Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

The Words No One Noticed At Matt Cutts Pubcon Keynote

answers contract theft matt cutts google

  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#1 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 12:39 PM

At Pubcon today, Matt Cutts was the keynote speaker, and the session was live-streamed at ustream.tv/channel/pubcon

 

I wish the session had been recorded for later viewing, because there were two very brief parts that I'd love to pull out and share. But alas, we'll have to rely on my paraphrasing because I can't recall the exact words he used. As far as I could tell, no one even noticed those few words that came out of Matt's mouth, but in my opinion, they were the most significant words in the entire hour. You can see a text recap at http://searchenginel...t-pubcon-174906 but it too failed to mention this part.

 

While Matt was discussing the "moonshot" changes that are taking place, such as the Knowledge Graph, Voice Search, Conversational Search, etc. he said something to this effect (totally paraphrased by me, so don't quote me verbatim):

 

All along, Google has attempted to organize the world's information, and nothing in that statement mentions the phrase "search engine". Users want answers, and that's what we're attempting to give them.

 

Later, in the Q&A portion at the very end of the session, Matt again referred to this when discussing how Google seems to be using up all the space in the SERPs with ads, toolbars, etc, so there's little room left for organic results. Another paraphrase:

 

Users want quick answers, and don't necessarily want to be sent off to a site to answer it. Your job is to provide content of real value that does more than just give a 3-word answer to a question so that users will want to visit your site.

 

I quickly tweeted about that, saying, 

 

Butt matt, if you give the answers, the users will never see our value.

 

HA! Just noticed my tweet's typo there. Bahahaha! Anyway...I digress...

 

My point, of course, is that as Google gives more and more "answers" in the SERPs, there's little to no incentive for users to ever leave Google, or ever have the chance to see the valuable content we have.

 

People say, well, it's Google's site, so they can do what they want.

 

That's not always the case, however.

 

The "answers" that Google gives is not their content. It is OUR content.

 

We've always had an implied "contract" with Google.

 

We'll let you crawl our sites, Google, if you'll send traffic back to us.

 

The "contract" isn't this: We'll let you steal and use our sites' content, Google, without anything in return (traffic).

 

Google - via Matt's brief, nearly unnoticed words today, is letting us know...we are going to keep stealing your content, because we love our users, and we don't care what you think about that.



#2 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 02:11 PM

Nice catch, Donna.  Subtle language by Matt, and based on recent experience It is very telling.  When google changed its presentations of images it redirected  stole traffic from the sites with image traffic.   We had one image which was ranked #1 in image search for a long time for a one-word phrase (now #2).   We lost huge traffic from that change.  Never gained it back.  It flowed into one of our local smb sites (so it didn't matter to us) from a straight business sense.

 

But it was connected to a darn good informational article by a knowledgeable writer.  Somewhere somehow that article merits link(s) for its information and the writer deserves more credit and acclaim.  Its a shame that the likelihood of that might occur, if only because the page gets about 1/4 of the traffic before google redirected stole the traffic.  

 

That is occurring across the board in major ways.  



#3 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2135 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 03:23 PM

I've cut off this stolen traffic. Give 'em my very small hotlink image. The most requested file on the site but 1% of MB. I notice a number of people that now come to the site to view the image. Facebook is just as bad but no one ever mentions it.

 

That's my 302 finger.



#4 Ken Fisher

Ken Fisher

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 418 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 03:44 PM

I'm kind of surprised he goes to these events these days. After-all Webmasterworld was whacked by Panda. I wonder what the tone is like out there these days? Judging by what Donna and others say, it can't be a friendly crowd.



#5 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 03:54 PM

If it was "just" images, that would be concerning enough, but it's getting to be much much more than that. Answers. Answers that we provide...google swipes 'em and displays 'em in the search results - prominently. (they've done this for a long time, but it's rapidly increasing).

 

Ken, you'd be surprised how quickly people turn into suckups. :)


Edited by DonnaFontenot, 23 October 2013 - 03:55 PM.


#6 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2135 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 04:06 PM

merriam-webster hears you

 

Eventually when it will not be worth it anymore (not tomorrow) I bet a lot of sites will do

 

User-agent: Googlebot

Disallow: /



#7 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 05:00 PM

Images was what came to mind.  

 

In the local world google had businesses create local pages and now has google+ pages.  

