Matt Cutts of Google Using a Big Stick to Teach an Important Lesson about Traffic Diversity

by 92 replies
123


If you do, you are bound to miss some important pieces of information.



On Jan 21st, Matt Cutts of Google announced a new round of high profile algorithm changes around the next bend. He announced changes to Google's Search Algorithms to combat search engine spam and changes that were coming soon.

Of course, those who reported this news tended to only focus on one small part of the overall announcement where Cutts said Google was "evaluating": " 'Content Farms,' which are sites with spammy, shallow or low-quality content."

Earlier today, I reported the items left out of most news stories, in a post in the SEO Forum.



Surprisingly, on Friday Jan 28th, Cutts announced that the Content Farm Algorithm had been made live the previous day -- one week after announcing that Google would be evaluating what could be done about Content Farms.

He stated that these changes would only affect 2% of all Google search queries, but fewer than 0.5% of changes would be obvious to Google's users.



On the same day, in a story at Search Engine Roundtable, Barry Schwartz reported on the fallout from this latest Google Algorithm change: "Confirmed: Google's Content Farm Algorithm Live! Sites Are Dropping!"

Authority websites that have always done things by the "book" for years, are dropping like flies!! LOL

Schwartz reported that "Webmasters who have had stable rankings in Google and stable traffic from Google for years" are reporting 40-60% drops in traffic.

Those most painfully affected by Google's Content Farm Algorithm Change are webmasters who are suggesting that they "have unique and useful content on their site!"



To understand how this has come to pass, one must understand how Google defines "Content Farms". Simply put, "Content Farms" are websites that create content.

In his Jan 21st announcement, Matt Cutts said, "".

Of course, anyone who follows my posts here at the Warrior Forum should not be surprised. In Dec 2010, I reported a rumor about the anticipated launch of Google's new "Unique Content Penalty". Others in that thread were also able to confirm an anticipated Jan 2011 roll-out of this new Google penalty.



So, it would seem that the rumor I reported in December had some legs to it after all... The Unique Content Penalty, also known as the Original Content Penalty, seems to have been implemented along with the Content Farm Algorithm Change.

It seems that Google really is targeting Content Farms -- those websites that create "Unique and Original Content"!!!

Remember how Matt Cutts said that the Content Farm Algorithm Change would only affect 2% of all Google search queries?

When you stop to realize that 98% of all online content is unoriginal, rehashed content, then the 2% number takes on a whole new meaning, doesn't it?





Matt Cutts and Google have made a statement this month that they are tired of those Internet Marketers who try to manipulate Google's search engine results to get better rankings!!

While Cutts and company may have not come right out and said it, in effect, Google has shown us in a very bold way that Internet Marketers should seek traffic from more sources than just Google...

So long as we try to play to the whims of Google, at any time it suits them to do so, Google will change their search algorithms and deal webmasters a 40%-60% drop in traffic... Even if the webmaster has done his best to follow Google's webmaster guidelines...



The Lesson to be learned from this past month?

What is your opinion about these new developments?
#search engine optimization #algorithm #big #content farms #cutts #diversity #google #important #lesson #matt #matt cutts #stick #teach #traffic #unique content
  • What is my opinion?

    That I need to be ramping up my Facebook and Forum Marketing for my niches/sites to start driving the traffic I know they are capable of but have been lazily relying on Google for my bread and butter.

    Guess its times to dust off some reports and get my strategy re-implemented.
  • great post. Never put your eggs in one basket, that is like the first rule of IM and investing also.

    Thanks for the timely post!!!
  • interesting post.. thanks.

    i guess this posts sort of says... have a plan B!
  • You think you're so clever don't you :p
    • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
  • Very true and an amazing post. One of the best I have seen here in my short time here.

