Please help me I got a shocking message from Google

10 years ago

"Thin content" doesn't mean "not very much" content or "short articles".

It means, "content that is primarily designed to get traffic to affiliate/ad links".

Without seeing your site it is hard to give specific suggestions but some things to look at:

- Proportion of affiliate vs non-affiliate links. Are you linking out to one authority site for SEO and the rest affiliate links? Do you have one or more affiliate links in every article? Even if they seem natural?

- Affiliate pages vs content pages. Do you have pages of pure content with no affiliate links? Do you have review/pre-sales pages to promote affiliate products? Does the site structure help distinguish these? i.e. silo-structure to organize content and internal linking to funnel traffic to "money pages"

- Content quality. Is the content truly unique and valuable? Is it PLR or re-written articles?

- Do you have a variety of content videos, images, text?

- How is the user engagement? Bounce rate, page views, etc. what do your Google stats tell you is happening with your traffic?

Unless you had a manual review, Google is detecting this with an algorithm. That means key indicators (not always revealed) are triggering Google's "thin content alert". Look at the stats Google gives you and see if you see any red flags.

Google's warning is a standard response so you won't get a direct answer from them about what is triggering it.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591085].message }}

razorz18

10 years ago

Originally Posted by onSubie

"Thin content" doesn't mean "not very much" content or "short articles".

It means, "content that is primarily designed to get traffic to affiliate/ad links".

Without seeing your site it is hard to give specific suggestions but some things to look at:

- Proportion of affiliate vs non-affiliate links. Are you linking out to one authority site for SEO and the rest affiliate links? Do you have one or more affiliate links in every article? Even if they seem natural?

- Affiliate pages vs content pages. Do you have pages of pure content with no affiliate links? Do you have review/pre-sales pages to promote affiliate products? Does the site structure help distinguish these? i.e. silo-structure to organize content and internal linking to funnel traffic to "money pages"

- Content quality. Is the content truly unique and valuable? Is it PLR or re-written articles?

- Do you have a variety of content videos, images, text?

- How is the user engagement? Bounce rate, page views, etc. what do your Google stats tell you is happening with your traffic?

Unless you had a manual review, Google is detecting this with an algorithm. That means key indicators (not always revealed) are triggering Google's "thin content alert". Look at the stats Google gives you and see if you see any red flags.

Google's warning is a standard response so you won't get a direct answer from them about what is triggering it.

Thanks. this is great explanation. At least can avoid "thin" content warning from Google. Entirely new for me. Thanks again

Thanks

Signature

Ways to Increase Website Traffic in 2019

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591170].message }}

pauljones99

10 years ago

Screw G. Who are they to tell you what you should and ashouldn't do?

Hey G. Guess what? I don't have all day to outsource and post crAPPY ARTICLES. THAT'S NOT WHERE I SPEND MY TIME. I am not here to create readers. They can't seem to understand this. Not every peropsn wants to "educate the masses." Why do you cater to such non-sense? They'll only change their rules again.

Thanks

Signature

One stock at a time
www.investmentswithadifference.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591269].message }}

Alexa Smith

Banned 10 years ago

Originally Posted by FaisalKhan

Moreover, I have some articles with more than 1000 words.

You've misunderstood what "thin content" refers to. It isn't about quantity. It's about quality.

Originally Posted by FaisalKhan

I write articles about their release date, review, and when they are available on the market I add links from Amazon. I add video reviews from well-known sources.

All of that certainly sounds like a site that Google wouldn't care for, at all.

Originally Posted by FaisalKhan

Can my site do well still?

Countless sites that are barely listed in Google's SERP's do well. All Google's approval can ever bring you is some search-engine traffic, and after all these years you obviously already know that that barely translates into income at all, for all the reasons explained here.

Originally Posted by FaisalKhan

Please share your experience.

Mine is here, and in other threads. I don't care what Google thinks of my sites. I create my sites for people, not for search-engines. In spite of all the floods of search-engine traffic I happen to get, if Google de-indexed all my sites this afternoon, it would take away only about 2% of my income, because "Google traffic" is so unresponsive and terribly difficult for affiliates to monetize anyway. I prefer to pay attention to the other 98% instead.

Originally Posted by FaisalKhan

Is it possible to remove the penalty?

