become less affective?

      I know that they submit to many auto blog sites.

      Thoughts?
      Signature

      Jeff Wise
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265936].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paleochora
        Originally Posted by wiseworks View Post

        Does this mean using article spinners like Article Wizard will become less affective?

        I know that they submit to many auto blog sites.

        Thoughts?
        It will mean that blogs which just scrape for and publish syndicated content through rss will be hit. That must go for all of the big news agencies which basically scrape Reuters and BBC feeds.

        People using spinners will benefit, or at least see no change, as they make each copy of their content unique through the spinning process.

        Not so good for those who blindly post the exact same article to their site and multiple article directories without making each publication unique.

        It kind of kicks the legs from under the big article directories too. Consider the original purpose of those sites...providing content for syndication - as long as it is not altered in any way.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266071].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author mikebrooks
          The question is, if you're spinning articles, how much do you need to change things up?
          Signature

          Mike Brooks
          Affiliate/JV Manager for Job Crusher
          IMPartnerPro.com

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266113].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author James Rogers
            Originally Posted by mikebrooks View Post

            The question is, if you're spinning articles, how much do you need to change things up?
            Your best bet is to spin your articles each paragrapgh first, and then each sentence in each paragraph. That way Google can't see what is the original and what the spin version
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3270498].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author wiseworks
          Originally Posted by Paleochora View Post

          It will mean that blogs which just scrape for and publish syndicated content through rss will be hit. That must go for all of the big news agencies which basically scrape Reuters and BBC feeds.

          People using spinners will benefit, or at least see no change, as they make each copy of their content unique through the spinning process.

          Not so good for those who blindly post the exact same article to their site and multiple article directories without making each publication unique.

          It kind of kicks the legs from under the big article directories too. Consider the original purpose of those sites...providing content for syndication - as long as it is not altered in any way.
          Perfect and clear explanation for me! Thank you!

          Btw, people take my EzineArticles all the time and alter it by not including my resource box.
          Signature

          Jeff Wise
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266120].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stanislavlem
    Themain aim of Google is to provide BEST results of searchers.

    Pros: If you write unique content - GREAT!

    Cons: If you're using autoblogging sotware - BAD!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3265933].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    For those who keep insisting there is no problem ranking with duplicate content (which logically is absurd), this may be a wake-up call.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266014].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      For those who keep insisting there is no problem ranking with duplicate content (which logically is absurd), this may be a wake-up call.
      I have seen many people ranking with duplicate content.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266067].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      For those who keep insisting there is no problem ranking with duplicate content (which logically is absurd), this may be a wake-up call.

      My only argument with this is that article syndication before 2005 had nothing to do with playing Google, but getting great content to larger audiences.

      If people rely solely on Google for their traffic, they are silly at best.

      Changes in Google's algorithms will never affect those who syndicate quality content that answers questions and solves problems for real human readers.

      I will continue to syndicate my content all over the web, because it is not about rankings but eyeballs.

      So logically, if you are intent on using that word, it is absurd to declare the death of article marketing based on your own limited view of the marketplace.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266110].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        My only argument with this is that article syndication before 2005 had nothing to do with playing Google, but getting great content to larger audiences.

        If people rely solely on Google for their traffic, they are silly at best.

        Changes in Google's algorithms will never affect those who syndicate quality content that answers questions and solves problems for real human readers.

        I will continue to syndicate my content all over the web, because it is not about rankings but eyeballs.

        So logically, if you are intent on using that word, it is absurd to declare the death of article marketing based on your own limited view of the marketplace.
        Good points, and I agree. The problem is people using duplicate content not to place their content on other sites to get traffic from those other sites, but using duplicate content solely for search engine traffic.

        This is just the first of many changes Google will be making. Good to see that sites scraping (copying content) and pages with little original content will be dropped a little lower.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266261].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author wandysue34
    I write all my content myself on my main hub but the rest are using a spinning service so can't wait to see how this turns out. Hope there is positive results without complication in between.
    Thanks for sharing
    WandaSue
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266018].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    So, cutting through the bull,

    Anyone actually notice any changes?

    I haven't.

    I checked some of my sites that have almost no original content and they are still rockin', same as always. Plenty of #1's and Top 10's, just like they were last week, just like last month.

    To be fair, they aren't auto blogs but are blogs made up of heavily used content. I only changed the titles, added in some h2 subtitles and occasionally tweaked the text.

    Now, there could be some ranking changes at the page level, I'm not sure. This is probably where you are going to see most of the effects but I don't keep track of long-tails n' randoms.

    So... changes, anybody? Or is this another Big Foot sighting?
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266116].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      Or is this another Big Foot sighting?

      Good analogy.

