Googles SEO warning - Are you Ready for the next update?

zebrahat · Mar 25, 2012

In Google's world, good sites are always and forever those that conform to "what Google wants." Only what it says it wants, doesn't seem to fit what it actually wants, as many have noted. It says it wants SEO to "be reasonable," whatever that means, and not reliant on formulas, BUT Google is not retiring its algo anytime soon. Meaning, SEO math still matters. G says it wants fresh content, but above posts document that fresh content is ignored by them unless backlinks are added. Meaning, links still matter.

The only constant in this is, Google seems to say things that positions its business image in the market as that of the good cop. That image is "what it wants." The business reality, as opposed to the PR, is that G wants to rank authority and big Inc sites above small sites using domain age, links and SEO formulas wrapped in its algo and bots, but wants the little guys to back off trying to figure out its big boy biased formula. It's like they want to play DJ and bouncer at Studio 54 at the same time, servicing the heavy hitters with the hottest hit traffic, while keeping out the riffraff.

CheapYT+1daddy · Mar 25, 2012

SEO's 2nd Generation is started now, Let the Young guys come in this field.... oldies should retire :rocketwho

Dumper · Mar 25, 2012

I'd be royally fucked as i couldn't even get an add launched before those dickheads banned me for who knows what reason.

Barbarossa said:
Hey Matt, why not just scrap the whole organic serps shit and use that space for paid listings too?

Nigel Farage · Mar 25, 2012

Google lost all credibility with me when I read about the scam it ran on businesses in Kenya.

http://marketingland.com/mortified-google-apologizes-mocality-3354

The main component with this "story" is that it's still a fraud. I find NO reports of it that describe it accurately. Everyone writes about how Google illegal "scraped" another companies' data, which is complete, 100% bullshit. Google called businesses up and committed straight-up
fraud. Scraping data is not illegal, but lying to people by telling them that you are in some kind of partnership or joint venture with a local business in order to use that trust to get people to give you money is fraud, and it's not enough to be "mortified", nor fire a department head.

The other, OTHER side of this story is that it isn't getting reported correctly. They fixate on the least significant detail i.e. data scraping, and ignore the direct, overt, organized and centrally-directed effort at committing FRAUD. Maybe other bloggers, reporters are doing the story correctly, and Google is burying the results of those reports on page 5 of the SERPS, and giving special Google-love to those reports that make the situation sound as benign and distorted as possible.

Seems to me that Google learned a lot by it's experiences in China. Maybe Matt Cutts underwent some state-sponsored indoctrination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manchurian_Candidate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA

daonest · Mar 26, 2012

Google is always changing, so basically their saying keep making new content anyone can do that. Also as people said here unless google has the intelligence of aliens how can they teach the bots to judge what is good and not? Only thing it can do is check if its unique. So here comes the content spam... theyll never understand there will always be people who manipulate.

beauxesprits · Mar 27, 2012

Nigel Farage said:
Google lost all credibility with me when I read about the scam it ran on businesses in Kenya.

http://marketingland.com/mortified-google-apologizes-mocality-3354

The main component with this "story" is that it's still a fraud. I find NO reports of it that describe it accurately. Everyone writes about how Google illegal "scraped" another companies' data, which is complete, 100% bullshit. Google called businesses up and committed straight-up
fraud. Scraping data is not illegal, but lying to people by telling them that you are in some kind of partnership or joint venture with a local business in order to use that trust to get people to give you money is fraud, and it's not enough to be "mortified", nor fire a department head.

The other, OTHER side of this story is that it isn't getting reported correctly. They fixate on the least significant detail i.e. data scraping, and ignore the direct, overt, organized and centrally-directed effort at committing FRAUD. Maybe other bloggers, reporters are doing the story correctly, and Google is burying the results of those reports on page 5 of the SERPS, and giving special Google-love to those reports that make the situation sound as benign and distorted as possible.

Seems to me that Google learned a lot by it's experiences in China. Maybe Matt Cutts underwent some state-sponsored indoctrination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manchurian_Candidate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA

Seems like you have already declared a war with the Google.....

meeaou · Mar 27, 2012

BHW seo is the best

nbseo · Mar 27, 2012

beauxesprits said:
"SEO WAR 1" Sounds interesting... I am ready with my Guns:mad2::boxing:irate::ridinghor:1::fencing:: :rocketwho :AR15firin

I m in the Army too... LOLzzz :AR15firin

jb2008 · Mar 27, 2012

Everyone talks like an update is a complete change of the algorithm. G has spent waay too money, time, effort, and expertise making it. They're not going to essentially destroy the whole thing and start from scratch, when the current algorithm is, to their credit, pretty good already. I hate to say it but when I search G I nearly always find what I'm looking for, within reason of course.

What I find bizarre is that it seems people who have written quality articles with the keywords in them at a reasonable density eg 2-5% might be penalized just because they have optimized the content for search engines. wtf.

Fancy · Mar 27, 2012

?And we are also looking at the people who abuse it, who put too many keywords on a page, exchange way too many links, or whatever else they are doing to go beyond what you normally expect. We have several engineers on my team working on this right now," Cutts said.

What do you think about this method to get more visitor? With this update it will die? 4
Method: http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/making-money/205287-how-i-increased-my-traffic-150-a.html

RAYRAY7 · Mar 27, 2012

Do not believe the hype!