 

Google tried to drive traffic to the business pages.  I don't believe it worked for google and really didn't make sense for the smb's.  The google business pages or local pages were mere outlines of what a business might and should have on its website.

 

Now it has created google + pages.  I can't believe they are getting a lot of traffic.  I know the volume of people that click to the site or call us off the google plus pages are incredibly small.    

 

These pages are google's though, make no mistake about it.  Google is working to take that business info and move the traffic internally within google's system.   Ultimately down the line it will connect with monetizing google.  Of that I have little doubt.

 

of note, with regard to the google business pages or formerly the google local pages:   They provided absolutely the worst data to those that claimed pages..  I don't blog into the local world..but it pained me to see these pages lauded and written about without anyone ever publicly calling them out on how bad the information was that they sent back to the smb's.  

 

It was bad, worthless, sometimes completely misrepresentative of what was occurring.  The incident that stuck in my mind relative to data they sent off the local dashboard was for years they reported how many people clicked on the site, on the google local page, and how many clicked on driving directions.   For years that data suggested something like 2,3, or 4 times the traffic clicked on websites versus the google local page.  

 

Then suddenly as of a certain month that data changed for every business with the preponderance of visits going to the google local page.  During that period I saw no significant change on traffic to the site.  Meanwhile I checked with other local business seo's and they saw the same change.  

 

It was systemic.  It seemed to have nothing to do with real data or changes.   Google was questioned and I believe their response was the old buffalo shuffle.  They never gave a real response.   

 

In any case google has taken all the data that smb's have provided and created alternative google pages from their websites.   its a disservice and its manipulative.   Its not scraping in this case, but it creates alternative pages from business websites and puts them directly into google's hands.

 

goo--ogle.   Its a big monopoly



#8 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5477 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 05:31 PM

Really.... Google is just fartin' around.  If they were serious about this they would simply scrape wikipeida, republish it on Google.com (update daily), slap ads on it, ranking those pages at topSERPs, sit back, hire oafs to rake in the dough, while they are thinkin' up new projects like freezin' corpses, minin' asteroids, and sippin' fizzies. 


Edited by EGOL, 23 October 2013 - 05:45 PM.


#9 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 05:47 PM

Just checked the google dashboard info for the google local perspective for one smb:   The info is so atrociously bad.

 

I tracked the dashboard data against adwords for impressions.  For the last 30 days the local dashboard suggests 2700 impressions wherein the smb was viewable on google maps.

 

As I scanned through the top part of keywords wherein I know a google map showed....I stopped counting at about 3500 impressions for a extensive adwords campaign wherein I know the smb turns up on maps throughout that region.   Inside the google local dashboard among the phrases wherein the smb supposedly shows up on a map....is the word "google".  How stupid and non helpful is that?

 

Then the clincher for bad data.  The local dashboard said that there were five visits from google to the website.  In the last 30 days there were nicely over 3k organic visits to the website.  There were a  lot of impressions wherein a big #1 or a one map dominates the page.  Its simply atrocious data.

 

Its astonishing this data has been so bad for so long and it doesn't get called out.

 

Now back to the issue that Donna mentioned:  The google local pages and the current google+ pages are simply ways for google to take our smbs' information and move that into a google only world.  It doesn't help us and I doubt it has the quality or substance of info in most cases that satisfy customers.   I know from our examples we continuously have heard from customers over many years:   they read through our site(s).  They also rely on reviews.   But the google pages do not give the type of info that our site(s) communicate that helps us get customers and satisfies the interests of those customers.



#10 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 06:31 PM

Frankly, I think Google should have to pay webmasters for the use of their content if that use discourages users from visiting the site with the original content.



#11 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5477 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 06:49 PM

Frankly, I think Google should have to pay webmasters for the use of their content if that use discourages users from visiting the site with the original content.

 

I really like that idea.   I hope they read this.



#12 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 06:49 PM

Frankly, I think Google should have to pay webmasters for the use of their content if that use discourages users from visiting the site with the original content.

 

 

Hear hear!!!   Donna for overlord to google!!!!!!



#13 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 4633 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 09:10 PM

:)

Good catch, Donna. I'm not surprised that most/all others would miss the comments you paraphrase as they run contrary to their highly Google search web-world beliefs. People tend to not hear or discount what conflicts with their world view.

