Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
1–10 of 103 posts
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#2> Add Google authorship information to your online content
I can't find the reference, but I remember reading here on HN that someone investigating a large drop in traffic to pages with #1 organic rankings traced it back to the profile photo that got added to pages with authorship attribution. There didn't seem to be a traffic drop on pages with #2 or #3 etc., so the author came to the conclusion that the profile thumbnail was causing their listing to be mistaken for an ad.
Anyone remember that article?
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#3> Add Google authorship information to your online content I can't find the reference, but I remember reading here on HN that someone investigating a large drop in traffic to pages with #1 organic rankings traced it back to the profile photo that got added to pages with authorship attribution. There didn't seem to be a traffic drop on pages with #2 or #3 etc., so the author came to the conclusion that the profile thu…
I do. I believe the person had the authorship stuff on their product pages. To me it looked like a blog post from the search result but by actually reading the headline you could see that it wasn't.
Here is the article you are referencing: http://www.jitbit.com/news/183-how-google-authorship-decreas...
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#4I think it makes sense that Google +1s is used in high search rankings. It's the one social signal they can audit to see if people are cheating on it. They own the whole Google+ social graph and can easily detect if it's being gamed.
Or it can just be that the more +1's you get, the more links you get, which boosts the rankings. So it may just be an indirect correlation.
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#5I think it makes sense that Google +1s is used in high search rankings. It's the one social signal they can audit to see if people are cheating on it. They own the whole Google+ social graph and can easily detect if it's being gamed. Or it can just be that the more +1's you get, the more links you get, which boosts the rankings. So it may just be an indirect correlation.
No, I don't think so. Humbly, my best articles are the one with less +1s while the ones with relatively high +1s are related to my success or luck promoting them.
Also I don't see a correlation in my blogs between more retweets and more Google's +1s. It is most probable because my blogs don't have many visitors and didn't cross the charm, but I expect search engines like Google to leverage the long tail instead of smashing it.
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#62 things:
1) I think most people suspected this, and it's not amazing.
2) Is this not an abuse of their monopoly position in search? In that, to obtain a better placement or even just retain existing placement, you would have to participate in Google+
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#7This makes sense in areas where Google+ is popular, but in North America Google+ is a empty outside online marketers and tech communities, so how can they possible rely on it as a metric.
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#82 things: 1) I think most people suspected this, and it's not amazing. 2) Is this not an abuse of their monopoly position in search? In that, to obtain a better placement or even just retain existing placement, you would have to participate in Google+
IMHO, no. Its easier for Google to use +1s as an indicator to measure social reach since it is their own data. Contrast this to:
[1] Facebook and LinkedIn: most shares/likes are private by default
[2] Twitter: Google would have crawl Twitter's entire corpus and tweet stream. It could do it, but Twitter's increasingly restricting access to this data.
So it makes sense from a technical perspective that Google can use only the limited information available to it in terms of social strength of an article.
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#9Does this mean I have to put a +1 button on my site if I don't want it to come after all the sites that do have +1 buttons (unless I'm a canonical source like Wikipedia)? If so, it seems like a gross abuse of power on Google's part.
I would imagine Facebook could file an anti-trust suit over this.
Re: Google +1's Correlation with Higher Search Rankings
#102 things: 1) I think most people suspected this, and it's not amazing. 2) Is this not an abuse of their monopoly position in search? In that, to obtain a better placement or even just retain existing placement, you would have to participate in Google+
Do they really have a monopoly in search? Have they bought/created all the patents that stop other companies from implementing online search engines?
I don't think there is a monopoly in search, look we have duckduckgo for instance.
Since it's their search and their google+ why aren't they allowed to use one as metrics for the other?