    I agree 100%, diversify your traffic. Think of traffic like you do internet marketing. If there is one niche that has a lot of money in it, but very competitive, it doesn't mean to give up on it, but you should also get into other niches. Why not treat the search engines like that? Plenty of searches are done in yahoo and bing. In fact I get about 20% of my visitors through bing!
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • So last year, unique content was king. Now, lots of unique content will get you dropped from the SERP like a hot rock?????

    WTF. I am throughly confused. What the hell am I supposed to put on my site then? I guess PLR is all that is left.
  • Grabbing the popcorn. It's gonna get good.

    At least my signature ranks #5 in google. WF got juice.
    • [1] reply
    • Try logging out of Google, and then searching.

      If the results are the same, go to a buddy's house and try.

      I am not seeing you in the first 10 pages for your keyword.



  • You will not get me again Mr Platt, Having said that I read it knowing where you have placed your tongue (in cheek) while writing it, and I still want to believe it is true, Brilliant writing as usual.
  • Hey Bill,
    I'm not an SEO expert and am not claiming to be one here. My comments are more questions than answers.

    I preface everything I say about Google with the idea that Google's main objective is to return relevant, high quality pages to it's users. If Google fails to do that, the money machines--AdWords and AdSense crumble. Google has to be able to look at a page and be able to determine its meaning in order to align the AdWords and AnSense ads it delivers effectively to the pages and the searches done for those pages.

    My take, and I'm asking for clarification on this, on content farms is that they create massive amounts of content, but not all of it good. What I see Google doing is trying to better judge pages insofar as how well they align with the information searchers are looking for when they search.

    My perception is that Google is not looking to penalize original content, but to better separate it from content that is spammier and less useful to the people searching for information. It seems to me they are trying to reward content that is original, informative, and free from scrapped, stolen and spun low-octane material associated with "farm cultivated" text.

    It seems to me that creators of informative, original content would benefit from their changes, not be penalized by them.

    Again, I am no expert in the SEO arena, so I'm really asking you--what do you think the reasoning behind the algorithm change really is? Help me understand the whole thing better! --Mike
    • [ 2 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies

    • Hey Mike. Great to see you.

      To understand the Unique Content Penalty / Original Content Penalty, you really should read the post I made about it in December:
      http://www.warriorforum.com/off-topi...e-penalty.html

      After you take a look at that thread and the first few responses, it will all begin to make more sense to you. Seriously...




      I am an expert in SEO, but I am also expert in myth making.

      This thread is as much about human nature as it is about SEO.

      If you read the story from the Search Engine Roundtable, all of the quotes I used are accurate, but without the qualifiers given in the original story.

      Barry Schwartz is a smart guy. He is definitely worth reading.

      It is just like he said in the original story, "They mostly all claim they have unique and useful content on their site, but as you know, with any Google change, there are always examples of collateral damage. "

      No new algorithm change is ever implemented without some "unintended consequences".

      Google is not deliberately penalizing "original content", but "low-quality content".

      We all know that their intended target is low-quality, spammy content -- the kind that $5 writers and article spinners spit out every day. When Google was talking about "Content Farms", they were talking about websites whose stated goal is to sell cheap content to other webmasters to help them spam Google's search index.

      Google will be making alterations to their new algorithm over the coming weeks to enable the latest set of changes to have the intended outcome, instead of what it is currently doing. They will be looking to repair the algorithm to continue to penalize the crappy content they were targeting, and to restore the credibility of those websites that are credible.

      The Original Post documents facts from beginning to end, except in its conclusions about Google's intent.

      However, its final point about "not relying on Google" and "getting traffic from a variety of sources" are legitimate recommendations for any person serious about doing business online.

      If anyone relies solely on Google for traffic, they are always ONE algorithm change away from complete business failure.

      This post like many of my posts is written for two audiences:

      * Those who read what I write will get a more accurate understanding of the message.

      * Those who skim the bold and underlines will get a totally different, overly negative perception of the matter.

