|
Making sense of Update Florida
By Barry
Lloyd – CEO www.makemetop.co.uk
...
With the huge number of postings on all the various
forums, concerning this update, most people don't know
where to start looking for information about the recent
Google update. The following is an attempt to put down
rationally (I hope) most of the information that is
known and the (unproven) theories behind the update
algo.
Introduction.
Starting on the 16th of November, a major shift in
results was seen on Google. Veterans recognised that
Google appeared to be doing a major update, not seen
for many months, as reported first on WebMasterWorld
who named it "Florida", continuing the tradition
of naming updates rather like hurricanes. In this case
it was a hurricane! As was usual with many updates,
there were moans and groans as people complained about
their sites falling. Many people were unaffected (including
us) but the symptoms of the sites being dropped were
not usual. No penalties, such as PR0, seem to have
been applied against pages that had fallen - yet none
of the pages targeted at specific key phrases, particularly
index/home pages, appeared in the top results for these
search terms. Indeed some had dropped hundreds of places
and, in some cases reported, off the scale. Yet these
pages did appear for obscure phrases and were obviously
still in the index.
It appeared to us and to several other respected names
(though hotly disputed by others) that some sort of
over-SEOd filter had been applied to check if overt
SEO had been done for that particular phrase. It was
as if Google were checking to see if external links
to the site included the phrase, on-page optimisation
was being done for the phrase and even if the domain
included the phrase. If the density of the optimisation,
both on and off the page, appeared too artificial,
then a filter was tripped and down went the page -
solely for that phrase.
Google had never looked favourably on abuse of their
systems and many established SEOs looked upon this
algo tweak as a way of Google getting rid of the abuses
of links and stopping the scrambling for getting (and
sometimes buying) links including your required anchor
text from other high PR, but probably irrelevant to
your subject, sites. It seemed to make sense.
On Friday, 21st November, Google decided to tighten
the "filter". All hell broke loose as tens
of thousands of sites disappeared from positions they
had held (in some cases) for years. We noticed some
of our client sites plummeting for their major key
phrase from being #1 to total invisibility. Yet this
was only in highly competitive areas, not for their
secondary phrases. These sites were, in most cases,
not highly optimised, had not sought reciprocal links
but had achieved their rankings through being on the
web for 4 or 5 years. The bad news was that their company
name and domain included the key phrase, sites (including
directories) linking to those sites included the key
phrase in their links and Google interpreted this as
over-optimisation and down they plunged. In many areas
all the top 20 ranking sites disappeared, including
industry leaders, to be replaced by educational sites,
news review sites, government sites, major shopping
portals or directories. Something major had happened
- but what?
The Facts!
Thousands of web pages have been suddenly demoted
in the Google search results, primarily on the main
commercial search terms for which they targeted their
pages to be replaced by other sites who, in the main,
referred to the search term obliquely. Several of the
replacement sites were the main shopping portals or
business directories which gave listings for companies
who may provide the services requested, many were not.
Very high-ranking "authority" sites such
as Amazon, e-bay, Kelkoo and Dealtime etc., seemed
to be unfiltered.
The changes were starkly obvious on regional English
language Googles where a regional filter was employed
and there were less commercial sites with "authority".
An example for Google UK is the search for the word "shelving".
On the UK search the result used to show mainly UK
suppliers of shelving. The results now show:
#1 - about arranging shelving in Sheffield University
- an education site .ac.uk
#2 - shopping directory - Dealtime - a top commercial
shopping site.
#3 - shopping directory - Dealtime - a top commercial
shopping site.
#4 - Leeds University about needing shelving for their
books - an education site .ac.uk
#5 - Buckinghamshire College with an article about
concerns with some shelving - an education site .ac.uk
#6 - Kelly Search a UK Business Directory (like Yahoo
or Yellow Pages) - authority directory site.
#7 - Sheffield University library shelving sequences
- an education site .ac.uk
#8 - Article from a news site regarding the shelving
of an Indian ferry service - news site.
