Google every once in awhile takes away my choices for my home page items and makes me redo the whole thing. I hate that. I have what I want and I do
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
Spammers Are My Competitors in Google
Hallo Friends, I am doing on page and off page optimization for one of my site..and for this site in Google my 85% of competitors in 1 to 100 are S
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
SEM @ china Nanjing, China: Sept 23rd -24th, 2008 Search Marketing Expo - China @ Timev is certain to be to the “must-attend” interactive and
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
Optimize new website
Hello Can any one tell me how to optimize a new website? what are the steps to follow ? i have done on page by optimizing meta tag, content, robo
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
Spammers Are My Competitors in Google
Hallo Friends, I am doing on page and off page optimization for one of my site..and for this site in Google my 85% of competitors in 1 to 100 are S
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
I just want to know, whether there is any google updation, becoz the page rank for my site was 4 and it has changed to 0, when will i get my page rank Continue…..
Hi there, we are optimising our website for about 20 key phrases and wanted to know if there is any, script, api, program or website where we ca Continue…..
This morning the Guardian UK published a scathing analysis of Google, SEO and the launch of Cuil. In his article, Chris Williams claimed that the greatest threat to Google is spam. No argument there.
But Williams takes the argument one step further and states:
Plenty of digital ink has been needlessly spilt this week over the launch of the suicidally-monikered new search engine Cuil.com. But the only threat to Google is itself and, in a roundabout way, the legion of spammers and “search engine optimisation” (SEO) consultants that buttress its dominance.
It’s clear that Williams is crying over “spilt ink.” He’s right in saying that Web sites have adapted their design and structure to accommodate Google.
But Williams would like to think that all companies - including competing search engines - are in the business of “reverse engineering” Google.
The people at the vanguard of reverse-engineering Google are not its jealous search rivals. They’re the spammers and SEO consultants. They have driven an ever-closer relationship between the quirks and whims of Google’s algorithms and policies, and the structure and content of the web. It’s a feedback loop that was unavoidable once Google’s early rivals proved unable to respond to its better search results and presentation.
He feels that techniques such as “adding needless internal links, creating PageRank-friendly URLs and distorting normal grammar” are all widely deployed with varying degrees of dastardliness.
While grammar may be distorted, the fault doesn’t lie with SEOs but with writers lacking sufficient command of the English language.
Somehow Williams connects Google’s share of searches with SEO efforts, rather than user preference. If that’s the case, then SEO must be producing superior SERPs.
Williams writes, “Thanks to the mutualistic process driven by spammers and SEO consultants, that dominance is only going to increase, and it’s the only ‘Google Killer’ on the horizon.”
Williams envisions a future “when the favours spammers and SEO consultants have been doing for Larry and Sergey will become dangerous, anti-trust style.” He believes regulatory intervention now seems the only bar to a complete Google autocracy over the Web economy.
is addressing the ever-present topic of spam again, only this time it’s on the Official Google Blog. Cutts wrote about coming across spam links in the search results. He says this doesn’t happen nearly as often as it used to, thanks to Google’s anti-spam metrics.
One of those metrics is data from search logs. Many have worried what Google does with the data collects, and Cutts assures that data such as IP and cookie information is used to help improve the search results.
“The IP and cookie information is important for helping us apply this method only to searches that are from legitimate users as opposed to those that were generated by bots and other false searches. For example, if a bot sends the same queries to Google over and over again, those queries should really be discarded before we measure how much spam our users see. All of this–log data, IP addresses, and cookie information–makes your search results cleaner and more relevant.”
But Cutts is also aware that the war against spam continues on:
“If you think webspam is a solved problem, think again. Last year Google faced a rash of webspam on Chinese domains in our index. Some spammers were purchasing large amounts of cheap .cn domains and stuffing them with misspellings and porn phrases. Savvy users may remember reading a few blogs about it, but most regular users never even noticed. The reason that a typical searcher didn’t notice the odd results is that Google identified the .cn spam and responded with a fast-tracked engineering project to counteract that type of spam attack. Without our logs data to help identify the speed and scope of the problem, many more Google users might have been affected by this attack.”
Another unsolved webspam problem - that was not addressed by Cutts - is letting humans in on the reporting of spam. Over at Blogspot, supporters of Presidential candidate Barack Obama have reportedly been flagging anti-obama blogs as “spam.” As a result, several of the blogs, including ones created by Hilary Clinton supporters, have been frozen.
Of course, this problem is experienced in the ‘paid links debate’ as well. Google accepts anonymous reports about paid links, which is an easy way for competitors to attempt to flag each other out of the results.
What do you think of Cutts comments? Do they reduce your fears about Google’s data collection? Should Google let third parties flag sites? Let us know in the comments.
Source: feeds.searchenginewatch.com
Limit for amount of pages added to the site daily?
Hi, I am creating a new video streaming site where the users will upload their staff. is there a limit (googleseo wise) to the amount of pages a
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
Local Advertisers Shifting Dollars to Internet
This year, local advertisers are expected to shift $13.1 billion of their budgeted funds to the Internet, according to Borrell Associates. The number is up 50% over last year.
In 2009, local online ad spending is projected to grow another 40% to $18.2 billion in 2009. By 2012, the growth in spending will eventually slow down and plateau at about $23 billion, but still average 15% growth over the next four years.
Online advertising is cheaper than traditional methods of marketing and is thought to be the reason for the change. According to Borrell, internet CPMs average $3.65, the lowest of any media, while an offline Yellow Pages ad carries an average CPM of $9.29.
The numbers seem to be in line with recent projections for global internet advertising, expected to exceed $106 Billion by 2012.
Of course, search engines are gearing up for the increased ad spends. Google recently announced its brand new media planning tool, Ad Planner. Microsoft recently acquired Navic Networks, a TV ad company that will likely help Microsoft clients integrate online and offline campaigns. And Yahoo inked an online and mobile advertising partnership with Publicis.
Source: feeds.searchenginewatch.com
How Are These Guys Ranking So Well? I Don’t Get It.
Hey Guys, I am brand new here but have been doing SEO for about a year and a half. I am working on ranking a website in Google for the keyword “hai
Source: forums.searchenginewatch.com