SEO topics live here, really: Search Engine Optimization

.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591765].message }}

Mike Anthony

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

All Google's approval can ever bring you is some search-engine traffic, and after all these years you obviously already know that that barely translates into income at all, for all the reasons explained here.
.

Thats odd. We have an entire board here about search engine traffic that is one of the busiest and there are lots of people who its translated into income for.

Of course if you write a few articles and throw up some Amazon affiliate links - Go figure you are not guaranteed success. Almost every time I have seen Google give a thin content penalty to a site its because to everyone but the webmaster - its garbage and isn't likely to make money regardless of how its marketed.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591797].message }}

Alexa Smith

Banned 10 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Thats odd.

It is, Mike.

There seem to be thousands of people here who think of "traffic" as meaning, more or less, "visitors from search engines", and have little real experience of traffic from other sources. I find that very odd.

(I always wonder to what extent that's related to the alleged "97% failure-rate in internet marketing".)

I don't know - perhaps that's not so surprising, when you look at the proportion of people who are promoting SEO services of various kinds? Maybe that's part of the reason??

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

there are lots of people who its translated into income for.

I'm less convinced of that. Especially these days. And all the more so for people starting "these days".

I know that SEO service providers like people to believe that search-engine traffic translates into income for "lots of people", but I've always believed that that's actually true only for "very few people", myself. I suspect that if it were really true of "lots of people", the success-rate in IM would actually be many times higher than it really is.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Of course if you write a few articles and throw up some Amazon affiliate links - Go figure you are not guaranteed success. Almost every time I have seen Google give a thin content penalty to a site its because to everyone but the webmaster - its garbage and isn't likely to make money regardless of how its marketed.

Yes, I agree with you unreservedly, there: I know these sites are almost all garbage and will never earn anything worth talking about, with or without rankings.

But as someone who is (a) making my living for many years as an affiliate marketer and (b) getting plenty of search-engine traffic, myself, I also think I'm relatively well placed to observe how very poorly that traffic monetizes, for that purpose, in a large range of unrelated niches, compared with any other kind of traffic I've ever had.

I always suggest to people that they shouldn't put time and effort into trying to attract SEO traffic, for two main reasons ...

(i) it's really very precarious and makes your business Google-dependent, and any business that's Google-dependent is no more than one algorithm-change away from a potential accident (or even a potential disaster), as so many Warriors have been finding out over the last year or two, some of them to their very great cost;

(ii) for me, search engine traffic, in every single one of my niches, has been uniformly the worst-converting traffic out of everything I've ever tried - search engine visitors to all my websites typically stay the least time, view the fewest pages, opt in the least often and actually buy anything by far the least often. I admit I do get tons of search engine traffic to all my main sites (because high rankings for multiple keywords happen to be a minor side-benefit of the main targeted traffic-generation method I use) but I'd hate to have to make a living just from that traffic.

If you have a good look round the forum, you'll also see plenty of other experienced Warriors making exactly these two points.

I accept and respect that as a provider of SEO services, yourself, your perspective will doubtless be a little different from mine.

.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591820].message }}

Mike Anthony

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

It is, Mike.

There seem to be thousands of people here who think of "traffic" as meaning, more or less, "visitors from search engines", and have little real experience of traffic from other sources. I find that very odd.

(I always wonder to what extent that's related to the alleged "97% failure-rate in internet marketing".)

Wonder no longer. I can educate you. Take a look in the WSO section and watch for the people buying up garbage because it promises them they will get rich easily. There's your failure rate in the making right there. Meanwhile you are wrong. Ton loads of people never rank but this board is FAAAAAR more into list building and slamming the poor subscribers with MMO offers - another reason for the 97% failure rate. Much (NOT ALL) of MMO is practically Pyramid like.

I don't know - perhaps that's not so surprising, when you look at the proportion of people who are promoting SEO services of various kinds? Maybe that's part of the reason??

Oh I dunno have you looked at a site called Google.com recently Alexa

. I notice when i do searches for Clothing, software , food products, beauty products, make money online, Forex, widgets, insurance, Medical supplies, plastic surgery, weight loss, cars, real estate. toys, pets, paper, all kinds of services, cabinet making, furniture...well you get my gist - that its not SEO services that comes up in the results - so it stands to reason I guess some of that traffic and the customers that come with it are not SEO services which you are always so in love with. lol

I'm less convinced of that. Especially these days. And all the more so for people starting "these days".

