62 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
62 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Do you believe in social signals as a ranking factor?

by taposh123
53 replies
  • SEO
    • |
I am going to make a case study about social signals as a ranking factor. You can leave your points here. Also don't forget to write your name .... After finishing this study, i will let you know when i will publish it on my blog.......waiting for your thoughts....
#factor #ranking #signals #social
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    Social signals are not a ranking factor. End of story.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886167].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author taposh123
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      Social signals are not a ranking factor. End of story.
      Thanks for your reply...This is just beginning........Do u think that u know everything? If u didn't know about this,then why are u interfering here? I have seen that u have answered all the posts.....But one thing..You are trying to spam here......buddy.......

      At last moz and mattcuts already written about it.......... And u are talking this is not.........You are the superman of warriorforum.........
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886297].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
        Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

        Thanks for your reply...This is just beginning........Do u think that u know everything? If u didn't know about this,then why are u interfering here? I have seen that u have answered all the posts.....But one thing..You are trying to spam here......buddy.......

        At last moz and mattcuts already written about it.......... And u are talking this is not.........You are the superman of warriorforum.........
        Yeah, I'm trying to spam here.

        You are right. Matt Cutts has talked about this several times. And every time he has said that social signals play zero role in rankings.

        Show me one website in a moderately competitive niche that is ranking based on social signals. Nobody has ever shown any solid proof of social signals ranking a webpage.

        There is no way that Google is going to put emphasis on something that can easily be manipulated (far easier than backlinks) and that they could be shut out of without warning.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886316].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author KylieSweet
          Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

          Social signals are not a ranking factor. End of story.
          Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

          Do u think that u know everything? If u didn't know about this,then why are u interfering here? I have seen that u have answered all the posts.....But one thing..You are trying to spam here......buddy.......And u are talking this is not.
          Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

          Yeah, I'm trying to spam here.

          You are right. Matt Cutts has talked about this several times. And every time he has said that social signals play zero role in rankings.

          There is no way that Google is going to put emphasis on something that can easily be manipulated (far easier than backlinks) and that they could be shut out of without warning.
          @taposh123 - it seems that you are the one who knows everything
          @MikeFriedman - Well said no need to elaborate more
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887746].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author taposh123
            Originally Posted by KylieSweet View Post

            @taposh123 - it seems that you are the one who knows everything
            @MikeFriedman - Well said no need to elaborate more
            I am just trying to share this matter with everyone....What is their opinion........How can u say that end of story.......KylieSweet
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887776].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author taposh123
          Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

          Yeah, I'm trying to spam here.

          You are right. Matt Cutts has talked about this several times. And every time he has said that social signals play zero role in rankings.

          Show me one website in a moderately competitive niche that is ranking based on social signals. Nobody has ever shown any solid proof of social signals ranking a webpage.

          There is no way that Google is going to put emphasis on something that can easily be manipulated (far easier than backlinks) and that they could be shut out of without warning.
          quicksprout is an example who made their strong opinion for people to confess social signals as a ranking factor.......Nail patel already told that posts that have gotten more social shares, already got high rankings..........
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887788].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DABK
            So, you get a large number of visitors, who stay on the site, and they come from social sites.

            And the only obvious conclusion is that the source of the traffic is the cause of the increase in ranks.

            Number of visitors and how long they stay on the site have nothing to do with it, right?

            I am ranking pages on sites that have not one social anything. Right behind me are pages that do get twittered and facedbooked and pinterested, some quite a lot.

            Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

            quicksprout is an example who made their strong opinion for people to confess social signals as a ranking factor.......Nail patel already told that posts that have gotten more social shares, already got high rankings..........
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9888481].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
            Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

            Nail patel already told that posts that have gotten more social shares, already got high rankings..........
            Actually, he has never proven that. He says it, but has never shown definite proof.

            Neil has used examples of people trying to rank for ridiculous easy terms, like "Argos Voucher Codes March 2013" and doing it with social signals. The truth is for a term like that if you create a decent page with good onsite SEO, you will rank in the top 5 most likely for a term like that.