      While the powers-that-be at Google might read this thread, they are not going to debunk it. They won't debunk it, because anyone who follows the advice in it, will be helping themselves by pursuing traffic from many sources, AND they will be helping Google by creating less Internet pollution -- or as Google likes to call it, webspam.

      Those who skimmed this post, after being told not to do so, will leave this thread with a state of mind that will enable them to improve their business, even if they didn't understand the big picture.
      • [ 3 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
    • To my mind, Mike is writing a much more easy-to-run with post here. There is NO logical sense in Google "dumbing down" results.

      I am wondering whether I have got hold of the right end of the proverbial stick here. When I first read about "Google cracking down on content farms", I had thought that Google was REWARDING unique content as opposed to, for instance, sites with neat PLR (ie unchanged, published elsewhere), or "ReviewAzon sites" (rehashed from Amazon, again verbatim). That made sense to me - content might be well SELECTED, but NOT unique.

      Now what has been written in this string has confused the heck out of me! Surely Google is NOT going to penalise unique fresh content?
      • [1] reply
  • This is not difficult people. You can't have original content. You can't have unique content. You can't have duplicate content. You can't have have low quality content. You can't have scraped content.

    Don't you see?

    Google is just trying to confuse the executives over at Bing.
    • [ 14 ] Thanks
    • [4] replies
    • Now I understand :confused: :confused: :confused:.
    • Dennis, Looks like blind sales copy...
      • [1] reply
    • Yep. I've been putting up blank websites and they're all grabbing number one positions. Soon, when you use Google you'll come up with nothing but blank websites. That will get rid of information overload.
      • [ 5 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply

    • So in other words put up a blank site about nothing except a buy now button and some keywords.
  • Hey Bill,

    Just to make sure I get the highest rankings. Which of your blogs should I be scraping and spinning the content from?

    If I read all that content you referred us to properly it seems like the perfect answer. It puts us right in the middle of unique, scraped, and duplicate content so the Google Algorithm will have no idea what to do with my site. Should result in #1 rankings....right?



    Barry
    • [2] replies
    • Barry,

      The idea ia to not put your eggs in one basket.

      Have a nice mix.

      Some unique sites, some PLR, some scraped, some duplicate, some keyword stuffed, some legal, some illegal etc. I've just been making a 500 page site with exactly the same content on every page, Indexed yesterday, #1 for all my keywords this morning.

      Also, start spamming more. I've heard this is going to be favoured soon.

      Aweber I heard were removing the double opt in and will be closing accounts not engaging in spam.

      By the way, you have an Uncle in Nigeria that passed away, he left his Estate with me, can you send me.....

      EDIT. For those with a sense of humour bypass this, this post is an attempt at humour, it is sarcasm. Good grief.
      • [2] replies

    • Barry: Anything of mine is scrape-worthy. And you will be in good company, when you scrape it, take it, and spin it. All of those people at the top of the search engines are already doing it... And I am sure they will be flattered that you have the same taste in content that they do.
  • More popcorn please. My funny bone has been tickled.
    • [1] reply
    • The humour is so much in the comments.

      My popcorns all over the floor now and I've coffee coming out of my nose.
  • I meant the venomous fumes song quote, not my little test link. A WF thread pops up at #5 for it.

    That little quote test does kinda kill a lot of duplicate / syndicated content myths. I added that little quote last night and it hit #5 pretty quickly despite all of the other preexisting sites with the exact same quote. Lesson learned, authority of site means everything when ranking duplicate / syndicated content.

    While the results for the PLR link were non-existent, no test is ever a failure.

    I did learn that a WF backlink alone isn't enough to get an empty, slightly SEO'd site on the map for a competitive keyword. I need to repeat the test with a less competitive keyword to see how that does. I wanted to see how much weight and authority 1,000+ signature backlinks from WF has.

    I've neglected moving on to Step 2 which is adding some text content to the site to see what difference, if any, that makes.

    After that, Step 3 is to add a couple of additional backlinks via commenting at a couple of power blogs.

