Jun 18 2014

Google Looks At Apparent IE Sponsored Post Spam

Tech blogger/investor Michael Arrington revealed that someone who claimed to be a “social strategist on behalf of Microsoft” tried to get him to write about Internet Explorer for payment. The message he got says: Hi Michael, I work as a social strategist on behalf of Microsoft, and I wanted to invite you to collaborate on a sponsored post opportunity for Internet Explorer. We love your aesthetic and blogging style, and think you’d be the perfect partner to spread the word on the new Internet Explorer browsing experience! The new Internet Explorer is a brand new experience with many different features. This reworked Internet Explorer lets you search smarter and do more with its cool new features, such as multitasking, pinnable sites, and full-screen browsing. In this program, we are looking to spread the word about the new Internet Explorer web experience in a cool, visual way, which is where you come in! Internet Explorer has teamed up with many partners in gaming, entertainment, and more, and we’d love to see you talk about your opinions on these collaborations. If you accept our invitation to work on this program, we would like for you to write a blog post by July 10th, in addtion to sharing links to the new Internet Explorer across your social channels. Compesnsation for this post is available, and there will also be ample opportunities for fun prizes and rewards throughout the duration of the program. To learn all about the details of this program, please visit this page (http://unbouncepages.com/7975010c-edb3-11e3-b3e0-12314000cce6/). I look forward to working together. As Arrington notes, “This is just layers of stupid.” This is, after all, the founder of TechCrunch, who has referred to people being paid to shill products on their blogs as “pollution” in the past. When Arrington responded, asking if this was real, they replied that they weren’t sure how Arrington wound up on the list, and “Go TechCrunch!” The URL in the message has since been taken offline, and Google is even investigating what could be webpspam from its biggest competitor. Google’s Matt Cutts tweeted: @SocialChorus I'd like to talk about your sponsored post offer at http://t.co/zDGCNeGiPV as well as http://t.co/WKcCAp7f6u — Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) June 18, 2014 He was then in contact with SocialChorus program strategist Gregg Hanano. @mattcutts Thank you for reaching out Matt. I just sent an email back and cc'd some more employees to better answer your questions. — Gregg Hanano (@gregghanano) June 18, 2014 @dannysullivan I've emailed the point of contact from http://t.co/zDGCNeGiPV asking for more info while the webspam team investigates. — Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) June 18, 2014 As you may recall, Google actually had to penalize its own Chrome browser a while back for pretty much the same thing. The story there was that an outside agency was soliciting such posts on the company’s behalf. It doesn’t look like Internet Explorer has suffered such a penalty so far. Of course, Google’s competition with Microsoft adds a whole other layer to this. Microsoft is a big part of the FairSearch lobbying group that constantly tries to see antitrust regulation brought against Google. To be continued…

Jun 13 2014

Google Launches New Version Of Payday Loan Algorithm

Last month, Google rolled out two major updates to its algorithm around the same time – new versions of the famous Panda update and the “Payday Loans” update, which is one of its ways of fighting spam. A newer version of the latter began rolling on Thursday afternoon. @BtotheMcG it's rolling out now! — Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) June 12, 2014 Google’s head of webspam Matt Cutts announced the update at the Search Marketing Expo in front of a packed house. Here's what the #smx Q&A session looked like from the stage yesterday: pic.twitter.com/A7kSb90oPL — Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) June 12, 2014 “Matt Cutts explained that this goes after different signals,” recounts Barry Schwartz at SMX sister site Search Engine Land, who was in attendance. “The 2.0 version targeted spammy sites, whereas version 3.0 targets spammy queries.” It will target queries like “payday loans,” “casinos,” “viagra,” etc., he says. According to this recap of Cutts’ announcements (as tweeted by Cutts himself), he referred to the new update as Payday Loan 2.0 with last month’s being 2.0A if that helps you for any reason whatsoever. Also according to that recap, Google is working on improving reconsideration requests so web spam analysts can provide additional feedback. Also, Google is close to getting IE 8 referring data back. It will still show mostly as not provided, it says, but will correctly show the visitor as coming from Google search. Image via MYA (Twitter)

Jun 4 2014

Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

We’ll just keep this one short like the video itself. The most common SEO mistake you can make, according to Matt Cutts, is not having a website. Hopefully you feel you’ve gotten your money’s worth on that one. Once again , Cutts uses the ol’ floating head trick. I wonder how many more of these things he’s got. Image via YouTube

Jun 4 2014

Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

We’ll just keep this one short like the video itself. The most common SEO mistake you can make, according to Matt Cutts, is not having a website. Hopefully you feel you’ve gotten your money’s worth on that one. Once again , Cutts uses the ol’ floating head trick. I wonder how many more of these things he’s got. Image via YouTube The post Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake) appeared first on WebProNews .