            Neil also uses an example of when Smashing Magazine tweeted out Moz's Beginner's Guide to SEO. Smashing Magazine has almost a million followers on Twitter. If you think that tweeting that did not generate links, you are naive. Not to mention that Moz tweeted it too to their followers, which are mostly SEOs and internet marketers, many of which have their own sites and could easily link to the page.

            All the social media crowd has been able to show is correlations. Not proof.

            Google is not going to put any weight into their algorithm based on something they could be shut out of tomorrow. Facebook and Google do not have a good relationship. Facebook could block Google at any moment. They really do not rely on search engine traffic, so it wouldn't hurt them. Twitter and Google have also had a contentious relationship, although they just recently entered into a new agreement to work together. The last time they did that though it ended abruptly with no warning.

            But hey, don't listen to any of us who have tested this and researched it. Test it for yourself. You will see. It doesn't work.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9888659].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author paulgl
            Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

            quicksprout is an example who made their strong opinion for people to confess social signals as a ranking factor.......Nail patel already told that posts that have gotten more social shares, already got high rankings..........
            Then quicksprout is an idiot. As are the rest. End of story.

            Some people confess a strong opinion the moon is made of cheese.

            A billion people will confess they don't eat cows because one might be their
            long dead great grandfather.

            Keep confessing.

            Keep failing.

            Keep confessing that you are mixing up rankings with social.

            Keep on keeping on.

            No wise man has the power to reason away what a fool believes.

            Paul
            Signature

            If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9888736].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author savidge4
              Here is MY personal us of social media. I personally do NOT use social media as a form of back linking or in any way a factor in getting ranking. it is what happens AFTER the post that I am looking to achieve. Again I could care less about the tweets and retweets or the likes and shares as a number unto themselves.

              1. I am using Social media for its intent purpose. To connect with people where they hang out. I don't ask them to come to me, I go to them.
              2. I am looking for the obvious return traffic. albeit social traffic in terms of conversion... is rated some of the lowest converting traffic you can get. ( I can actually show some data to back that up )
              3. I am looking for my audience to share via their websites my article or information. THIS is where actual counting back linking takes place. IF you take your level of content beyond a silly video or a single infographic you can elevate this process considerably. "Beginners Guide to SEO" would be a good example of this type of content )
              Yes, I use social media... use the hell out of it actually. use it with the intent purpose of growing my off page SEO efforts... but NOT from the social media platforms directly.
              Signature
              Success is an ACT not an idea
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9888997].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author alex93
          Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

          Yeah, I'm trying to spam here.

          You are right. Matt Cutts has talked about this several times. And every time he has said that social signals play zero role in rankings.
          .
          I agree with Mike, iv got over 80,000 retweets and have an average of 99.7 retweet rank, ie, each post i make is retweeted hundreds of times, it makes zero difference except you might get some traffic from the url.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891924].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cookiesfromhome
    Banned
    With Social media we can get daily visitors and if we have traffic then we can get ranked also.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886314].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AndresNWD
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886426].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by AndresNWD View Post

      That said, to feed the controversy, there is correlation (not proven causation) between ranking and social signals like tweets, +1's and likes. Searchmetrics 2014 ranking factors.
      That is the problem and what has started this whole stupid myth. Nobody has ever shown any proof. Only correlations.

      It's not the social signals that caused high rankings. It is the high rankings that caused the social signals.

      In other words, a site that ranks highly is going to get more traffic. More traffic means it is likely that more people are going to retweet it and like it on Facebook.

      There has never been a published case of it happening the other way around.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886450].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author savidge4
        Google made an attempt at the ability to track social signals when they brought in and implemented "Google Authorship" as we know they ( Google ) laid that to rest mid to late last year. For me personally there has been a better than correlation between G+ and Google listings. My personal methods in regards to the use of G+ to not only list but rank my pages in Google are the lifeblood of my business, be it personally or professionally for clients.