      Cutts did say it will only affect "slightly over 2% of queries change in some way, but less than half a percent of search results change enough that someone might really notice."
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266137].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      So, cutting through the bull,

      Anyone actually notice any changes?
      There is no bull. Please don't start with the old Google conspiracy theories again. its not supposed to affect many serps. From Matt's blog.

      This was a pretty targeted launch: slightly over 2% of queries change in some way, but less than half a percent of search results change enough that someone might really notice. The net effect is that searchers are more likely to see the sites that wrote the original content rather than a site that scraped or copied the original site's content.
      In addition algorithm changes of this kind take effect when the crawler moves on through so it won't take effect immediately if google is not in the habit of reindexing your page often (no new links , no new contetn etc).
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266349].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cashcow
    Interesting, I haven't seen any changes in my sites at all so I guess I must be doing something right! (Phew!).

    I have a LOT of autoblogs, but I always add some unique content to them and those are actually the pages I am trying to rank, the rest is just additional stuff for people to read and videos for them to look at (and products). So I guess it makes sense that my rankings and traffic are the same.

    Would be curious to know how or if this is affecting ezinearticles. Anybody?

    Lee
    Signature
    Gone Fishing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266147].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TristanPerry
    Regarding the article syndication issue, moultano over at HN is also a Google employee and he just posted this:

    Syndicating content across domains is a common practice and will not be effected by this.
    Signature
    Plagiarism Guard - Protect Against Content Theft
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266263].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    One thing I have noticed recently, getting new pages indexed is a PITA. Getting a new site indexed, can still get this done within 48 hours but the pages are stubborn.

    This could be due to the algorithm changes. I'll have to test it out and whip up something unique and see if it does any better than the slightly modified content.

    Let's see, gotta make it scientific. Select 2 sites that rank well and are having an affair with the google bot. Throw up a not-so-unique article and a unique article on each and do the same on 2 newer sites that aren't performing as well. We'll call it the Half-Assed Scientific SEO Method or HASSEOM.

    But first, I'm gonna put another nail in the coffin. Smoke break.
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266326].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      Let's see, gotta make it scientific. Select 2 sites that rank well and are having an affair with the google bot. Throw up a not-so-unique article and a unique article on each and do the same on 2 newer sites that aren't performing as well. We'll call it the Half-Assed Scientific SEO Method or HASSEOM.

      But first, I'm gonna put another nail in the coffin. Smoke break.

      That is the kind of thinking I like to see.

      But better. Find the site with Google Love, and link to a blank domain, one page with original content and another with dupe content.

      Then watch.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266357].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      One thing I have noticed recently, getting new pages indexed is a PITA. Getting a new site indexed, can still get this done within 48 hours but the pages are stubborn.
      .
      Haven't noticed that . In fact I was working with a site this week and making changes and it indexed things I changed a day later. This will be just the first of changes with google though. Google has been getting a lot of bad press about their results and Bing is out there so they have no chocie but to move up on plans. Bad PR will always make a corporation giddyup. should be an interesting year.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266374].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    Syndicating content across domains is a common practice and will not be effected by this.
    Now that doesn't make any sense.

    Aside from the means by which one acquires the content, what is the difference between syndicating an article or scraping an article?

    A google bot doesn't know if I'm allowed to use the content on my site or not. Doesn't know if my site is a legitimate syndicated news source or if I'm running WP Robot to grab everything I can from Amazon and Articlebase.

    So basically, nothing is going to change. Viva la google. We are back to original content doesn't mean squat, you just need your site of dupe content to rank above the rest.
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266381].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Fernando Veloso
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      So basically, nothing is going to change. Viva la google. We are back to original content doesn't mean squat, you just need your site of dupe content to rank above the rest.
      From what I can see in local results, YOU are correct.

      Even sites reported a long time ago (filled with scraped content) are ranking high.

      Nada changed, or so it seems.
      Signature
      People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266399].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    There is no bull. Please don't start with the old Google conspiracy theories again. its not supposed to affect many serps. From Matt's blog.
    Cutting through the bull = what changes or results have you see, not hypothesis. Nothing to do with a google conspiracy.

    We can sit around and think 'what if' but what matters is 'what is'
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266403].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      We can sit around and think 'what if' but what matters is 'what is'

      Yep, that is where I thought you were coming from.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266462].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TZ
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        Yep, that is where I thought you were coming from.
        And now we are coming from a self-help forum.

        Except what is and go ommmmmmm....:p
        Signature

        $php_coding = "consistent cash";

        echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266475].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      We can sit around and think 'what if' but what matters is 'what is'
      What is is obvious. there has been a change that affects a few siteS. Claiming it isn't one would be the old conspiracy argument again. Google announces something that isn't true etc. We've been down that road together before.