Jun 4 2014

Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

We’ll just keep this one short like the video itself. The most common SEO mistake you can make, according to Matt Cutts, is not having a website. Hopefully you feel you’ve gotten your money’s worth on that one. Once again , Cutts uses the ol’ floating head trick. I wonder how many more of these things he’s got. Image via YouTube

Jun 4 2014

Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Here’s Another Matt Cutts Floating Head Video (About The Most Common SEO Mistake)

We’ll just keep this one short like the video itself. The most common SEO mistake you can make, according to Matt Cutts, is not having a website. Hopefully you feel you’ve gotten your money’s worth on that one. Once again , Cutts uses the ol’ floating head trick. I wonder how many more of these things he’s got. Image via YouTube

Jun 2 2014

Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links

Google has a new Webmaster Help video out talking about how it looks at quality of content that doesn’t have many links pointing to it. Specifically, Matt Cutts takes on the following question: How does Google determine quality content if there aren’t a lot of links to a post? “In general, that sort of reverts back to the way search engines were before links,” he says. “You’re pretty much judging based on the text on the page. Google has a lot of stuff to sort of say OK, the first time we see a word on a page, count it a little bit more. The next time, a little more, but not a ton more. And that after a while, we say, ‘You know what? We’ve seen this word. Maybe this page is about this topic,’ but it doesn’t really help you to keep repeating that keyword over and over and over again. In fact, at some point, we might view that as keyword stuffing, and then the page would actually do less well – not as well as just a moderate number of mentions of a particular piece of text.” He continues, “We do have other ways. In theory we could say, ‘Well, does it sit on a domain that seems to be somewhat reputable? There are different ways you can try to assess the quality of content, but typically, if you go back to a user is typing possibly some really rare phrase, if there are no other pages on the web that have that particular phrase, even if there’s not that any links, then that page can be returned because we think it might be relevant. It might be topical to what the user is looking for. It can be kind of tough, but at that point, we sort of have to fall back, and assess based on the quality of the content that’s actually on the text – that’s actually on the page.” A few years ago, after the Panda update was first launched, Google shared a list of questions one could ask themselves about their content to get an idea of how Google might view it in terms of quality. You might want to check that out if you haven’t yet. Image via YouTube

Jun 2 2014

Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links

Google has a new Webmaster Help video out talking about how it looks at quality of content that doesn’t have many links pointing to it. Specifically, Matt Cutts takes on the following question: How does Google determine quality content if there aren’t a lot of links to a post? “In general, that sort of reverts back to the way search engines were before links,” he says. “You’re pretty much judging based on the text on the page. Google has a lot of stuff to sort of say OK, the first time we see a word on a page, count it a little bit more. The next time, a little more, but not a ton more. And that after a while, we say, ‘You know what? We’ve seen this word. Maybe this page is about this topic,’ but it doesn’t really help you to keep repeating that keyword over and over and over again. In fact, at some point, we might view that as keyword stuffing, and then the page would actually do less well – not as well as just a moderate number of mentions of a particular piece of text.” He continues, “We do have other ways. In theory we could say, ‘Well, does it sit on a domain that seems to be somewhat reputable? There are different ways you can try to assess the quality of content, but typically, if you go back to a user is typing possibly some really rare phrase, if there are no other pages on the web that have that particular phrase, even if there’s not that any links, then that page can be returned because we think it might be relevant. It might be topical to what the user is looking for. It can be kind of tough, but at that point, we sort of have to fall back, and assess based on the quality of the content that’s actually on the text – that’s actually on the page.” A few years ago, after the Panda update was first launched, Google shared a list of questions one could ask themselves about their content to get an idea of how Google might view it in terms of quality. You might want to check that out if you haven’t yet. Image via YouTube The post Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links appeared first on WebProNews .

Jun 2 2014

Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links

  • Posted by in Web Pro News
  • Comments Off on Google Talks Determining Quality When There Aren’t Links

Google has a new Webmaster Help video out talking about how it looks at quality of content that doesn’t have many links pointing to it. Specifically, Matt Cutts takes on the following question: How does Google determine quality content if there aren’t a lot of links to a post? “In general, that sort of reverts back to the way search engines were before links,” he says. “You’re pretty much judging based on the text on the page. Google has a lot of stuff to sort of say OK, the first time we see a word on a page, count it a little bit more. The next time, a little more, but not a ton more. And that after a while, we say, ‘You know what? We’ve seen this word. Maybe this page is about this topic,’ but it doesn’t really help you to keep repeating that keyword over and over and over again. In fact, at some point, we might view that as keyword stuffing, and then the page would actually do less well – not as well as just a moderate number of mentions of a particular piece of text.” He continues, “We do have other ways. In theory we could say, ‘Well, does it sit on a domain that seems to be somewhat reputable? There are different ways you can try to assess the quality of content, but typically, if you go back to a user is typing possibly some really rare phrase, if there are no other pages on the web that have that particular phrase, even if there’s not that any links, then that page can be returned because we think it might be relevant. It might be topical to what the user is looking for. It can be kind of tough, but at that point, we sort of have to fall back, and assess based on the quality of the content that’s actually on the text – that’s actually on the page.” A few years ago, after the Panda update was first launched, Google shared a list of questions one could ask themselves about their content to get an idea of how Google might view it in terms of quality. You might want to check that out if you haven’t yet. Image via YouTube