25 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
25 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

I think you should seriously consider Google+, especially for SEO

by FraserC
22 replies
  • SEO
    • |
I know a lot of people out there think that Google+ is a ghost town, that nobody's going to use, but I think you should seriously consider it for its value as a pure social media network, as well as the SEO implications of authorrank.

1. It doesn't suck.

Google+ is great, if you actually use it. It lets you share photos seamlessly, have video Hangouts and make them publicly viewable to anyone on the internet.

And most importantly, you can connect with communities that share the same interests as you. But you need to invest some time into making it work for you. You need to search for people and shared circles that match your interests. Don't bother looking for your friends, they're not there. Make new friends.

Once you've got about 500-1000 active people in your circles, your stream is going to be amazing.

2. Google has the resources and commitment to make this stick

I've talked to Google engineers personally about Google+, and they're writing this service right into their DNA. The future of the web is social, and they're going to make absolutely sure they take advantage of this transformation.

They can keep integrating Google+ into every product in their ecosystem. Just use your imagination to see how they might keep integrating and integrating. You can see this happening bit by bit; just yesterday they integrated Local search into Google+ (Google+ Local). Just imagine the mobile integrations.

They have to do this because they know their future depends on it.

3. Authorship will matter for SEO

Right now Google is in the info gathering stage, learning about the personal authority of people and connecting these networks together. But it should be easy to imagine a future where the personal authority of the author is a significant factor in the search engine rankings for a document.

Personal authority + domain authority = high rankings

I know you'll be able to buy bundles of +1 on Fiverr, but I think it's going to get harder and harder to fake in the future as Google deeply studies the personal relationships of everyone involved.

Writers with high authority will be able to demand high rates to be guest bloggers for various sites because of the personal authority they'll bring to the sites.

Anyway, I think you should give it a try and start building your personal authority today.

1. Create a real account on Google+. Fill out your profile.
2. Try to post one good thing a day.
3. Circle 500-1000 active people in niches that interest you.
4. Comment, +1 and share other people's work
#google #seo
  • Profile picture of the author rahmanpaidar
    I really see no benefit in using yet another great social services for just benefiting
    SEO. If the words in the title of this thread came from what Google has said, then
    it is so interesting how they promote services just by packing it with what is their
    enemy, i.e SEO, to make it luxury to use for IMers.
    Signature
    طراحی سایت، طراحی وب سایت
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6352963].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nest28
    Thanx for the tips Fraser, now the funny thing is a helpful thread like this will get 9 comments, yet some useless thread about the fact that a empty blog ranks for a high profile keyword will get 40 responses.


    I do believe that social engagement will play a big part in the future of the internet, and like you said google will push plus 1 hard to trying tap into that trend.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353097].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Masterminding
      Originally Posted by nest28 View Post

      Thanx for the tips Fraser, now the funny thing is a helpful thread like this will get 9 comments, yet some useless thread about the fact that a empty blog ranks for a high profile keyword will get 40 responses.


      I do believe that social engagement will play a big part in the future of the internet, and like you said google will push plus 1 hard to trying tap into that trend.
      Social is already the present of the internet in my opinion. Whenever I do SEO I always ask myself "what does Google have access to and COULD it thus be using to evaluate rankings?" A couple things come to mind when thinking along those lines:

      - Quantity of Shares, Likes, +1, etc. per page (social equivalent of number of page linking root domains metric)

      - Quantity of Shares, Likes, +1, etc. site-wide (social equivalent of number of root domains linking to the root domain metric)

      - Quantity of Shares, Likes, +1, etc. per user => engagement

      - Quality of the social share itself: sharing a page on Facebook is harder than liking it and should thus carry more weight than a Like

      - Social relevancy: getting a social share from someone who's interested in the same stuff as you are and/or has shared the same stuff as you have should carry more weight. In other words, getting a share from a zoo keeper won't be worth much if you're a webdesigner, but getting a Like from another webdesigner would.

      - CTR to page/site after a social share + time on site after clickthrough after social share

      - Reciprocity: possibly as a negative factor (unnaturally helping an associate/employer/friend improve rankings via social media)

      As you can see: tons of interesting stuff CAN already be calculated. Google and Bing just haven't officially admitted it yet, but I highly recommend anyone who's interested in SEO to not only take the present into account when doing SEO... but the future as well. Because it's social... and it's mobile/"apptivized"
      Signature

      “He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared” – Sun Tzu

      Check out the Motriz Marketing blog for a funny yet informative, brutally honest look at the IM world in general and SEO in particular.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353240].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author johnben1444
    Not just Google+ alone getting some social networking presence is also great for SEO.

    Have you taken the time to check out Open Site Explorer for back link analysis, you will find Facebook shares, likes, Tweet and Google+, that is just one BIG indication that the big G is taking your social presence into consideration when it comes to SEO too.

