PCWorld Forums: Google Begins Penalizing Search 'over-optimization' - PCWorld Forums

Post your comments for Google Begins Penalizing Search 'over-optimization' here

Its funny if you search this article title you'll see exactly how well this works, which is not at all! Like I said over on ComputerWorld if Google actually held all sites to the same standards PCWorld/ComputerWorld and it's sister sites as well as several major blogs and tech sites out there would be hit rather hard for duplicate content and some of the other things Google wants to penalize sites for.

Some sites would be hit for lack of unique content while still more would be hit for creating content on trending topics for rank and creating pages with little value for users.

I understand Google is trying to level the playing field a bit, but it doesn't appear to be working the way they intended.

It's all just PR. They have a huge problem with SEO, as thanks to the latter Google's initial algorithms - which worked well on a web that wasn't created and manipulated for one purpose: ranking first in Google result lists - have now become obselete and useless.

Truth is: everyone would be better of if we'd not have a search monopoly, but multiple search engines with about the same popularity, but working based on principally different algorithms. Thay way nobody could really game the system, as it would be obviously impossible to rank first in all the search engines with the same content and same hacks (and the trick of serving up different content for different web engines could be easily caught).

Heck, even Google could implement multiple search ranking formulas for the very same pages, and use them randomly to prioritize pages in the result lists. That would have the same net effect.

However, by sticking to their old algorithm and only tweaking it the way they claim to do is, is just useless and leads nowhere. Or it actually leads to a cat and mouse game which can't be won and will be harder and harder to be one steap ahead in.

On the other side even if they don't tweak their algorithms, but announce to do so, might be a perfect way to detect sites trying to game the system. Now, that they announced they will penalize too many keywords, they only have to watch sites which reduce their keyword density in a large percent to get a near-perfect list of sites that are actively trying to game the system and gain a competitive advantage by adjusting their sites quick and fast to every change in Google's algorithms.

Nothing truly new here. This is yet another explicit acknowledgement, as was last year's implementation of the rolling Panda updates, that the quality of Google's organic SERPs leave much to be desired. Even the particulars cited, such as keyword stuffing and link manipulation, are very old hat.

And, it's a losing battle, as all algorithmic based applications are vulnerable to manipulation. Given sufficient time, one can find a combination of input values which yield the desired results.

As for "penalties," I do wish that all would properly use the term. A reevaluation that favors some while disfavoring others does not entail a "penalty" for the latter., as a true penalty entails a taking away of something that was rightfully gained.

Take, for example, the case where a Domain Name is found to be engaging in egregious link manipulation. Possible actions include:

• Discounting the links in question - no penalty involved;
• Discounting said links along with temporarily reducing the effective PageRank of some or all of the Domain's page to zero - a temporary penalty; or,
• Barring the Domain from being displayed in any of the SERPS - a permanent penalty.

This post has been edited by deepsand: 25 April 2012 - 06:00 PM

richeemxx, on 24 April 2012 - 11:35 PM, said:

As has been made clear by Google, there is no such thing as a "duplicate content penalty."

Rather, it is simply the case that, within the context of the user search query string, his search history, and the context within the content in question is presented, Google will try to determine which particular copy or copies are the most likely to best suit the user.

deepsand, on 25 April 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

Really? Under the quality guidelines it states

Quote

So I guess that wouldn't apply here? I can see how it doesn't specifically apply elsewhere (where it should) but I thought it might apply to sites/blogs ect that cross post?

IMO more than anything Google should penalize sites that are duplicating content from other sources. Most of your link bait, seo pages come from there anyways. Nothing but scrapped content with keywords filtered in!

Consider, for example, how many sites there are that carry the full text of the US Constitution, or the lyrics of the Star Spangled Banner. Absent sites belonging to the authors of such, all are copies. For any SE to decide that a particular copy is the original would be arbitrary and capricious.

And, even if the author of a particular work were to have a site, such would not perforce necessarily be the best suited for all searchers, the simplest example being where the work was presented in a language other than that of the searcher.

Furthermore, that a particular work may be widely published is no measure of the quality of any one presentation, an example being syndicated works.

The best that any SE can do is to try to determine which copy is best suited for the searcher of the moment.

All Google's guideline on the subject amounts to is a request that content providers not make that task the more difficult. It does not speak to any consequences for failure to comply simply because it cannot, as such are variable, depending on the specific search of the moment.

.

This post has been edited by deepsand: 26 April 2012 - 09:17 PM