    So, it's a slow, step by step test to see what makes google happy from a backlinking perspective for a brand new site.

    The only problem is these tests take so long to do correctly. It's would be much faster to just blast away with backlinks from various sources which I know works but I want to narrow down not only what works but what works more efficiently.

    The science and mad methodology behind the sock puppets schenanigans.
  • My original content has been nudged up a lot of its searches in the past week, so I'm happy.

    But, but, one of my content farms is also up and away.

    So its another load of google-bobbins.
  • Well...since content on the internet is ever increasing this is only logical. I mean, day by day we get more websites, articles, videos up and running all over the net. Eventually, the offer (sites) will be larger than the demand (users). If search engines don't start filtering the content now, it will eventually become one big mess.
  • My opinion: I will write more articles and post them to Ezines and I will create videos and send them to Youtube. I will probably try forum marketing
  • My Google traffic and rankings are up. I also have original content.
  • Well, if you didn't depend on the search engines for getting traffic it really wouldn't matter what you put on your site. What would matter is that whatever it is (unique, PLR, spun, whatever...) got the visitor to perform the desired action.

    Lee
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Script created! Posting the WSO now!
    Oh, and it also creates blank auto blogs really fast!


    Have a Great Day!
    Michael













  • [DELETED]
  • I heard about this, but is it only for Internet Marketing? Many of the alternative media websites have been complaining that their traffic has dropped too? I'm just curious if anyone knows are they only targeting marketers?
  • Google can suck my right titty. They think they are GOD determining what is what LOL.. about time someone knocked them off their high horse
  • Are you serious this time or this a wind up like last time?

    No, I am not worried in the least about Google's recent changes. They're after autoblogs and scrapers and I don't have any of those, except for a few article directories. My sites have all skyrocketed since the new year and they are all heavily monetized affiliate sites.

    Google has no way of determining mass produced MFA content unless they do a manual review.

    Again, if you know anything about Google's actual algorithm, there is nothing to be worried about. Just don't scrape or autogenerate content and you'll be fine. Article syndication may become less effective as a backlinking method.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply

    • I am serious that the smart folks will seek traffic from many sources.

      Everything else is a wind up like last time....
      • [1] reply
  • [DELETED]
  • The 40-60% drop has nothing to do with the preceding Christmas peak and post Christmas lull?

    For some reason I have always found a link between Google algo changes, whinging, and ecommerce sites.

    I guess there should be a 40% drop in traffic across sites such as:

    Ezinearticles.com Site Info
    About.com Site Info
    Ehow.com Site Info
    ...etc

    The goal should obviously be to have a traffic source that is reasonably secure and predictably, but I'm not going to stop any time soon using content smartly to build that secure traffic source - even if it goes on 'content farms'. Someone has to be on top so it might as well be me.

    Has anyone been directly affected by these latest changes? Do you dare show the rest of us an example of what a bad content farm 'looks like'?

    I have no doubt Google is working hard to cull the auto-generated keyword stuffed rot that appears for certain types of searchers BUT as a user of Google I rarely come across them.

    I wonder when Google is going to turn to a Wiki format with their very own army of user-based moderators protecting the searchers from themselves?
    • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • I saw a 25% surge in traffic the day after the Content Farm Algo was introduced. Then my traffic settled back to normal.

    I am not seeing myself at all hurt by the new changes, and I have seen hints of improvement, but it is still too early to call from my point of view.
  • I'm not sure what the fuss is over.

    After all, internet marketing IS dead. Didn't you get the memo or read the posts?

    I hear clickbank is no longer accepting new affiliates, Allen is closing down the Warrior Forum next week and Google is letting adwords run through the first quarter before it is shut down as well. I also heard a rumor that digital point is switching over to a sports and porn forum.

    It's been a fun ride while it lasted.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
  • Wow, just wow.

    The whole invention of Google was based on making it easier to find information.

    Now this?