    In the nutshell, Google is just saying Be REAL, Be YOU even when back linking.
    Signature
    Grow your social media account, Spotify Streams, YT Views & IG Followers & More
    Software & Mobile APP Developer
    Buy Spotify, Facebook Bot & IG M/S Method
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353131].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author david4weaver
    Google + is part of Social Media Marketing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353163].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    Google+ still has fewer users than MySpace. That tells me all I need to know about it.

    Now they just took Google+ business pages and replaced Google Places. That will force small business owners to utilize Google+, but real people are still not using it in significant numbers.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353208].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author FraserC
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      Google+ still has fewer users than MySpace. That tells me all I need to know about it.

      Now they just took Google+ business pages and replaced Google Places. That will force small business owners to utilize Google+, but real people are still not using it in significant numbers.
      Right, but this is just another example of Google leveraging it, over and over again until people start using it. If Google actually kicked in the Authorrank functionality, SEOs would be baking it into everything. Eventually the dam is going to break and people will start adopting it.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353265].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
        Originally Posted by FraserC View Post

        Right, but this is just another example of Google leveraging it, over and over again until people start using it. If Google actually kicked in the Authorrank functionality, SEOs would be baking it into everything. Eventually the dam is going to break and people will start adopting it.
        The biggest mistake many large companies make is thinking they can enter into any niche and be successful. Just because Google throws its weight behind social doesn't mean it will ever amount to anything. This has been a mistake many of the biggest companies have made. Does anyone remember when McDonalds tried to sell Pizza? Just one example.

        Google has no cool factor going with Google+. They had it with Android and they had it with Google. Google+ already is perceived as kind of a joke by the public and that usually doesn't change when it comes to the internet. Almost every major internet phenomena usually starts with the cool factor. If Google+ and its small sample size of users start drastically affecting SERP results, well then Bing and Facebook will have lucked out big time.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6354818].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Q) What's the difference between Facebook & Google+?

    A) Video games

    I'm not trying to be a smart a$$ either.

    I read a while back that Zynga (Farmville) was considering/planning to target Google+, not sure If that ever happened, I don't use either site (G+, FB).

    My point is, video games on social sites are what drives the traffic. Nobody cares about your cat, a car wreck you've seen on the way home from the dentist, or that loud a$$ neighbor that keeps playing Justin Bieber at 3:00 AM.

    I think social sites are over rated (besides niche forums), but hey, I'm just a guy that doesn't care much for video games or Justin Bieber.

    If I was Google I would defiantly setup Google+ like Linkedin, more professional & long term than Facebook will ever be.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353644].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author FraserC
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      Q) What's the difference between Facebook & Google+?

      A) Video games
      I'm not trying to be a smart a$$ either.
      No, I think you're absolutely right. People are spending massive amounts of their day playing these video games, and it contributes to the time disparity between the networks.

      But would your techniques change if the author-rank had a big impact? I really think that's going to really hit webmasters hard if and when they start rolling it out. Right now I suspect they're just running the system in parallel, trying to figure out if it can improve the search results beyond links. If they can make it work, then I think the game changes and social sharing has a much bigger impact.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353758].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by FraserC View Post

        No, I think you're absolutely right. People are spending massive amounts of their day playing these video games, and it contributes to the time disparity between the networks.

        But would your techniques change if the author-rank had a big impact? I really think that's going to really hit webmasters hard if and when they start rolling it out. Right now I suspect they're just running the system in parallel, trying to figure out if it can improve the search results beyond links. If they can make it work, then I think the game changes and social sharing has a much bigger impact.
        I don't know If you can still do this, but Google did have the Google-Profile setup so you didn't have to use Google+. The last time I used Google+ was when they first started the G+ site.

        Can you still use a Google-Profile (thumbnail image in SERPs) on your site without actually participating in G+ circles, etc...?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353989].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author FraserC
          Originally Posted by yukon View Post

          I don't know If you can still do this, but Google did have the Google-Profile setup so you didn't have to use Google+. The last time I used Google+ was when they first started the G+ site.

          Can you still use a Google-Profile (thumbnail image in SERPs) on your site without actually participating in G+ circles, etc...?
          They have a way of verifying authorship through email now. They've made it a lot easier.

          You don't have to actually participate in the social stream to set up the author rank, but you do want people to be circling you, and taking social actions on your articles build up your personal authority.

          Or, feel free to ignore the whole movement, if you like. But Google+ is like anything. I know there are people doing great with LinkedIn, but I totally ignore it. Whatever you invest it, you get back.

          @OnemanSEO - Would you engage in the network if your search engine rankings were slipping because you lacked personal authority?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6354202].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author yukon
            Banned
            Originally Posted by FraserC View Post

            They have a way of verifying authorship through email now. They've made it a lot easier.

