Archive for the ‘Google’ Category

Google Rolls out New Ad Placement At the Bottom of Search Results

November 11th, 2011

Location, location, location. After many months of test marketing, Google has decided that AdWords, their main advertising and revenue product, would benefit from placing ads in a new location on the search engine results page: at the bottom, just below the organic search results.google-ads

Up until this recent change, AdWords ads were always featured at the top and/or right-hand side of the organic search results. Frequent Google searchers always knew that the official results for their search were sandwiched between under the top ads on the left.

If you were apprehensive about clicking on a sponsored ad, you knew that anything to the left and at the bottom was an organic search result. At this point, it doesn’t take a genius advertising placement engineer to figure out that people are going to gravitate to the bottom of the organic search results with their clicks. Google is placing ads exactly where the clicks are headed.

In response to the recent change, the Google AdWords support team commented that the new ads at the bottom of the search engine results page “fit better into the user’s flow as they scan the page from top to bottom.” They also acknowledged that ads will show either at the right side or at the bottom but not both. That’s a relief. Some might think that top ads, side ads, maps, images, related searches, and now bottom ads, are making the world’s most popular search engine regress to the likes of a 2005 ASK Jeeves results page (yikes!).

So Google says that that the new ad placement change stems from a user experience design need? Yeah, perhaps. Could it also be motivated by money? Yes. It is absolutely motivated by money. Google knows that they don’t get paid until AdWords ads get their clicks. Now, before you fly off the handle, remember that this is a win-win scenario. Site owners want traffic and shoppers directed to their site (which are, in turn, converted into buyers). Consequently, Google wants to put as many interested shoppers in touch with sites that may service their needs because it’s good business all around. If Google thinks that they can supply advertisers with more clicks and put more revenues in their pocket by placing ads somewhere else on the page – they’ll do it. And even though average people (especially business owners) are typically resistant to change, it’s really quite beneficial for us all. But there are some complexities.

Google’s official line is that the bottom currently performs better than the right hand side – but they’re not eliminating all right-hand side ads, merely opening new areas for ad placement. Some might say that the growing need for more advertising placement (and revenues) has Google fitting ad products into every nook and cranny. This may not be the case. If the new ad placement does indeed stem from research that shows that some ads will perform better at the bottom of the organic search results, then Google has made a business case for the change. In the long-run, if it’s beneficial, great. But if click-through rates (CTR) begin to drop for ads that previously offered a reliable source of website traffic, there’s going to be a lot of distressed hand-wringing going on in the back offices of small businesses everywhere.

Furthermore, competition may increase to insure bids are set to rank on the top of the page and not the bottom. Perhaps, this is additional incentive for Google’s change.

A few things are certain: in the AdWords game, there is an awful lot of data and detail to monitor. For most business or site owners, the additional effort comes at a time when the small business economy begs attention from their every waking moment. More placements mean more challenges and more monitoring to ensure your return on investment. The online marketing team at Sweet Spot Marketing has already taken steps to ensure that the Google ad placement change does not adversely affect our client results.

Google Goes Live with Fresh Algorithm Change

November 7th, 2011

Once again, the developers at Google have opened their toolboxes and made a few fixes to the world’s most reliable search engine.

The changes to the Google ranking algorithm were made live yesterday morning. Did you hear it? When the news broke, there was an almost-perceptible hush as silence descended on cubicles in offices across the globe – followed by a calamitous rattle as millions of cans of RedBull clattered to the desktops. Propelled to action by the notion of a change in the almighty algorithm, SEOs and Web Marketers across the planet dropped whatever they were doing and began furiously typing in search strings to see the search results.

The results were fast and fresh. So, why the alarm? Well, outside of the notion that Google had tweaked their algorithm to index, crawl and return results faster, developers from HQ in Mountain View, California also stated that the improvements to the ranking algorithm impacted roughly 35% of all searches. Again, that’s 35%, people – a larger percentage than the Panda update which only impacted 12% of conducted searches. The concern, as you may imagine, was that a whole bunch of search results just lost their expected placement. This is a good thing.   

google-fresh-algorithm

The present change to the ranking algorithm supplements and supports the Caffeine web indexing update that was completed by Google in June of last year. The Caffeine indexing system was built in response to the changes in available content on the web. The developers at Google (and just about everyone else who spends a little time on the web each day) know that content on the web is both thriving and growing at an alarming rate. More content means more complexity. More content also means greater expectations from content producers and searchers alike. Google built Caffeine to index pages on an enormous scale, adding new information to the database at a rate of hundreds of thousands of gigabytes each day. Then they added in the freshness factor.

The primary term that Google has created over this new algorithm change is freshness. By this term, Google developers are expecting the algorithm to determine when to give searchers more up-to-date, relevant results for varying degrees of information freshness. Simply put: given the absurd rate at which information moves and changes, different search types must have different freshness requirements – if the search results intend to give the searcher up-to-the-minute information.