        To what extent the likes of Facebook and twitter have, I wouldn't even begin to comment, and would agree with Mike and others... its pure speculation. You can look atwrite ups as recent as this one: How Social Signals Impact Search Engine Rankings as it was written 16 days ago, and they are detailing "Studies" that were made in March 2013 and February 2011. I personally would not call these studies valid by any stretch.

        Looking to this article from June last year: Does Google Use Social Signals From Facebook And Twitter In Its Rankings? - Forbes and there is direct mention of Cutts answering the question; does social signals carry weight, and reading the article you see the answer is clearly NO. However, pointed out in the article, you do read about the omission of G+ in that statement.

        I think if there was ever a "Correlation" to be made it would be this. Google Uses its own products and services as rank indicators. Ask this simple question; When was the last time you saw a "Vimeo" video in the top 10 listing of Google? The answer is you don't.. you see YouTube videos.

        You want to sell me the fact that Google uses G+ as a social indicator..Im right there with you. You then try and stretch that to other Social Outlets... not a chance!
        Signature
        Success is an ACT not an idea
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886675].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Enuke
        Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

        That is the problem and what has started this whole stupid myth. Nobody has ever shown any proof. Only correlations.

        It's not the social signals that caused high rankings. It is the high rankings that caused the social signals.

        In other words, a site that ranks highly is going to get more traffic. More traffic means it is likely that more people are going to retweet it and like it on Facebook.

        There has never been a published case of it happening the other way around.
        I am quite agree with you my dear brother, I got one customer he wanted to take 20 g+ and 20 shares on FB for each link. I tried to deny but not accepted. I gave him any how but now I am seeing, there is no difference in ranking by now and I hope, It may be down in coming days.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887819].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author taposh123
          Originally Posted by Enuke View Post

          I am quite agree with you my dear brother, I got one customer he wanted to take 20 g+ and 20 shares on FB for each link. I tried to deny but not accepted. I gave him any how but now I am seeing, there is no difference in ranking by now and I hope, It may be down in coming days.
          Bro make it natural.......Lets give people to share it naturally........... THEN SEE.........
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887831].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim3
    In order to do that in a meaningful way you will need to register two new sites with similiar names, set up exactly the same, targeting exactly the same keywords but with completely unique content, while maintaining exactly the same on site/page SEO.

    The only difference (apart from the content) is one site will have no social links at all, the other will be festooned with social buttons.

    Are you prepared to do that? if not, any such test is fatally flawed from the start.

    However, Mike F has already pointed out to you the outcome of your efforts, if you want to ignore what he told you, that's fine go ahead and test, all is not lost...

    No-one is doubting that social signals may have a positive effect on your site, in terms of visitors, and perhaps a few of those visitors linking to your site, (maybe this what you are getting at?) but by the time you have farted around boldly going social, your time would have been better spent getting your own backlinks.

    But say, for arguments sake, none of those hoards social visitors you seek link to your site? (ain't nobody got time for dat) What then?

    Your site is socially popular, who cares? not Big G, they rank relevant content, with good backlinks, (eventually) and always have/will.

    Of course, your time will not be completely wasted, because having completed the above test, and fully documented it you will have an awesome piece of content for an SEO/SEM blog, which, if it is good enough, may attract scores of links from the big dog sites, when you contact them with a view to publishing it thereon for their readership.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886512].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author adcentrex
    From my experience it doesnt have a "direct" correlation with ranking the site, but it most certainly has a factor in building Page Authority and Domain Authority of your website. There are several techniques to use Social as a way to build PA and DA in which these 2 metrics are used in correlation to ranking a site. So I agree with Mike above in that you wont rank a site by just blasting social signals at your site; however it will have a factor on PA and DA in which will have a factor of ranking your site.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886705].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ProfitFromMyDomain
    As a branding factor only. It increases authority and search engines look at that.
    Signature