People are not always convinced by the facts now are they?

I know that SEO service providers like people to believe that search-engine traffic translates into income for "lots of people", but I've always believed that that's actually true only for "very few people", myself. I suspect that if it were really true of "lots of people", the success-rate in IM would actually be many times higher than it really is.

Your exercise awaits you. Have you visited that site called Google.com. There's another one called Bing too. Is it the SEO service providers just believing that sites selling all kinds of things are ranking and getting traffic or ahem..... are there actually such non SEO service providers ranking and getting the traffic you do not believe in. Facts are such inconvenient things aren't they?

As for IM failure rates. I looked at the WSO section and the offers unrelated to SEO vastly outweigh the SEO offers and related products. I take it then by your assertions regarding SEO that success rates must be at an all time high for IM? Great Scotts thats fantatic!! That and the main forum section almost always claims SEO is no good so surely by now the success rates should be soaring since SEO was the cause. Again annoying isn't it? I mean facts not fiction.

But as someone who is (a) making my living for many years as an affiliate marketer and (b) getting plenty of search-engine traffic, myself, I also think I'm relatively well placed to observe how very poorly that traffic monetizes, for that purpose, in a large range of unrelated niches, compared with any other kind of traffic I've ever had.

Perhaps you just sucked at SEO and/or conversion?

Fair question considering fortune 500 companies , mid sized business and successful small business men the world over are hiring and using SEO. Why should I take your anecdotal no one knows who you are "evidence" over those facts. For example why are these incompetents hiring SEOs

Amazon.com: Job Search > “seo”

Surely a successful enterprise would know better.

(i) it's really very precarious and makes your business Google-dependent, and any business that's Google-dependent is no more than one algorithm-change away from a potential accident (or even a potential disaster), as so many Warriors have been finding out over the last year or two, some of them to their very great cost;

Well I hear tight rope walking is precarious as well so I skip that mode of crossing the grand canyon when I am visiting it (allows me to skip the illogical notion that visiting the Grand canyon is "precarious" so bonus there). I also tend to read the warning signs posted and for some strange reason I have never fallen off a cliff. Its the strangest thing though. I see sites that have been ranking for YEARS that have never fallen of the first page of Google due to an algo change and most experienced people I interact with right here on WF haven't seen a big change in years. OF course they read the warning signs too. Could the warning signs have something to do with it?

Now of course you feel your point has resonance(if not logic) because after all this was one of the main places people sold link spamming tools until it was banned even from here. Its also where everyone talks about Fiverr and lets face it where everyone LOVES software and the idea of pushing a button and getting untold riches. SO of course many will agree with you because they were knee deep into link spamming they were warned to avoid but refused to.

(ii) for me, search engine traffic, in every single one of my niches, has been uniformly the worst-converting traffic out of everything I've ever tried - search engine visitors to all my websites typically stay the least time, view the fewest pages, opt in the least often and actually buy anything by far the least often.

perhaps your offers suck? or are not suited to the general public (common problem for affiliate marketers). Alas its contradicted by the fact that every day people use search engines by the millions and stay on the sites that have something they like or want. So again anecdotal subjective experience of a few negated by the cold hard fact of millions?

Mind you whatever works for you . I am not against that just your nonsensical claims that because SEO didn't work for you and a few others on a forum that the evidence of millions should be disregarded.

but I'd hate to have to make a living just from that traffic.

and who does exactly? As usual you are as confused about SEO as you ever have been. Its an advertising model not a business model. The back bone of every real business is repeat customers and visitors. In fact how you know you offered garbage is if you ranked for two years and then your traffic dries up if you don't. Its another way of the market telling you you suck and offer nothing anyone wants to come back to.

If you have a good look round the forum, you'll also see plenty of other experienced Warriors making exactly these two points.

and if you look at their sites you see the spammy links that caused them to think that way as well? I didn't say you wouldn't get agreement but its kind of like polling caught cheaters on the volatility of marriage. They usually won't have a pretty story to tell on the subject and they tend not to connect the dots between their cheating , getting caught and their latest marital views

I accept and respect that as a provider of SEO services, yourself, your perspective will doubtless be a little different from mine. .