None of this is new at all. Except that I'm not quite so alone in my lostness these days...

#14 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 13602 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 11:20 PM

I was in the front row for this talk and was the one who asked Matt questions about how local sites and start ups can get "authority" in an environment clearly overtaken by big brands and even folks like myself who have years and years of content.

 

Nobody I know was impressed with the talk and expectations were low that any new information would be shared.  Webmasterworld is owned by Jim Boykin and fine.  

 

The "new" way of search engine marketing is about people and making person to person connections.  Links are no longer a viable option because of their abuse. 

I have a bunch of notes but one of the strongest messages coming out of Pubon is that if you fake it, you lose.  Google is looking for what real people with real content, real names, real pictures, real opinions and real connections.  

 

Forums are making a comeback because of the people to people connections.  A forums like ours is above many others as far as quality content because we manage the spam and profile priv's.  

 

I'm exhausted but when I get my brain back will share more.



#15 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 11:35 PM

I recognized your voice when you asked that question. I thought to myself, "hey, that's kim!" :)

 

Google is looking for what real people with real content, real names, real pictures, real opinions and real connections.  

 

Yeah...that...and content to steal for answers. ;)



#16 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 13602 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 11:55 PM

I haven't slept in 2 days and am foggy brained but now that you mention it, I remember thinking this morning that something was funky about the part where he was talking about how the content that would appear in SERPS would answer the query, making a click unnecessary.  I had an inner nudge about it.  With any luck I got it in my notes which I'll have to find,

 

My voice was SO low on the mic.  I hadn't slept and my voice had dropped even lower.  



#17 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 12:37 AM

Heard you fine. Felt a bit of pride at the time that it was you asking questions. :)



#18 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2580 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 02:47 AM

Google wants everyone to stay on their website.

 

Users don't want to click through to websites on a Q&A basis, they want the answer so the direction is good for users. They bought that company back in April that had created an algo that would essentially categorize the web in such a way as to make it possible to server a greater range of Q&A data than that which their existing algo can do. Matt Cutts also mentioned in a post guidelines for doing deep and meaningful content. That deepness was basically summed up as: Try and write  a page of content that addresses a wide range of possible answers. So I think that as a content strategy you should be developing content in this way.

 

On Local look at travel and tourism and the 6-pack. Now typically you have hotels being featured in the 6-pack and a few featuring in the organic listings. All of this is moot because above the fold data is all paid with 1 perhaps 2 organic results showing. So it doesn't matter. The fact that they managed to get every business to delimit their business data in an orderly fashion via the whole Google Business, Places and Google+ is made possible with the carrot that doing such activities would give you free traffic. It did for a while, and then they pushed it off the page.

 

This takes us to a future where basically the webmaster's content is basically served for the benefit of the user which can be justified as such by Google, and Google doesn't even say  thanks for the liberty. In the same way that they apply their webmaster guidelines retroactively so they can keep removing sites that get good free traffic through optimization.

 

Lie big condensor anyone?

 

Glyn.



#19 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5477 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 06:24 AM

Google is looking for what real people with real content, real names, real pictures, real opinions and real connections.

 

Real people and real names?    Looks like Mark Twain, Alfred E. Newman, anon, the Three Stooges, Santa, Sponge Bob, Mr. Ed, GoogleGuy, glyn and iamlost just got a kick in the donkey.  I mean... even The Pope doesn't go by his real name.

 

Cre8asite is the best forum in the webmaster space and a lot of the posting is done by people who don't use their real name.  You can go to a lot of other forums and the only reason that a lot of people are using their own names is because they have big egos or want to find people who will pay them for their opinions or they are spammin' the place for sig links.


Edited by EGOL, 24 October 2013 - 06:48 AM.


#20 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2580 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 06:45 AM

Good is looking to sell Adspace and if your endorsement enhances that proposition it will be incorporated.



#21 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 4633 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 08:36 AM

Much of the consternation of webdevs is that many/most have had a false image of what Google is. Yes, Google started as a search engine. Great. Yes, Google is still thought of as a search engine. Sorry that is a decade out of date. Ever since they first put Ads on the search results page what G was wasn't. From that point on they only made money if the organic listings were NOT clicked. AdSense was simply a method to chase after the ad clicks that got away from the results pages. The goal of collecting all the world's information is far from new either :) I've long been amazed that so few, until recently, asked WHY or thought about the consequences.