    I would have invented Google and Microsoft if I was born earlier.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9886981].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BIBI15
    and what about the pinterest ???
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887023].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author solemar
    I think social signals are becaming important to climb the serp.
    If you share a content, it mean it's a valuable content. Google love valuable content for its users
    Signature
    Cristian Mammini
    Internet Marketing Coach
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887142].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Forget reality, tweet your page to #1 with a fiverr gig.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887258].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author NeedBucksNow
    Seems to me that they work to build page authority, so they will make an improvement in your ranks as well. It has to look natural though and wouldn't waste your time ordering them from Fiverr.
    Signature

    HOW TO QUIT YOUR BORING JOB AND START MAKING MORE CASH MARKETING FROM YOUR HOME!
    http://needbucksnow.com/
    JOIN MAXBOUNTY TODAY AND I'LL SHOW YOU HOW I'M FINALLY MAKING MONEY ONLINE USING PPC!
    http://www.needbucksnow.com/top-cpa-offers/

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887297].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author savidge4
      Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, kids... of all ages... I have a question. if Google does not scan twitter.. how do they know what has been tweeted, and where it is pointing?

      ( July 4th 2011 ) The end of Google /Twitter agreement As Deal With Twitter Expires, Google Realtime Search Goes Offline

      Google and twitter have a "New" agreement, but the start date is unclear.. and specifically what will start is not known either Google & Twitter Agreed To Show Tweets In Search Results

      So to even THINK that twitter is a page rank indicator is absolutely dumb. If Google can NOT see what is being tweeted, HOW can it be a factor?
      Signature
      Success is an ACT not an idea
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887336].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    You would have a better shot praying than using social signals.

    It is more likely that god will miracle your site to the top of the rankings than it will get there with social signals.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887446].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author savidge4
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      You would have a better shot praying than using social signals.

      It is more likely that god will miracle your site to the top of the rankings than it will get there with social signals.

      Amen to that!
      Signature
      Success is an ACT not an idea
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887450].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DABK
    I don't have to believe, or not believe.

    I drove traffic through social, it came, my rankings did not change. By the way, the traffic bought less than any other kind of traffic I've ever driven to a webpage of mine.

    As an aide, your title: what's belief got to do with what you're talking about?


    Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

    I am going to make a case study about social signals as a ranking factor. You can leave your points here. Also don't forget to write your name .... After finishing this study, i will let you know when i will publish it on my blog.......waiting for your thoughts....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887478].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author william17
    Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

    I am going to make a case study about social signals as a ranking factor. You can leave your points here. Also don't forget to write your name .... After finishing this study, i will let you know when i will publish it on my blog.......waiting for your thoughts....
    According to me, social signals are the traffic factor. These may increase traffic on your website soon rather than ranking of keywords.
    Signature
    Salesforce Consulting Services | Salesforce CRM Implementation | Custom Application Development
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887576].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Blaine Smitley
    Believes got nothing to do with it.

    This reminds me of the line at the end of Unforgiven when William Munny has Little Bill laying on the floor with that big bore rifle stuck under his neck.

    Little Bill claims that he doesn't deserve to die cuz he's building a house. William Munny tells him "deserves got nothing to do with it" then blows his head off.
    Signature
    Louisville SEO Company
    Check out our Customer Testimonials
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887730].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by Blaine Smitley View Post

      Believes got nothing to do with it.

      This reminds me of the line at the end of Unforgiven when William Munny has Little Bill laying on the floor with that big bore rifle stuck under his neck.