      Maybe you track a whole lot of duplicate content site serps I don't because it always was an iffy proposition anyway but my bet is there isn't a single person in this thread that tracks more than a handful of those kind of sites to say nothing has changed. Most people on here do some spinning and even you admitted to tweaking and making changes.

      too small a sample. So theres not a reason to claim that because in your own corner it hasn't happened it isn't real thats just the conspiracy thing again and it makes no sense man.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266489].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        What is is obvious. there had been a change that affects a few siteS. Claiming it isn't one would be the old conspiracy argument again. Google announces something that isn't true etc. We've been down that road together before.

        ...

        too small a sample. So theres not a reason to claim that because in your own corner it hasn't happened it isn't real thats just the conspiracy thing again and it makes no sense man.

        LOL You are the only one I have noticed talking about "conspiracy" in this thread. Just sayin...
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266580].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          LOL You are the only one I have noticed talking about "conspiracy" in this thread. Just sayin...
          TP you haven't frequented the SEo sections as much as I have in the past. Jason and I have discussed this before and the bull argument is much the same as the past. What IS real and what isn't etc. doesn't need to mention the word conspiracy anymore than talking about a shooting from the grassy knoll does.

          and in other news. Yes I have now confirmed a difference in one of the example sites that a content duplicate site creator seller used to rank number one. He lost his position. Just sayin.

          SO does that qualify for what IS?

          Not across the board though but we'll see.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266623].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TZ
    Oh damn...gotta run. I hear a black helicopter hovering over my house.
    Signature

    $php_coding = "consistent cash";

    echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266599].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jhonsean
    there are so many people using duplicate content and they are also ranking and i think that their purpose is to wide the influence and its source to the related sites.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3266748].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnitaCross
      "we're evaluating multiple changes that should help drive spam levels even lower, including one change that primarily affects sites that copy others' content and sites with low levels of original content." ~ Matt Cutts (emphasis supplied; Full post here)

      Cutts goes on to say "This was a pretty targeted launch..."

      My guess is the algo has a narrow focus, so if your site publishes syndicated content, along with content of your own, you shouldn't be affected.

      If the intent is to remove spammy sites from the top results of the SERPs for any given query, it should only be the most egregious sites that are penalized. That means a lot of marginal sites would/should still slip through.

      But as Google won't be giving us specifics, we can only guess at their intent and future effects on our sites.

      It would be interesting to follow up on this thread in about 6 months or so, and look back on the effects this change has or hasn't had on our sites.

      Respectfully,
      -Anita
      Signature
      Looking For A Short Cut To Online Retail Profits?
      OSOA on Facebook -- SimplySilk on Facebook

      Anita       is one of several Moderators at "Live Marketing Chat"
      LMC, mixing work and fun on Saturday nights -- Google it
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3267779].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author inter123
        So if someone posts an article on their site, gets it indexed and then submits to Ezine, does that mean the article published on Ezine is not going to rank highly?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3267976].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TZ
        Originally Posted by AnitaCross View Post

        it should only be the most egregious sites that are penalized. That means a lot of marginal sites would/should still slip through.
        That is what I think is going to happen I think?

        And maybe nothing is going to happen - it's just smpe,
        Signature

        $php_coding = "consistent cash";

        echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3268206].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TZ
        Originally Posted by AnitaCross View Post

        it should only be the most egregious sites that are penalized. That means a lot of marginal sites would/should still slip through.
        That is what I think is going to happen I think?

        And maybe nothing is going to happen - it's just a smoke show.
        Signature

        $php_coding = "consistent cash";

        echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3268211].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    Wow...scraper sites ranking lower than the ones with original content. Who would have thought...
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3268494].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      Wow...scraper sites ranking lower than the ones with original content. Who would have thought...

      yeah it always was a bad practice for the long term. It really doesn't take that much to add a little uniqueness to pages making you money.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3270479].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Look4VGames
    .................
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3268528].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jerytohn
    Does that mean ezinarticles and such will now rank lower?
    Signature

    Good Day People! This is my fav search engine: Google

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3268639].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author twmaffun
      I'm kind of bummed out that they are going to do this, but it will end some of the ridiculous things that people do, and some autoblog farms, and probably just end autoblogging :/ Hope i am wrong
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3268647].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author luuda
    This is a bad news ...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3270765].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AdamPeterson
    That is a great news, I am sure that would stop black-hat seo people work lol... Sometimes back, one of my friend had that problem, the site which got his content was ranking well, but his site was penalized. Later, he struggled a lot to with the ranking as a result, now he is back into action, may be more quality backlinks to his site too help to this.
    Signature
    Regards,
    Adam Peterson,
    Software Testing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3270969].message }}

Trending Topics