#9 - The same as 8 - news site.
#10 - Information about the Loughborough University
library shelving team - an education site .ac.uk.
On the main Google search for the same phrase, the
results return 1 site that sells shelving, 6 shopping
portals, 2 Universities and 1 Amazon store. Yet previously
these results showed 9 shelving suppliers.
Other searches remain unchanged. Take the word "jackets",
for example. There could be plenty of diverse sites
to come up for that phrase but, when searched for -
it returns the sort of results one normally got from
Google. The new algo appears not to be being applied
on this search.
WebMasterWorld members came up with an interesting
observation which we confirmed. Only certain phrases
were being selected for processing through the new
algo. Indeed it was asserted that this could be proven
by amending the search by asking to exclude a spurious
string (such as -waffle) and it was true! If you do
the search shelving -waffle in the UK, all the sites
that used to previously be listed in the top positions
suddenly re-appeared. Similarly, do that search on
the main Google with the same search and all the shopping
portals disappear and shelving suppliers re-appear!
If you do the same thing with the phrase "jackets" there
is no real difference between the results previously
shown. Why?
After tests on over 500 phrases we have concluded
that certain phrases kick in the new algo, and certain
don't. The ones that do are always highly commercial
and the ones that are not, are often also commercial.
So why some and not others? Completely non-commercial
phrases never come up with any indication that the
new algo/filter is being applied.
If you try this yourself and your phrase is more than
2 words you may have add additional garbage words so
web design Toronto may need to be web design Toronto
-waffle -woggle.
These are the facts, though, it must be said that
it is unlikely for Google to continue allowing this
particular loop-hole in to viewing the different results,
if they apply, for very long - so you may not continue
to see the differences in a few days. If you don't,
they were there!
The Theories
Many theories abound as to what has happened and are
hotly disputed. We have our own which are from some
considered research and are included in this analysis
and will be labelled as such. Others are available
and will also be included with our comments. Be aware
these are theories, some are bizarre, some may be close
to the truth - but only Google knows what they are
doing. They are here to assist you in your own conclusions.
The most logical theory in my opinion - portions of
which are agreed, I think, by most industry observers.
Google has seen their search engine results manipulated
by SEOs to a significant extent over the past few years.
Their reliance on PageRank™ to grade the authority
of pages has led to the wholesale trading and buying
of links with the primary purpose of influencing rankings
on Google rather than for natural linking reasons.
In some instances, people would not link to sites unless
they thought it would not harm them or would benefit
them for Google. Google SEO consisted mainly of ensuring
your page had your primary search phrase placed in
all appropriate places on your page and that your sought
after phrase was inserted in the anchor text of any
incoming links. Thousands of SEOs and webmasters followed
these simple and basic rules and loved the fact that
Google seemed to reward them by giving them top listings.
People forgot the fact that Google really wanted to
give surfers the most "authoritive" results.
So someone looking for cheap computers on Google should
find the site that had "earned" a reputation
for providing cheap computers - not just that a webmaster
had optimised their site to make it look that way,
by getting links with the phrase "cheap computers" included
on a load of unrelated sites. This update was an attempt
to redress the balance and get back to the way Google
thinks that results should be calculated. The most
obvious way to start is to identify the major terms
that are likely to be manipulated. These are obviously
commercial and there are a number of ways this could
be done:
Google has an immense amount of information fed back
to it by their popular toolbar that could give an indication
of what people searched for when looking to buy.
Google AdWords is a dictionary of commercial terms
built by webmasters themselves coupled with the amount
of money they are willing to pay per click. This could
indicate, very simply, the largest volume searched
for terms and their "sought-after" nature.
Forms of artificial intelligence and semantic analysis
through programs used by Google. It could be worth
reading the Applied Semantics White Paper - used by
AdSense and also the Hilltop algo - both capable of
being used by Google.