      Little Bill claims that he doesn't deserve to die cuz he's building a house. William Munny tells him "deserves got nothing to do with it" then blows his head off.
      Great movie. A bit long, but the payoff in the last 20 minutes is awesome.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887742].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Lee
    What's there to study? I think everybody and their mother has already had this debate the last two years and concluded that social signals don't directly affect rankings, but can indirectly affect them by providing more opportunities to get links.
    Signature
    Follow my journey to $10,000/month with Adsense.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887780].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author taposh123
      Originally Posted by Chris Lee View Post

      What's there to study? I think everybody and their mother has already had this debate the last two years and concluded that social signals don't directly affect rankings, but can indirectly affect them by providing more opportunities to get links.
      We are talking that if your posts have more social signals like facebook,twitter, google plus one share then your post rank well in serp.......Because google scan it..........
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9887785].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jessicalad
    Social signals are not ranking factor,but they are a way google considers try for trust and good authority links and helps rank website.
    Signature
    Google Adwords Certified Company | PPC Management Services
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9888398].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 03navneetkumar
    According to my point of view, social signals will not give you ranking but yes, it will help you to rank. Suppose you have 100 backlinks with good stuff but still not having too much traffic then will it go to first page?

    obvious not but if you go with social signals, you will find some comments, shares then it will help google to make it rich for you becuase they will look at that person who is coming onto your site want to take any action or not.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9888504].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author deezn
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udqtSM-6QbQ#t=95

    TL;DR no, it isn't a ranking factor.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9889189].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TopSocialMarketing
    Personally I don't think that social signs are critical for Google to rank a website, but it helps in some way.
    Signature
    YOUR FB ADS ACCOUNT WAS CLOSED? >>>>I GOT A SOLUTION<<<< CONTACT ME
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9889407].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author alexiastukes
    its depend on
    Number of people that like your brand on Facebook
    Number of Facebook shares
    Number of Twitter followers
    Number of tweets mentioning your brand name or including a link to your website
    Number of people that “have you in their circles” (Google+)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9890397].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rahmanpaidar
    That's too funny that people here don't even allow the OP to post their study and results
    instead they fuel prejudicing about the outcome.

    Note that OP didn't even claim that Social Signals are a ranking factor but just a case study
    that may even emphesis other opinions about Social Signals are not a ranking factor.

    Be patient people. Seo needs patient and your are a search engine optimizer :-)
    Signature
    طراحی سایت، طراحی وب سایت
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9890500].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by rahmanpaidar View Post

      That's too funny that people here don't even allow the OP to post their study and results
      instead they fuel prejudicing about the outcome.

      Note that OP didn't even claim that Social Signals are a ranking factor but just a case study
      that may even emphesis other opinions about Social Signals are not a ranking factor.

      Be patient people. Seo needs patient and your are a search engine optimizer :-)
      It's funny that you think we are just giving opinions without already testing this ourselves.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891365].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author rahmanpaidar
        Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

        It's funny that you think we are just giving opinions without already testing this ourselves.
        What if I come and say I've built 100 links to my site and didn't see any difference in
        ranking?

        What if I come and say I've built 100 high quality and high pagerank links to my site and
        didn't see any difference in ranking but a decrease in daily visits.

        Does that make me to think links doesn't work?

        Most social signals made for SEO are easily spotted algorithmically by Google.

        The differences are in real and artificial tasks done by search engine optimizers
        and overuse of one or two techniques.

        Google has all access to the web data. They are able to spot real and artificial
        data fed to their machine.

        And bottomline: I don't claim Social signals are a ranking factor nor I claim
        Social signals are not a ranking factor. Just my 2 cents for this thread.
        Signature
        طراحی سایت، طراحی وب سایت
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9892497].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
          Originally Posted by rahmanpaidar View Post

          What if I come and say I've built 100 links to my site and didn't see any difference in
          ranking?

          What if I come and say I've built 100 high quality and high pagerank links to my site and
          didn't see any difference in ranking but a decrease in daily visits.

          Does that make me to think links doesn't work?

          Most social signals made for SEO are easily spotted algorithmically by Google.

          The differences are in real and artificial tasks done by search engine optimizers
          and overuse of one or two techniques.

          Google has all access to the web data. They are able to spot real and artificial
          data fed to their machine.

          And bottomline: I don't claim Social signals are a ranking factor nor I claim
          Social signals are not a ranking factor. Just my 2 cents for this thread.

