So far their solution seems to be ranking Reddit for every query.
[deleted]
New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
11–20 of 205 posts
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#12[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#13[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#14The acid test: can I find a brownie recipie without any fucking around? ...nope, I still can't.
Never tell a Googler what the metric is.
Cue a flood of aspiring L6 promo packets with detailed numbers on improved brownie recipe ranking.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#15Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#16This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it is also kind of true:
The easiest way for Google to detect spammy, low-quality content is to ... simply add up the number of Google Ads placements on the page.
Those flooding the internet with garbage content are doing so because the verbiage is tightly intermingled with Google Ad placements, that's the business model.
Google -could- go a step further and deactivate those accounts, but that would impact their revenue, so nah.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#17This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it is also kind of true: The easiest way for Google to detect spammy, low-quality content is to ... simply add up the number of Google Ads placements on the page. Those flooding the internet with garbage content are doing so because the verbiage is tightly intermingled with Google Ad placements, that's the business model. Google -could- go a step further and deactivate those account…
In general, I believe Google's ranking system attempts to be hands-off and not hard-code what factors might correlate to good/bad rankings, but I do wonder if they had to put in a special rule to ignore any automatic quality signals related to their own ad system (or competitors!). It would make sense to do this for revenue preservation reasons, but I wonder if they also might have to do it for anti-trust reasons.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#18The acid test: can I find a brownie recipie without any fucking around? ...nope, I still can't.
Just opened incognito window and entered "brownie recipe"... the first link is to "Love and Lemons" site which seems pretty good - there is a pretty small introduction, but then there is ingredients list, steps, etc.. top 5 links all look pretty good to me. (At least in web design area... I have no ideas if recipes themselves are tasty or not) Maybe it's a regional thing (I am in the US)? Or your profile is messed up…
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=brownie+recipe&ia=web
Returned Love and Lemons first too. Never heard of them, but their SEO must be amazing.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#19This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it is also kind of true: The easiest way for Google to detect spammy, low-quality content is to ... simply add up the number of Google Ads placements on the page. Those flooding the internet with garbage content are doing so because the verbiage is tightly intermingled with Google Ad placements, that's the business model. Google -could- go a step further and deactivate those account…
In general, I believe Google's ranking system attempts to be hands-off and not hard-code what factors might correlate to good/bad rankings, but I do wonder if they had to put in a special rule to ignore any automatic quality signals related to their own ad system (or competitors!). It would make sense to do this for revenue preservation reasons, but I wonder if they also might have to do it for anti-trust reasons.
While we're just shooting the breeze, there is still something to what you're saying here.
It's a long held complaint that Google's ad/analytics/tracking scripts slow down page load/page render times.
It's also long held that Google prioritise speed in rankings.
My guess is that they'd be excluding their own scripts and ad load times as part of that page load calculation, even though that is not a genuine result and would down-rank pages that utilise competitor ad platforms.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#20The acid test: can I find a brownie recipie without any fucking around? ...nope, I still can't.
My go to site for baking recipes is Smitten Kitchen.
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Asmittenkitchen....
I realize adding `site:...` is probably fucking around. But trust me, her brownie recipes are worth it. :-)