Just so we know GOOGLE:

1 - Without backlinks, who would be the judge of good content?

2- Would pure content get higher pagerank?

3- With millions of websites and many thousands created daily, how can content be relied upon for website ranking?

Google is at it again, create massive confusion to keep the SEO community on edge. If you think without backlinks you would rank your site, well good luck to your bank account.

This is all smoke and mirrors By Google. Backlinks would always be needed if you want to rank your website.

Unfortunately, it is easier now to create backlink mischief for your competitors, since Google just punishes without asking who is responsible.

Scripteen · Mar 27, 2012

RAYRAY7 said:
Do not believe the hype!

Just so we know GOOGLE:

1 - Without backlinks, who would be the judge of good content?

2- Would pure content get higher pagerank?

3- With millions of websites and many thousands created daily, how can content be relied upon for website ranking?

Google is at it again, create massive confusion to keep the SEO community on edge. If you think without backlinks you would rank your site, well good luck to your bank account.

This is all smoke and mirrors By Google. Backlinks would always be needed if you want to rank your website.

Unfortunately, it is easier now to create backlink mischief for your competitors, since Google just punishes without asking who is responsible.

With google joining the social world with G+ I think the future is all about social signals to let the crowd judge the content. This about the old style (backlinks from sites) that was so limited because not everyone interested in your niche has a website to be able to vote for your page but now with everything social anyone with a free twitter/G+/facebook account can promote/vote for high quality content without having to own a website to do so.

bigwhite · Mar 28, 2012

Time to just buy some content.

beauxesprits · Mar 29, 2012

RAYRAY7 said:
Do not believe the hype!

Just so we know GOOGLE:

1 - Without backlinks, who would be the judge of good content?

2- Would pure content get higher pagerank?

3- With millions of websites and many thousands created daily, how can content be relied upon for website ranking?

Google is at it again, create massive confusion to keep the SEO community on edge. If you think without backlinks you would rank your site, well good luck to your bank account.

This is all smoke and mirrors By Google. Backlinks would always be needed if you want to rank your website.

Unfortunately, it is easier now to create backlink mischief for your competitors, since Google just punishes without asking who is responsible.

Backlinks has always been the base, but what about the other things that are coming everyday, the social THE BIG SOCIAL MARKET.... Without a facebook page or a twitter page you are just like dead on the internet. What according to me is now, we can rank with a very less amount of backlinks and maximum amount of activities on and around the website.

FunkyWaltz · Mar 30, 2012

Interesting information. Thank you for the share. Focusing on quality.

indusharma · Mar 30, 2012

Let google to do their own work.

james406 · Mar 30, 2012

Scripteen said:
With google joining the social world with G+ I think the future is all about social signals to let the crowd judge the content. This about the old style (backlinks from sites) that was so limited because not everyone interested in your niche has a website to be able to vote for your page but now with everything social anyone with a free twitter/G+/facebook account can promote/vote for high quality content without having to own a website to do so.

I imagine, therefore, the future of BH will be creating networks of fake user accounts rather than fake blogs, and PR will be replaced with "followers" as a guide, with "link building" to these sites actually being "adding followers". Dodgy followers (accounts with little info, few posts), will be the Tier 2s, realistic followers with greater posts and many thousands of dodgy followers will be the Tier 1 "links".

sabyc200 · Mar 30, 2012

Choronzon said:
This is the usual BS, think about it honestly. If crappy links devalue your site then you could just devalue your competition. This is an ongoing battle that Google have never found a solution to for that reason.

Just take it with a pinch of salt and move on...

Haha, that's the best point of view. Imagine everybody starts to use dripfeedlinks and linklicious not to rank their own sites, but rather devalue their competitors sites

)) .
Also what about sites that are based on affiliate marketing? The could not watch all their affiliates and see where they put links

) !

I've seen a site once that had about 19000 links according to Alexa ranking and the actual site had only one page , it called something with chat roullete and had an article about gsm marketing... not that is bad content in my opinion... I don't think any of us would want that to appear on the first pages while searching for "chat"....

ryannull · Mar 31, 2012

I have been doing seo for 12 years, and one thing I know is not to pay attention to what Matt C says. Almost all his "suggestions" about seo are either vague or doesn't work. He says one thing, but the serps say something else completely. I just stopped reading his stuff and paid attention to what Google responds to.

Google's algorithm is a closely guarded secret. Do you really think that Matt C is going to give webmasters tips that actually work. I think not. It wouldn't be in Google's best interest. They would rather have you spend your money on Adwords, not seo services.

That would be like KFC giving out it's secret recipe. Everyone would be making KFC chicken, and KFC would be out of business.

sabyc200 · Mar 31, 2012

Regarding backlinks and anchor just think of the "click here" example. Try it now and you'll see that adobe still appear in first page and on the first position.... Talking about backlinks not counting...

Googles SEO warning - Are you Ready for the next update?

Elite Member

BANNED

Elite Member

BANNED

Regular Member

BANNED

Regular Member

Junior Member

Senior Member

Newbie

Regular Member

Elite Member

Regular Member

BANNED

Junior Member

Newbie

Junior Member

Newbie

Senior Member

Newbie

Main Menu

Marketplace

Making Money

BlackHat World

Googles SEO warning - Are you Ready for the next update?