Welcome to long long ago. Perhaps you might want to get back to here and now because there are even more questions and consequences that have been largely overlooked in the intervening years...

#22 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2580 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 09:35 AM

I'd like to add this:




#23 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 10:07 AM

Good thread.  Especially good catch and perspective by Donna....and good question at pubcon,Kim.  Google is a competitor.  Its also the monopoly search engine.  And in that vein it sucks up the majority of ad revenues on the web.  As a competitor or agent it's muscled its way into pieces of action for various verticals.    It plays all these roles.  It certainly wants to keep its monopoly position.  

 

Its interesting to see how it affects different types of sites and scenarios differently.  Just to reference one of them:  Glyn:  In the states Google has changed the visibility of hotels and restaurants to the "carousel view" yet to be introduced into Europe.  Its available for desktops and most tablets.  That view is controlled by a wide span of pictures of businesses across the top of the screen, some info, and then a narrow span in the above the fold element of the page.  In the hotel arena that is dominated by paid listings.  Google might throw out its own price pts on hotels.  And then way underneath that are organic results.  

 

The organic element of search in the hotel and restaurant industries in the states are essentially deemed irrelevant by virtue of being pushed so far beneath the fold.  Irrelevant in the context that those organic results are getting a diminished share of clicks.  By a lot!!!!

 

Google is the monopoly search engine, directing how we see data...pushing its perspective above all others....and slowly but surely gobbling up ad revenues and associated revenues as it controls the monopoly of search, controls the way info is seen, and is injecting its own products into that environment.

 

In the wider world of web, brands are killing independents.  On the local basis, as Glyn referenced google keeps injecting its own results above serps.  Ads are everywhere and always on the top.  

 

By the way...does this represent monopoly or not???   ;)

 

Users seem to be immune to the changes.  Google ignores webmasters.  I hope big business steps up to fight this growth.   Go EU.  Fight the fight.  educate the US



#24 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 10:08 AM

One of the things that I'm trying to get across is that Matt slipped this quickly into a much larger presentation. I'm convinced this was planned to be unnoticeable, but purposely placed so that later, once Google has taken most of our traffic, they can point back to this time, and say, "See, we mentioned this way back in October of 2013. This is nothing new."

 

We've all seen Google do things subtly, slowly, and then the ball rolls faster and faster downhill until eventually, we wake up one morning to some bad "surprise" (Not Provided as the latest example).

 

I'm telling you, people, this is the start of that fast-rolling ball. Two years from now, your content will be all over Google, and you won't be getting any traffic from it, and Google will point back to this moment as the time they started letting us know. The PROCESS started before now...but Google actually saying it out loud - in public - that's starting now. They are preparing for the time when they'll need to start heavily justifying keeping our traffic. Watch...wait...it's coming.



#25 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2580 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 10:10 AM

That ball has been rolling a while :)



#26 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 10:40 AM

I know, I mentioned that the PROCESS of stealing the content has been rolling a while. But this is that moment when they start preparing their defense of it. Maybe they've defended it before, and I just didn't notice, but this was that "say it subtly in public so we can say we said it" moment that really struck me and the light turned on. 

 

This is that moment when I know, without a doubt, what's coming down the pipeline. Google laid it out and told us what's coming, oh so subtly. If you wake up surprised one morning, you only have yourself to blame. No tin foil hat needed here:  :tinfoil-hat: 

 

What is Google going to do with your traffic?

 

:blowup: 

 

 

What are we doing to prepare you?

 

:whitestalltion:



#27 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2135 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 11:18 AM

What will they do when their engine gets blocked. For a time our data their data  will be fresh. They will have to scrape anonymously like the others.... (if they are not doing it already) or when they start to get DMCA notices. (like from merriam webster et al.)

 

The IBM monopoly got blocked as did Microsoft. So will the big G. The EU might get it going.

 

Maybe Bing will get better <_<


Edited by bobbb, 24 October 2013 - 11:27 AM.


#28 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 11:20 AM

Found a youtube video that someone posted. Found the first mention of this, so I can quote it now, but haven't yet found the second mention. Will keep looking.

 

 
Starts at 14:49 and ends at about 15:32

Why don't I just spell it out for you, the sort of trends that I think are really gonna matter. What are the megatrends?
 
One is machine learning. Google is gonna continue to try to be smarter and smarter. So our mission statement is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. That doesn't include the word "search engine" in there. If we can find ways to solve equations and tell you whether it's gonna rain tomorrow and extrapolate all kinds of useful information, we're gonna try to do that. We're gonna keep trying to figure out how to add more value to users and to searchers. 

 

Just realized, based on my Tweet stream, that the second reference occurred during the Q&A portion of the session, and the video posted above ended before that. Darn. Hopefully, someone will eventually post a youtube video of that portion as well. If so, I'll quote it then.


Edited by DonnaFontenot, 24 October 2013 - 11:49 AM.


#29 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2135 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 11:42 AM

Here's an idea for like the hotel and tourism industry. When the robot comes around, feed it wrong information. Yes it's cloaking but they aren't doing you any good anyway.



#30 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 02:39 PM

Google wants everyone to stay on their website.

 

Users don't want to click through to websites on a Q&A basis, they want the answer so the direction is good for users. They bought that company back in April that had created an algo that would essentially categorize the web in such a way as to make it possible to server a greater range of Q&A data than that which their existing algo can do. Matt Cutts also mentioned in a post guidelines for doing deep and meaningful content. That deepness was basically summed up as: Try and write  a page of content that addresses a wide range of possible answers. So I think that as a content strategy you should be developing content in this way.


Lie big condensor anyone?

 

Glyn.

 

You've hit on the key to future SEO - your pages should include who, what, why, how, where, when type questions to get picked up by Hummingbird. <-- This Is Important!

 

There is no way to get past the "Lie Big" Condensor, if you're from g#####.



#31 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 02:52 PM

Here's an idea for like the hotel and tourism industry. When the robot comes around, feed it wrong information. Yes it's cloaking but they aren't doing you any good anyway.

 

That's an awesome idea.  Why not re-direct g-bot to a different page, strategically prepared.  If you want to block them anyway, who cares about penalties.  If spammers start doing this, it could put a major crimp in g#####'s program.

 

Anybody at Blackhatworld.com listening?


Edited by chuckfinley, 24 October 2013 - 03:01 PM.


#32 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 02:56 PM

Here's a classic example of the Knowledge Graph stealing search results form a major brand -->

 

 

minnesota_vikings.png


Edited by chuckfinley, 24 October 2013 - 02:59 PM.


#33 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 03:48 PM

You've hit on the key to future SEO - your pages should include who, what, why, how, where, when type questions to get picked up by Hummingbird. <-- This Is Important!

 

Yes and no. Yes, you're right, but you're also making it simple for Google to steal your content for answers and never send the traffic to you!



#34 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 24 October 2013 - 05:11 PM

Mike Blumenthal referenced a recent change in the appearance of google plus pages for businesses.  It just occurred.  In comments I referenced these thoughts and concerns.

 

Not everything google does works.  The google plus pages have replaced google local or google places pages.  I doubt if our google plus pages are getting much traffic.  Certainly they refer only a tiny smidgion of traffic to the business sites.   Similarly the google places pages never got much traffic in my view or the perception of many local seo's.

 

During the period google created the google places pages there were periods where the page would include links to "similar businesses".  ie your competition.  UGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHH

 

Google would encourage the smb to fill out the google places pages with various info...then these pages were one of the potential links off of a local pac.   The pages were formatted in a standardized way that IMHO did little for many smbs....But they had links to freaking competitors.!!!   That is really screwed up.   It simply speaks how this google data is theirs not yours!!!

 

The google plus pages now have 3 columns of info rather than 2..  If smb's choose to fill them they are now rich with content!!!!   Rich!!!   Again they are google's pages.  Another recent change is that google just removed links to competitors.   Hallelujah!!!!!

 

Google's response on those links to competitors was that it was a "good user experience".  It seems to be their stock response.  I've come to believe that is horse manure.

 

What does occur is that they test things all the time.  They test layouts and they test aggregate user reactions.   Individual google places pages might have gotten relatively few visits, as might be the case with current google business + pages but google has enormous aggregate information about user experiences on these pages.   They are google's.  We don't know what is occurring on them.   Additionally they throw a cr@ppy bone to businesses with some really terrible data.   You can't cross check the data from google's pages as you could with actual visitor logs against any analytics package you were or are using.   Who knows how accurate or misinformative it is.

 

At some point if google decides to promote the visibility of its google plus pages over the actual web pages of smb's....you have a massive stinking problem.  Users would be going to the google plus pages and google could hold up the smb's and jerk them every which way.   Its very possible.  You take the same PACS that predominate for local search and all they have to do is highlight links to the google plus pages rather than the links to the smb sites themselves.   

 

It doesn't make me comfortable.   Go EEC.  Be tough on this big search monopoly.



#35 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 25 October 2013 - 12:36 PM

Yes and no. Yes, you're right, but you're also making it simple for Google to steal your content for answers and never send the traffic to you!

 

The only problem is --> some traffic or no traffic at all.  If you don't play the game, you won't get any traffic at all.

 

g##### has us in a corner.  We are either going to need to fight back together, or we will die.

 

The good news -- for every problem g##### creates for us, they will open up a hole I mean, an opportunity.  Whether we survive or not depends on us finding those opportunities and exploiting them, even if it plays into g#####'s hand to some degree.

 

imho --

 

g#####'s weakness -- they can't control everything, no matter how many servers they have.  We need to pick them apart -- inch by inch, piece by piece, algo opportunity by algo opportunity until they get tired of trying to control us and decide cooperation is a better strategy.

 

Oh, and btw, whatever you can do to help the competition is a win for us.

 

The #1 thing you can do --> Let everybody that will listen know that during the worst recession in the history of this country with millions of people out of work and suffering, g##### showed their true character and decided to change their alogorithm and put hundreds of thousands of small business owners out of work or severely reduce their income.  They did this purely out of greed, their recent earnings prove it --> Google's 3Rd Quarter Overall Adwords Experience Is Way Different Than Ours. How About You?

 

The average person doesn't know about g#####'s business practices and when they find out, they (strongly) do not approve.  Big, evil corporations that put earnings ahead of people aren't very popular amongst the masses.


Edited by chuckfinley, 26 October 2013 - 12:22 AM.


#36 WPMuse

WPMuse

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 25 October 2013 - 03:10 PM

Mano -- this is the thread I've been dreaming about for what seems like years!  How refreshing to hear everyone say it like it really is!  I guess I am still gun-shy to join in on conversations like this because when I've done so elsewhere the "real SEOs" scold me for my uninformed and unrealistic POVs.  Cre8 is Gr8!

I know from my experience the small bizes that were hurt did nothing so bad as to warrant being banished out to the nether-lands of the SERPs.  They were NOT spammers or scrapers, they were NOT dishonest, they were NOT ad filled, nor were they intentionally aggressively out to game the system as g##### claims they were trying to address. They were just doing what had worked for well over a decade to help get their honest, small business found.

Now, what do we have in the SERPS?  All the "big box I already know their site exists" combined with sites that are carp, sites that in instance after instance are junk compared to the sites they replaced.  g##### refuses to acknowledge collateral damage -- because they don't care -- pony up the $$ or you're out.  We'll, I'm out and it ain't as bad as some may think -- the monkey is off my back.

 

And this next step to provide answers off my content so visitors stay on g##### should have every site owner's underwear in a bundle.  If it doesn't is because they aren't paying attention.


I get it -- it is what it is.  But it doesn't mean I have to be happy about it, agree with it, feed it or cow-tow to SEO snots who in their condescending tones will admonish those who dare to do so.   I tell everyone who will listen to not use Google -- for anything -- there are always alternatives and new sites won't see top page results probably for years -- if ever. 

 

I've started my 2014 New Years resolutions list and at the top is to cancel my G+ pages and ditch Faceybook (who is just as evil).   None of my sites garner quality traffic or conversions from either of those venues and I'd rather spend my time with services and sites that have the same morals and ethics that I use to run my enterprises..
 

"After we have calmly stood by and allowed monopolies to grow fat, we should not be asked to make them bloated." ~ John Griffin Carlisle

 

google-intervention.jpg



 

Edited by WPMuse, 25 October 2013 - 03:23 PM.


#37 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 25 October 2013 - 11:41 PM

Not everything google does works.

 

In my experience, little that g##### does works very well.  Which should give us pause as to their keyword data -- do you really think that it was accurate?

 

In the future, we may have to get keyword data by comparing more than one source, but the agreement between sources will add credibility and we won't waste time promoting the wrong keyword.  The data is there right now to be had.  Not as easy to get as they AdWords Keyword Tool or Wordtracker, et. al., but its there and there will be a myriad of tool makers that scramble to satisfy the need.  There is one or two that exist already.

 

In the end, we may find that it was a blessing in disguise to get away from g#####.


Edited by chuckfinley, 26 October 2013 - 12:01 AM.


#38 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 25 October 2013 - 11:59 PM

I get it -- it is what it is.  But it doesn't mean I have to be happy about it, agree with it, feed it or cow-tow to SEO snots who in their condescending tones will admonish those who dare to do so.   I tell everyone who will listen to not use Google -- for anything -- there are always alternatives and new sites won't see top page results probably for years -- if ever.

 

Here, here!  I couldn't have said it better myself.  There are many so called experts that have a lot to be gained by brown nosing g##### hoping to get recognized by matt cutts.  The truth is, they don't know the first thing about competition and making it in business.

 

I was on one forum where the owner was just giddy because matt cutts answered her e-mail.  What's matt cutts going to say that will help her clients? 

 

Bizarre.

 

The Black Knight nailed it here -->

 

The truly amazing thing is that with everything Google told us Panda and
several other updates were about - cutting out sites that existed only
to serve paid ads - suddenly paid directories that are nothing but paid ads are topping the SERPs.

 

I really do think that Google have entirely lost the plot this past
couple of years - and I also believe that the success of Duck Duck Go is
showing the popular protest vote. If Google do not take notice of that
protest vote, just as AltaVista failed to when people switched to
Google, then this is the beginning of the end for them as a search
engine. (I believe they'll still survive as a tech platform long after
they lose the search market).

 

 

Divest and let folks know you are doing it.  I won't use g##### for search anymore.  There are too many very good search engines out there.  You don't need WMT or GA or Chrome. 

 

Move on to the next thing.  But don't be foolish -- still milk g##### for all the organic traffic they can't prevent you from taking.  Take their clicks and put them in your bank account and I'm going to help you do it. ;)

 

The only defense we have is letting people know the truth.  Believe me, there are enough of us that g##### will fear the truth.  Remember, if you're an internet marketer or SEO, g##### is busy smearing your reputation and taking your livelihood from you. 


Edited by chuckfinley, 26 October 2013 - 12:19 AM.


#39 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2135 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 10:37 AM

   There are too many very good search engines out there.  You don't need WMT or GA or Chrome. 

Not sure about that. Yes I am seeing more different SEs in my referer list; more Bing and Y! and a sprinkle of the Duck, AVG, Ask, Norton, etc. Where is their data from? The Duck says Yandex and probably a hybrid of B, Y! and G.

 

So the Duck hits G for the word insurance and takes in 100 results. How different from what I would get?

 

The only real SE that could make a difference is Bing. They are #2 but not even a contender. I see them, on a site I have, just wasting their time and resources going after all lower case name URLs when it is mixed case. They have my site map that they read in at times as per Bing WMT

 

Where do they get that info from? Third parties? Yes because I see third parties doing the same. THEY have the proper info right from the horses mouth.

 

Who's left? Yandex and Baidu? Betya most here ban both. How many sales do you expect from Russia and China. (If you are selling something). I now let Yandex through.  I believe they have now shown to be a bit more behaved and a better net citizen. Won't say anything about Baidu; may not be allowed here but the phrase starts with F and it is phonetically like the French word for baby seal.



#40 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 4633 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 12:52 PM

What G dominates (for some definitions thereof) is general search. What I always suggest to people doing general aka initial subject search is two-fold:
1. Given that each SE has differing indices, filters, etc. AND that most people search with the default 10 results it is best practice to search each query across a number of SEs so as not to inadvertently find oneself with a filter bubble. No one general SE is always 'best'.

2. Given that an increasing number of people (if only webdevs :)) are increasingly upset with G and/or G's results BUT still feel the need to use it's service I recommend viewing G via Startpage.

What I find surprising is not that G is so popular for general search but that it is generally considered viable for specific/niche/subject search beyond initial general search. That is so much like saying that Wikipedia is fine for indepth subject research...

Google has trapped itself within it's own filter bubble as webdevs regurgitate the same old froth that they find via Google... Ah well.



RSS Feed


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users