    I wish there were cold hard facts behind this info.
    • [1] reply

    • The entire OP (original post) included a wealth of verifiable facts. Click the links and read the cited resources.

      The only part of the entire post that was without merit was the assumptions and leaps of faith that were taken, based on the facts given.




      I am thrilled to hear that I was able to pluck you out of the nether-worlds, even if but for a few minutes.

      Please don't wait so long next time before you come back in to play...

      I am also thrilled to learn that there are others who understand and appreciate posts like these.
  • I'm brand new to this forum, and to internet marketing in general. As such I don't have any expertise to share other than technical advice. Not a big deal really as that fits in well with my general lurking style on forums.

    That said, I can share something in this thread. While new to this forum, even I can tell that the OP was speaking tongue in cheek. In case anyone else is confused, however, I thought I'd provide a little inside information as to what Google's new push is all about. Not super super inside information, just a little inside information.

    The push is for one thing only, and that's Quality. The penalty will be for low quality articles. Contractors who are tasked with rating content for Google are being asked to pay attention to article quality as well as topicality re the query, etc. Poorly written, poorly researched, poorly or non-attributed articles with no information other than typical knowledge have little utility in Google's view and are to be rated accordingly. Duplicate content should as always be rated as having little utility (no change there).

    Going to quietly slink back into the bushes to lurk now.
    • [ 2 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • I'll tell you what I have noticed, at least on my biggest adsense site.
      I am getting super-targeted visitors like I have never got before.
      Which in turn, has actually gotten me much better ads on that site.
      And it's rocking. I don't know if that's coincidence, but it does coincide
      around that date.

      Paul
      • [1] reply
  • I don't see any changes for my auto blogs and other sites. But I'm improving the uniqueness of blogs and create more quality backlinks.
  • I think that's absolutely a good lesson to "take away" from this change...and you can take it one step further by saying, "Diversify your income sources..."

    Google's going to do what they want to do, when they want to do it...so if they are your only source of income, it's going to be a bit bumpy.

    All the best,
    Jack Duncan
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • When my website started to take off 65% of the traffic came from Google. Thirty five years of offline business experience taught me this is not healthy so I resolved to reduce my exposure to Google. Now, a few years later, Google accounts for around 43% of total traffic. This is still too high but I imagine over time I'll keep discovering ways to increase market share without Google's help.
    • [1] reply

    • You should not try to block Google, but rather seek traffic from outside of Google.

      My main website gets nearly 4k visitors per month from Google, but that is only 35% of my traffic.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [1] reply

    • However, the Barry Schwartz story linked in the original post was talking about authority websites that got hit by the Google hammer, even though they were doing everything right too...
  • Unique content penalty... hilarious.

    Seriously though, I think the problem Google's combating here relates to sites that live exclusively off their domain authority. Particularly sites with UGC. Should eHow really outrank a smaller site that is exclusively devoted to its content area and likely has more expertise? Not really. Domain authority can be a great ranking signal only after a certain initial quality barrier is achieved for the individual piece of content.
    • [1] reply
    • Hi matt was really enjoying your course
      what is this crap ?internet marketing uk
      Programs - Symantec Corp.


      Dont sell snake oil to conuntries that just got rid of snakes

      Ireland will back me up you YOU BETTER BEIELIVE IT!

      Whats your game ?
  • great thread
  • And, as always don't forget Bing.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • Or you can just keep building content farms. 60% drop from a million page views is still profitable lol.
  • Banned
    Just create sites where you act as if the content is the main priority and making money from it second. Not the other way around. Then you wouldn't have to panic everytime you hear of a Google algorithm update.

    If you are in the #1 spot, your site should deserve to be there, or sooner later, Google updates will catch up with you and place your content where it really belongs.
  • Oh really nice technique. thanks you give me a chance to read this. Hope for the same next.
  • [DELETED]
  • [DELETED]
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • [DELETED]
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed