Take care!
Gerrit

Yet another inspiring post! I love how you are sooo honest and straight to the point even if it does anger some people. I say, “Good for you!”

I read that post that you linked to from the NY Times in its entirety (it is a looonnnggg read). I really feel for that woman that basically got duped by following Google’s #1 ranking. It taught me that just because a site is at #1 on Google that doesn’t mean you should trust it 100%. So, from now on, I will do my due diligence on every site that I’m going to buy something from.

Thanks!
Cindy

ME TOO! 🙂

Actually I think that list is a good set of guidelines for anyone in this business. I think I’m going to print it out so I can see it and refer to it more easily. It’s almost like a checklist.

I’m currently plodding through my first campaign based on your One Week Marketing (or as it’s turning out to be with me, One Month Marketing 🙂 ) and I think part of the reason it’s hard is because I picked something that I really believe in (which was one of my personal requirements) but I don’t know much about. So I’ve had to do a lot of research and when I’m doing it online *I really do find a lot of the same thing* – which is very frustrating. I do hate rehashing things so I went for a walk to the library and found some books on the subject. I’m so glad I did that; I now have not only *more* information but also *different* information. As for writing it out – that’s still not easy. But the comment from Tony S. has me thinking about a different way to do it – maybe as if I’m answering a question on a forum or on Yahoo! Answers instead of giving a lecture.

I really like reading your posts; I can tell you’ve given the subject a lot of thought (and sometimes done a lot of research) before you even write anything. I don’t always understand everything you or the commenters say, but I think I’m learning a lot from all of them.

(Now I have to go and sign up for emails on new posts since I obviously missed these on my RSS feeds…)

Missouri has the most bill-boards in the nation, drive along Interstate 44 towards Branson, Mo. or Interstate 70 towards Columbia and you’ll see what looks like an giant Adsense website.

I’m curious though, how you do that. Take a product from Amazon. You’ve got all the features and reviews in front of you. If you look at a camera and it’s small in size but takes great pics, you might say, “This camera is really light and takes quality photos, so you’ll be enjoying your vacation for years to come.”

Is that your own voice then? But how can it be if you’re still using the same material?

Thanks for opening up your blog!

Oh that’s awesome, Michael! I love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jennifer

My Credo :
I Michael Robinson, from now on, vow to no longer be an echo. I vow to only put up contents that actually adds value to the time of my Readers. To honestly say my opinion like it is, not saying things that i think people want to hear. I vow to give my readers the exact solution to their problem. From today on, I am determined to proudly declare, “I refuse to be an echo” 🙂

Hey Rach =)

I actually have the real list of “here’s what we are judging right now” from Google … thing is, it’s 125 pages long. I figured those questions from the Google blog got the point across MUCH more easily….lol!

However, if you want to read the 125 pages and know “exactly” – it’s on my new post here.

Thanks!

Jennifer

Thank you Jennifer,

I will get started doing………..

EP

Rather than a ‘here’s what we are judging right now’ list of rules, that list was a guideline for contributors to the Google Search Engine and as you say, is an indication of their ultimate end goal. With a combination of manual review and algorithm I believe that they will reach it, but in the meantime it is essential that content providers see this list as fair warning that things are going to keep changing.

The ‘self review’ process is quite a hard one to take on the chin but marketers have to be aware that until this point they have not had to seriously deal with the type, quality and intent of the content that they are putting out.

Those who outsource their content should also take note and consider these changes when assigning work.

I read a forum post once where the OP was bemoaning about his writer putting their prices up and then extended it to all quality writers overcharging their clients while excusing the price that his graphic designer charged him. I thought that it was pretty rich for someone whose entire business model is based on the quality of the product and information that they are putting out.

At the end of the day, your content will make you far more money than your flash graphics ever will.

Great conversation Jen – Looking forward to the next post …..

Rach

Awesome, Genesis! I love free-thinkers…and non-echos!

Jennifer

Reveal is Here!!!!

And I think it will answer a LOT of your questions (hint: would having a copy of a Google Rater Training Manual help?)

Here is the new post: How Google Makes Algo Changes.

Hope it helps!

And thanks for the inspiration!

Jennifer

That sounds interesting. I use an alternative to Google Analytics and when I see visitors from Mountain View, they’re from the domain googlebot.com or (too clever by half) 1e100.net. However, these visitors hail not only from Mountain View, but apparently also Vietnam, several APO locations in Europe, and several other locations around the world. If this info is accurate, I guess they must outsource the review process, which isn’t surprising. Do you see this, too? Bottom line: if someone in Hanoi is reviewing my site, I’m not reassured.
As far as the Webmaster guidelines go, I do think there are probably some hidden nuggets in the list. For example – and this assumes that the list is genuine in the sense that the factors listed actually contribute to G’s algorithm – how can I make a health-related site appear more trustworthy to Google? Assuming it’s a piece of software that evaluates my site, I probably at least need a medical disclaimer that the bot can find and identify. Linking out to authority sites like the CDC or NIH might also generate “confidence” – and these kinds of links are something an algorithm can be programmed to recognize. So, at least as far as these guidelines go, I think we need to answer them in a way that’s meaningful to a bot first, and not necessarily a human. Although I have a couple of health-related sites, these are things I hadn’t really considered before reading your post, so you did get me thinking!
Hope the direction is right. Looking forward to the reveal…