Examples:

  1. Under the new update, a search for information about a recent news event, such as the “Occupy Wall Street” protest, may return pages with information only a few minutes old.
  2. A search for a regularly-occurring event, such as the World Series, would prompt search results for the most-recent World Series (Cardinals over the Rangers in Game 7) and not some historical game.
  3. Those searches for information that receives frequent updates, such as consumer product reviews on laptop computers, assume that the searcher probably wants the most up-to-date information on the brand and not something written three years ago for a product that is no longer manufactured.
  4. On the other hand, we did find a 2006 Matt Cutts blog post ranking #1 for “URL canonicalization“. This content ranks above 2009 content from SEOmoz, and 2010 content from Vertical Measures.

I think we can conclude that Google has favored freshness for sometime, but not discounted all old content completely. Links, comments, social signals, and general URL trust/freshness are other indicators that your content should still rank. This will keep some old content rankings strongly, as we found in example four above.
Was it a good update to the algorithm? Did the world as we know it change dramatically?

Somewhat, yes.

The freshness factor has already been shown to impact one out of every three searches (hence the 35%). Some experts have suggested that the freshness factor may open search results to new problems with relevancy, search engine poisoning and junk content. In order for the changes to work as the developers wish, Google may have to leverage a few other search ranking factors as future tweaks to the freshness update.

SMX East 2011 Recap Pt 2 – Personalized Search and Data Consistency

October 3rd, 2011

This is Part 2 of the Search Marketing Expo East 2011 wrap-up.

The Search Marketing Expo in New York, also known as SMX East, concluded September 15th after three days of speakers and programs. Produced by Search Engine Land, SMX East was an awesome educational and networking experience for hundreds search marketers, techs and business professionals from all over the globe.

In the first part of our SMX East wrap-up, we covered Google +1 and Search Rankings and how Microformats are changing the way that content is found. In this installment, we’ll cover two other important takeaways from the programming.

3. In the Google Personalization & Robot Gatekeepers keynote address, “If personalized search is here, are keyword rankings dead?” was the question addressed by Eli Pariser, Board President of MoveOn.org and author of The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You.

Personalization may be the greatest achievement or greatest downfall of the web. Think about it in this perspective: Total personalization – that is, a web that is tailored to your interests, associations and activities – is no longer service-specific. It’s a buyer’s market vs. a seller’s market. When personalization factors alter or impact what you see on the web, then the web will show you what it thinks you want to see, not the information world as it actually exists.

Is this evil? Not necessarily. Although some attendees were wide-eyed at the thought, some skeptical, Eli explained it in simple terms: “Google most likely doesn’t have malicious intentions with personalization. Google is trying to make the web experience a little more passive, give you a better user experience.”

Okay, that’s an understandable approach to their personalization effort. But we all hope that Google understands that they don’t really know who we are. Google only thinks it knows who we are, based on our actions, our preferences and the content we regularly consume.

One of the additional problems with a wholly-personalized web experience is that a significant portion of the web-searching market may not know when the results are being personalized and when they are free of filters and solely native to the keywords in their search terms. Of course, the other glaring problem is that personalization may pose a great filter barrier for those SEOs and site owners that rely on keyword rankings and a level playing field to get their message out to the broadest market.

One last note from Eli, a well-stated suggestion for the powers that be at Google: “It would make it easier if we (the users) were able to understand the filters, able to turn them on or off, rather than having them imposed on us.”

A large part of this keynote was pulled from his Beware of Online Filter Bubbles TED talk. If you have not watched it yet, it is highly recommended.

4. “On local search, Data Consistency is key,” said Mike Ramsasy, one of the speakers at the Hard Core Local SEO Tactics panel.

Some would say that data consistency is a mantra that has been chanted to death. Not true. Now, more than ever, data consistency is crucial to local search rankings. Ramsay kicked off the discussion by claiming that “correlation does not equal causation. You cannot cause your page to rank by merely claiming your Place Page.”

Ramsay is correct. Any first-year statistician knows that correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other. Ramsay goes on to say “build out your Place Pages with purpose. Own your data and fill out everything accurately.”

Some of the “most recommended” Place Page factors to focus on include the following:

  • Consistent NAP (name, address and phone) data
  • A manually-owner-verified Google Place Page
  • Proper category associations for your business products or services
  • Local area code on Place Page

Each of those recommendations suggests that you work to eliminate data confusion. For those who may not know, your Google business listing is commonly known as a Place Page. As a business owner, you can verify your business, add content to your listing, just make certain that your business name, address and phone number is consistent everywhere. A great tool to see if you have good verification metrics is GetListed.org. This tool can quickly check Google, Yahoo, Bing, Facebook, YELP, Best of the WEb and hotfrog.com.

The reason for all this consistency is this: Ramsay and the other speakers have rightly suggested that “citation” is a ranking factor of highest importance. A citation is where your business name and address is mentioned on another website. These citations can come from directories, blogs, articles, or merely appear on other sites for whatever the reason. Citations do correlate highly with rankings. A citation is founded on data you can control and make consistent.

One easy way to verify data consistency is to search for “address” and/or “phone number” and check the results several pages deep.  Name, Address, Phone = NAP. And NAP creates your citation. Build out pages to reinforce your data and consistency. Easy. Worthwhile.