          There have been numerous tests done showing that links impact rankings. There have been ZERO tests that show that social signals impact rankings.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9892974].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kushalshah
    Social signals will do no good from the SEO prospective and this has been clearly stated by Matt Cutts.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9890518].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dan Brown
    I think we all have the same idea about this, that social signals coming from social sites doesn't really affect your rank just the traffic of your website. It can contribute like if you have a lot of visits then that's another story.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9890596].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nicole Sakoman
    Originally Posted by taposh123 View Post

    I am going to make a case study about social signals as a ranking factor. You can leave your points here. Also don't forget to write your name .... After finishing this study, i will let you know when i will publish it on my blog.......waiting for your thoughts....
    Social signals are ranking factor... maybe not big, but it brings value and it brings diversity to your links and G+ gives you more strength than all other social media combine.

    That will be the case study result if your onsite and offsite seo is done properly.
    Signature

    site will be soon live...

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891376].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by Nicole Sakoman View Post

      Social signals are ranking factor... maybe not big, but it brings value and it brings diversity to your links and G+ gives you more strength than all other social media combine.

      That will be the case study result if your onsite and offsite seo is done properly.

      Any evidence of that whatsoever?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891636].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    This forum page is ranking #1 in Google SERPs from only tweets.

    It really does work [meh].
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891683].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mrgood
    Social signals are not a ranking factor. Social signals can help you engage with people and give them something they want via shares , likes, g-pluses etc., but in SERP their meaning is pure zero.
    Signature
    Horror games - Play the best online horror games
    Hunting Games Online - the best 3d hunting games
    Scary Maze Game - best scary maze prank site ever
    Igre Friv - Croatian Friv Games website
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891898].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Life Naturally
    Interesting discussion. I had always read and therefore assumed social signals did improve rank. Doesn't google index tweets ect? It would seem if social media is pushing traffic to your website than that would help your rank, but I'm just a novice compared to most warrior forum members. Great discussion, it got me thinking...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9891914].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      Originally Posted by Life Naturally View Post

      Interesting discussion. I had always read and therefore assumed social signals did improve rank. Doesn't google index tweets ect? It would seem if social media is pushing traffic to your website than that would help your rank, but I'm just a novice compared to most warrior forum members. Great discussion, it got me thinking...
      Google stopped indexing tweets a while back. Recently, they have partnered once
      again with twitter. But....

      The do not just index tweets. That would be insane. There are way too many for even google
      to want to bother with. So they can index, very selectively, certain tweets. The reasons
      are the same reasons that google had before.

      It is all about who is doing the tweeting. The more followers, the better the chance.

      The normal person will have zero tweets indexed.

      But google would never use that as a ranking factor.

      I imagine the powers that be at google want to get a handle on trends, leading
      to "current" search results.

      It's a win-win for google and twitter. Twitter gets googled, and google gets
      the data.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9892330].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jetsetter883
    I'll only believe that Google uses social signals as an ranking factor once it is proven that they are deeply integrated with Facebook's APIs to determine legitimate activity.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9892066].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rsoniya65
    Social signals have come a long way in terms of their impact on ranking or search engine optimization (SEO) over the course of the last two years. We've gone from asking whether or not social signals play a role in organic rankings, to conducting numerous scientific studies in an attempt to determine the exact correlation between each type of social signal.

    Source : MOZ

    Soniya Rawat
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9892535].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DABK
      And? The result of these numerous scientific studies?

      Originally Posted by rsoniya65 View Post

      Social signals have come a long way in terms of their impact on ranking or search engine optimization (SEO) over the course of the last two years. We've gone from asking whether or not social signals play a role in organic rankings, to conducting numerous scientific studies in an attempt to determine the exact correlation between each type of social signal.

      Source : MOZ

      Soniya Rawat
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9893202].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ben West
    I don't believe social signals have much, if any impact on rankings. However I don't believe it to stay that way. I believe that eventually, Google and other search engines will include social signals into their algorithm once they come up with a way to do so without it being so easily manipulated.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9894940].message }}

Trending Topics