Which ever method is used (it may be none of the above
or combinations of all of them), Google manages to
identify sought-after search terms. It then, when the
search term is looked for, applies an optimisation
filter to redress the influence SEOd sites may have
and reveals the adjusted, "authoritative" results.
This is why you tend to see governmental, educational,
shopping portal, business directory and news sites
on many searches. However, some commercial sites will
still be considered the authority on that subject and
remain - many, though, will drop out. This is the theory
we subscribe to. We believe this was, and is, the intention
of Google in this update.
Additions or replacements to this theory include:
Google is trying to force webmasters who have been
seen by Google as manipulating their results to use
AdWords and that is why they have removed the results.
My conclusion - this may be a welcome side benefit
of the change (for Google), but not the primary reason
for it.
Google is trying to separate their results into non-commercial
and commercial. Commercial results will be AdWords
and non-commercial the natural listing, primarily used
for research purposes. My conclusion - well, it was
probably me who started this, with a rather cynical
tongue-in-cheek remark on the High Rankings Forum.
In reality, this is pretty much impossible and would
defeat Google's idea of returning the most suitable
sites for all searches. But some searches do make it
look that way. However, in my opinion, this is not
true.
Google has changed their algo to suit their biggest
advertisers. My conclusion - highly unlikely and I
do not believe that Google has any wish to be seen
as an unethical company, regardless of their growing
unpopularity with "jilted" webmasters.
There is no separate algo for "commercial" phrases
and this is a new over-all update. My conclusion -
all evidence points to this not being the case. I'm
waiting to be convinced I am wrong, though.
This is a result of a virus or blog results upsetting
the standard results which can only be seen if you
type in -mt-tb.cgi as revealed in The Register. My
conclusion - this is confusing the results returned
unfiltered as shown with our -waffle (or any other
garbage word) with a method of getting rid of extraneous
listings from Blogs in the search results by excluding
from the search the signature of the most used blogger
trackback script.
Conclusion:
Despite the furore, there is no great conspiracy theory.
Google are trying to redress the balance by trying
to eradicate obvious search engine manipulation from
their most competitive results. Remember, it is what
Google considers their most competitive results probably
gauged by both value and number of searches. As such,
certain types of site don't fall into this category.
SEO sites, for example, may be competitive but are
not searched for with huge frequency.
The results of the filter have probably surprised
Google, but, for the moment, few surfers will notice
anything - unlike webmasters. The quality of the results
has changed, with searches for home alarm, web design
Calgary, and medela breast pumps showing, variously,
sites with nothing to do with home alarms, a hockey
team being top for web design and a listing of pretty
much nothing but shopping portals. (My thanks to some
of the many people who have posted some of the searches
they have seen and I have used - you know who you are!)
Many feel this has been a severe downgrading in relevancy,
others believe that this is an improvement in the surfer
experience. It is your judgement! Of course, if surfers
don't like the results, they can move to other SEs.
You may be surprised at what you see!
It is certain that Google will be watching the result
of their change and will adjust the algo if they think
it will reward sites of merit and increase relevancy.
Whatever happens, though, the days of relatively easy
rankings through simple "ABC" steps of SEO
on Google are over.
As always, any comments on this article, designed
to be a basis for informed discussion on the latest
Google update will be welcomed. All opinions are the
author's and not necessarily those of the Company.
About the Author:
Barry Lloyd founded the MakeMeTop brand of SEO services
in 1999 although he began search engine optimisation
in 1997. Barry is a Jim Guide for the Jim World forum
covering PFI and other search engines, posts on several
forums as a Senior or Veteran Member under the name
MakeMeTop, is a Moderator on both the IHelpYouServices
Forums and High Rankings Forums, has spoken at leading
conferences on various aspects of search engine marketing
and has written articles on specific aspects of the
industry for webmasters world-wide. MakeMeTop now has
offices in Northern Ireland, mainland UK, USA and Singapore
and does search engine marketing for over 200 clients
throughout the World.
|