Perspectives are like eyelashes almost everyone has multiples. What makes for intelligent conversation is when you can back up that perspective not take the lazy intellectually dishonest approach of claiming someone being involved in something negates their points that are based on real data. How are we to know that you don't offer SEO because you were not any good at it and I do because I am?

Incidentally as an affilliate marketer do tell - does the fact that you market a product or service mean that the product is inferior to what you claim due to the perspective bound to your promoting it? By that rationale whatever you suggest should be avoided at all cost and might even add a few digits to the failure rate in IM if other marketers have the same rationale. Just a thought

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592100].message }}

discrat 10 years ago

Mike I am going to be point blank honest...........You make some very, very valid points.

As much as I have nothing anymore to do with Google and Search Engine traffic, what you say does in fact make sense.

Just like other advertising models and business models , I think SEO really requires a certain skill set that most just do not have.

People bought into the unrealistic dream ( me included when I first started) if they built thousands of backlinks then their Websites and Blogs would make them Rich.

We now know this is just not true.

I guess the Truth lies in the facts. And the fact is there are some really good Websites that went by the Rules from the git go and have been successful for years and years with organic Traffic.

Without any hiccups either so to speak.

I guess like you say they saw the Warning Signs from the beginning and abide by them.

Unfortunately, I ran into Grizzly Brears blog back in the day ....my first week in IM actually.

Boy ,did that fiasco cost me years of work down the drain

- Robert Andrew
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592170].message }}
- Mike Anthony 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by discrat
  
  Just like other advertising models and business models , I think SEO really requires a certain skill set that most just do not have.
  
  Hi Robert,
  
  In fairness I think theres another reason as well. Whenever you choose an advertising channel regardless of the channel you have to ask yourself if the core values fit for the medium. Goolge wants searchers to find relevant solid content of some type or the other. They favor sites that have something to offer beyond a sale of one product or service. If your business model is a sales page kind of deal then its jut not a good fit and you are not going to do well.
  
  To extrapolate from that that search engine traffic across the board is inferior is just not thinking things through. Your business model does not have to be one page or thin pages based. Theres a lot of benefits even beyond SEO to have a site that's full and engaging people with information and/or entertainment (WF is an apparent example). Its fine if you want to go only the sales page/only the offer focus route and choose that model but then its not the fault of the traffic from search engines. Its that it just doesn't fit.
  
  This extends to conversion as well. If you are looking to close a sale right away not build a relationship or authority then traffic that is not clearly driven through an ad may convert less. When someone clicks on an Ad they are prepared for a sales pitch. If they were searching they are more likely to be in search of information along with something to buy. They are also looking for clues to credibility rather than buying on impulse or greed. Trade off either way.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592217].message }}

travlinguy

10 years ago

Originally Posted by FaisalKhan

Today, I got a message from Google that my site has "thin content" I was shocked as I was trying to build up an authority site.

My site is about computer hardware. I write articles about their release date, review, and when they are available on the market I add links from Amazon. I add video reviews from well-known sources. I am really frustrated now.

Moreover, I have some articles with more than 1000 words. They are really good for sure.

What can I do?
Is it possible to remove the penalty?
Can my site do well still?
Please share your experience.

What can I do? Why do you need to do anything?
Is it possible to remove the penalty? What penalty? You got a note from Google. So what.
Can my site do well still? That's up to you. If you're writing content relevant to your audience, of course you can still do well.
Please share your experience. My experience is that since 1997 I have NEVER written for bots or crawlers, always for people and my sites still get plenty of organic SE traffic, for what that's worth.

How is it that people have become so brainwashed by outdated SEO practices? It's sad really. Every day I read posts here where people are shouting about doing things that were only marginally effective when they were actually relevant. And that was five or six years ago. It's nuts.

Here's something to think about. There are billions and billions of Web pages out there and more coming all the time. If you're in a competitive market it's going to be nearly impossible to get good positioning regardless of how creative you are slicing the keywords. So why bother?

There are dozens of better ways to get targeted traffic and they take a lot less effort and come with almost no anxiety.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591968].message }}

harry11

10 years ago

Pay more attention to the quality not the quantity. DO you use copy-paste articles or Spun content in your blog? That might be the problem if you do so

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592119].message }}

Please help me I got a shocking message from Google

Trending Topics

A healthy fascination for Hollywood...

How did you turn it all around?

Any thoughts on golf's latest phenom...Scottie Scheffler??

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?

best high quality crypto traffic.