More Panda 4.0 Findings: Syndication, User Engagement, Index

I should see if Google's SEO Guide in PDF is updated to reflect all of these drastic changes. At one point, I was going to draw up my own guide for those who have difficulty grasping all of it, but I had the idea just when Google started making all of the crazy changes. So, it's a good thing I didn't waste my time. LOL

However, now that Google is morphing into a more refined search engine, I think most of the basic requirements and best practices for appeasing the "Grizzly" bear won't change much, if at all. SEO experts like Glenn are making forward-thinking suggestions that have thus far safeguarded their clients from taking a hit every time Google rolls out another update -- even the drastic ones.

So, maybe I'll get around to that one of these days.

@tiptoptreasures Here's the link to the latest SEO Guide from Google. I know it's the latest because it includes a section on how to optimize for mobile phone users. While you should read the whole thing, scroll down to page 14 and start there where it says, "Offer quality content and services."

Also, having six instances of a word on a page is acceptable as long as your content isn't written in a nonsensical manner and actually provides value to the reader. I read it somewhere on Google's help site a few years ago that you should use a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8 instances of a keyword on a page, including all core elements of the page (ie, title, description, and I believe meta tags as well).

Here's an article on the Entrepreneur site that you might find helpful: How to Seamlessly Include Keywords in Your Web Content. Scroll down to the section titled, "Copywriting Tips: Good Copywriting vs. Keyword Stuffing," where you'll find a great guideline to determine if your descriptions are acceptable and truly serving their purpose.

Just to ease your mind, all of the articles I've been linking to ARE written by SEO experts. LOL Every one of them were written by those who either have their own SEO firm or work for an SEO firm, which specializes in optimizing their clients' websites as well as doing the necessary research and analyzing data to keep up with the constant changes being made to search algorithms. So, you can rest assured that what you're reading is accurate and great advice.

To answer your question about duplicate content, if it has the proper attribution, then Google will know that the content you've used originated elsewhere -- even if you didn't attribute it to the true originating author. During my research today, I came across a statement from a Google team member about how they take it upon themselves to determine who the original author truly is.

So, as long as you're attributing the content to the source you pulled it from (or their source, if noted), then you're okay. By including the rel="canonical" code in the source link's HTML, you're telling the bots you're not the original author, so to look at that linked page to index that content rather than giving your search ranking credit for it.

However, if the page consists mostly of your own original content, then your page will be ranked based on that, no matter what you copied from and attributed to another source. So, be sure to write your own quality content that will rightfully earn you your own top ranking in searches. I wish I could remember where I read that Google guy's statement, but I'm sure it's in one of the articles I linked to today -- or an article linked to within one of those articles.

For an overview of what I've discovered during my research on this topic over the past few days, read my Disappearing from Search Results? Then You Must Read This post. The light bulb illuminating the reasons we've all been having so many problems achieving and maintaining a healthy page rank might finally come on for you -- just like it did for me earlier and inspired me to write about it the moment it switched on. LOL

Yeah, I should have bolded the links so they could be seen easier. About the questions, I think we still have a short list. When I first started putting a list together, I felt there were too many and I didn't want to bombard him. LOL That's why I started researching things myself and I'm so glad I did because I learned a LOT and even had that epiphany about why we've been having all of the problems with dropping out of search results.

Anywho, here's the short list we could present to him and invite him to join our discussion here:

• What if others are copying your content without your permission and not attributing it to you? Can Google still see that yours is the original? If not, is there a code you can add to your own page that would designate it as your original content? I do include a copyright statement in the site's footer.
  
• What if you unknowingly attribute content you've copied to a source that's not the original author? Will Google ding you for that?
• Regarding pages that list your categories and/or describe what's in your categories, do we need to noindex those pages to avoid being penalized by Google?
• How does spam traffic/referer spam affect user engagement and bounce rate metrics?
  

If I missed any, please do let me know. I'll post the questions to his blog tomorrow evening.

We could ask him this right here just to make sure.

Can our boilerplate that is duplicated within each of our own listings on our own site be considered as duplicate content in Google's eyes?

G'night.

Here's an interesting read I got in my email from Nick Stamoulis of Brick Marketing, Google Takes on eBay. Google apparently hit eBay with a manual actual right around the time they rolled out the latest Panda update, which caused them to drop from #6 to #25 on the list of top sites that hold the most search ranking real estate, causing them to lose two-thirds of their real estate.

Note at the end of the article how it mentions that eBay strikes back by significantly reducing its investment in their AdWords campaign. This is why big brands get away with so much poo...money talks. If Google were to hit big brands as hard as they do small businesses with their algorithm updates, they'd lose a lot of money as the big brands would fight dirty to force Google to play favorites.

It sure would be nice if we were all treated equally and that the big brands would play fair instead of throwing their money around like a bunch of children throwing temper tantrums because they didn't get to take somebody else's candy, which they got for being good little children. If they want candy, then they should play nice like the rest of us honest small business owners.

Seeing how eBay reacted like a spoiled child, we really should reconsider who we blame for our problems with search ranking. Google is a publicly-traded business, so they have themselves and investors to protect from big bully businesses like eBay. Hence, the reason big brands usually aren't affected by algorithm updates.

If these big businesses were forced to play fair, then Google could get back to treating us all equally so we'd have an even playing field in search results. Unfortunately, while this screams unfair trade practices, I don't think there's anything the government can do about it.

When you think about it, reducing their investment in AdWords will only hurt their ranking in organic search even more. LOL I think it's just a ploy to see if Google will give in. If they don't, then you can rest assured eBay will go back to using AdWords as usual. So, let's hope Google does stick to its guns.

I would think they would since this was actually a manual action Google took against eBay that didn't have anything to do with the Panda update. So, they must be making an example of eBay to get the message out to the big brands that they need to follow the rules just like everybody else.

As you mentioned, Amazon already gave in to Google and are now paying to play for a presence in Google Shopping. So, let's hope it will be eBay giving in to Google rather than the other way around.