            You don't have to actually participate in the social stream to set up the author rank, but you do want people to be circling you, and taking social actions on your articles build up your personal authority.

            Or, feel free to ignore the whole movement, if you like. But Google+ is like anything. I know there are people doing great with LinkedIn, but I totally ignore it. Whatever you invest it, you get back.

            @OnemanSEO - Would you engage in the network if your search engine rankings were slipping because you lacked personal authority?
            IDK, I might test G+ someday, but I've tested Twitter & FB with my traffic & my traffic just doesn't respond to the social sites (besides niche forums).

            Most of my traffic is adult males in a hobby niche, I say hobby, but a lot of these guys eventually end up starting offline businesses.

            I hear what your saying as far as SEO, but Google has been known to flake out on other social products that they've started in the past.

            I just have a hard time taking Google serious when it comes to social products.

            It's possible G+ could be different than the last two social product flops. I just think their going to have to spice things up in a much bigger way than the last time I visited G+, to get the average web surfer to participate.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6354386].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author OneManSEO
            Originally Posted by FraserC View Post

            @OnemanSEO - Would you engage in the network if your search engine rankings were slipping because you lacked personal authority?
            Absolutely. If Google + contained more than just Google employees and internet marketers on its active user list, then yeah, I'd probably be using it much more.

            As it stands right now, Google + is a ghost town and until that changes, it will eventually be discontinued just like all the other Google social networks.

            And you are right, Google + doesn't suck. It just isn't succeeding.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6366441].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author OneManSEO
    I love spooky places and Google + might be the biggest ghost town in the world. BOOO!

    @Yukon - I actually agree and disagree with you on Facebook. I have plenty of friends on FB that seem to endlessly play games - but I've found it has been a great conduit to keep in touch with friends and family. I am notorious for going AWOL on my family, so this lets me keep those relationships healthy.

    As for SEO, Google + is going to fail. Sorry to break it to ya folks...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6353745].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sylonious
    From Google's high perch authority could be anything. A high enough author rank to effect search rankings could mean having books published or popular articles on sites like the Huffington post etc.

    From their perspective it's hard to tell what they consider an article that's worthy of a significant author rank boost.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6355457].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    Authorship is actually a pretty neat thing. 99% of readers will completely ignore this post, yey!
    Signature


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6355939].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chrisbroholm
    I mean is there any reason NOT to be on G+? It's not like it takes a great deal of effort to be part of a social network.

    And I like the authorship thing too, very cool in the serps.
    Signature

    Check out my blog GenuineOnlineMarketing.com where I talk about building Amazon and Adsense Niche Websites.

    Over 800 Amazon Reviews for $1 - No way?

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6356238].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dsouravs
    R U a Goog Employer
    Or R U Affiliated to Goog
    Signature

    I can convert your Non-Responsive website to Responsive website ... How sweet is that? :)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6356746].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author richinca
    Google is trying to make the web the way they want it to be. G+ is their attempt to control social like they control search. It will fail just like many of their other non-search projects.

    The worst part of "authorship" is once you have been 100% identified and linked in the Google ecosystem, they can ban you on a whim and destroy everything you worked years for.

    Look at all of the legitimate businesses using the web that have been damaged or destroyed by Panda/Penguin. This update has had a serious revenue impact on legitimate companies that may not have been "web experts" far greater than Google has let on. They are destroying companies that relied on them and worked to appease them for years. It is simply a bunch of knuckleheads talking to themselves and believing everything they hear.

    Adwords is even worse. Whoever thought of banning a customer because they haven't quite learned the "rules" of your advertising platform? Are you kidding? How about not approving just that ad and working with the customer to explain why it isn't approved and what needs to be fixed? Easy for them to do when they're a monopoly and growing like crazy, but this will change when revenues fall. Many of us have now moved to non-Google dependent advertising models that we can control.

    They have the arrogance borne from a monopoly and are destined to fail. Now they think they can solve slowing revenues by shoving G+ down your throat, but it will fail in time. I know it may help SEO short term, but I wouldn't waste a lot of resources on it, as they'll change on a whim when it suits them.

    Sorry for the rant, I've just had it with them after Penguin, read more about it here
    Signature
    NamelyDomains.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6356902].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author shifat
    Yeah i also think G+ will play huge rule on your serp greatly on coming days & i would advise everyone to get their hands dirty before its too late .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6357018].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chrisbroholm
    People really need to start chilling. Google isn't out to punish every single one of us. Follow the rules and you might never recieve anything but cheques from them. Do shady gray/blackhat SEO, try to game the system or anything of that nature and you will face consequences.

    I mean its not that difficult is it.
    Signature

    Check out my blog GenuineOnlineMarketing.com where I talk about building Amazon and Adsense Niche Websites.

    Over 800 Amazon Reviews for $1 - No way?

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6357062].message }}

Trending Topics