13 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
13 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Smart question about SEO (tweets)

by SpaceSerbian
11 replies
  • SEO
    • |
I wanted to get some tweets/retweets for my website. I am confused, is there a difference between a tweet and a re-tweet in the eyes of Google.

What will hypotheticaly leave a greater effect on SEO: 1000 tweets or 1000 re-tweets?
#question #seo #smart #tweets
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    Originally Posted by SpaceSerbian View Post

    What will hypotheticaly leave a greater effect on SEO: 1000 tweets or 1000 re-tweets?

    For SEO, they are both equally useless.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031275].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
    Tweets and retweets would probably be about equal, since retweet is reposting another user's tweet to your own feed. That's for the hypothetical part. In the real world of SEO they're equally useless as Mr. Friedman points out above.

    This from a guy who's had Twitter account since 2007, has PR5 for the profile/feed page, and is pretty much tweeting every day. I could be the poster boy for this flavor of Kool-Aid, but I can tell you that it tastes exactly like snake oil.
    Signature
    Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
    Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

    What's your excuse?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031290].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author patco
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031614].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by patco View Post

      Tweets would be better as they are being seen by Google as backlinks (no matter they are nofollow!) while retweets (no matter how many are they!) would be seen as just ONE backlink (because they were retweet-ed via 1 link only!)
      If you go and check a Twitter profile page tweet and retweet are almost identical. Retweet is shown in the page source, it's not anything special. It's clearly identifiable so if Google was interested in making a difference between them they could. However, I don't subscribe to the theory of "social signals".

      This is continuing on the hypothetical route... I'm still not saying that tweets or retweets do anything.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031835].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeffery Moss
    Google values sites like Twitter, Pinterest, Google+ and Facebook for the shares/retweets you receive, more so than the backlinks you generate from those. In other words, everytime someone retweets your content or shares it on Facebook, your credibility rises with Google as they assume you must be popular in the social sphere. And, consequently you rank higher in Google search as you have increased author credibility.
    Signature
    Transform your old PLR books to an automated cash machine that keeps paying you day in and day out!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031892].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Jeffery Moss View Post

      Google values sites like Twitter, Pinterest, Google+ and Facebook for the shares/retweets you receive, more so than the backlinks you generate from those. In other words, everytime someone retweets your content or shares it on Facebook, your credibility rises with Google as they assume you must be popular in the social sphere. And, consequently you rank higher in Google search as you have increased author credibility.
      I've never seen that happen.

      What I have seen happen is social pages trail a money site/page in the SERPs, but that's not the same as ranking a money page. Those social pages are trailing in the SERPs because the main money site has such a strong authority on the domain name. Nobody else is even trying to have that type of [exact] domain name authority, which makes it easy for social site/pages to trail a money page (domain name).
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031907].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by Jeffery Moss View Post

      Google values sites like Twitter, Pinterest, Google+ and Facebook for the shares/retweets you receive, more so than the backlinks you generate from those. In other words, everytime someone retweets your content or shares it on Facebook, your credibility rises with Google as they assume you must be popular in the social sphere. And, consequently you rank higher in Google search as you have increased author credibility.
      I've not seen it to work, guys more experienced than me don't believe in it, there's no reason for Google to do it, and Matt Cutts has said that as far as he knows they currently don't do it. They've used some Twitter data in the past, but that relationship went sour.

      "Your credibility rises" would be a fair point without the words "with Google". You can use this stuff as a sort of social proof to your visitors. "Hey look at me, I'm popular in Pinterest!"

      Google+ is a different animal. A Google product with clearly defined ways to influence the search results.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9032573].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author furqanarshad
    They are not healthy for SEO. If you just want to make your profile stronger and credible then tweets retweets are good otherwise for SEO its not of much help.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9031968].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Samuel Adams
    Essentially, the key to higher search engine rankings is to become popular with your fans and encourage lots of shares. But, this is true across a variety of social networks including Facebook and Google+. If Google is rewarding authors for all this social share activity, it just makes sense.
    Signature

    Would you like to learn how I make $2000/month from a super easy listbuilding system?

    Click here to get my listbuilding report for FREE!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9034371].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Samuel Adams View Post

      Essentially, the key to higher search engine rankings is to become popular with your fans and encourage lots of shares. But, this is true across a variety of social networks including Facebook and Google+. If Google is rewarding authors for all this social share activity, it just makes sense.
      The problem with that is Google doesn't care about nofollowed social links.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9034387].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by Samuel Adams View Post

      Essentially, the key to higher search engine rankings
      Isn't it funny how people who chant this mantra never actually bring any evidence to the discussion?

      "Social media is the path to higher state of rankings. Ommm."
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9035108].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Adamthomsoncontent writer
    Banned
    Both are equal for gaining more followers.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9035226].message }}

Trending Topics