Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Have Been De-googled

studiobriefing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 82 posts

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#51

Post by mcantor »

ThinkWriteMute wrote: post #36
aditya wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which begs the question as to why this is on imdb at all? Is imdb syndicating their "film news"?

Raises the question. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question#Modern_usa... ) Though I guess I should give up at this point.

Never give up.

Never surrender!

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#52

Post by meatbag »

Readmore wrote: post #28

I had the same sort of thing happen to my blog. Google refused to show my ads due to 'landing page or ad quality' but I couldn't ever determine what the problem was or get anyone to review the site after that. If Google has an achilles heel it's definitely lack of customer service.

Google is not required to provide customer service. If "SEO" is important to you, I recommend rereading Google's terms of service and landing page quality guidelines. Google Webmaster Tools is the best way to get feedback on your particular site, though I don't recommend using it on every site in your network.

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#53

Post by billswift »

meatbag wrote: post #41
zachware wrote: post #27

Have they checked website optimizer? Google isn't a call me and let's talk about it company. It has very efficient and streamlined tools to help people figure out what is wrong. There's a good chance there is an indexing problem that could easily be rectified if they just check webmaster tools. (PS. Ditto on the misleading URL)

I can't comment on "efficient" or "streamlined" but I would echo this recommendation to at least create a Google Webmaster Tools account before complaining to the Internet at large.

If Google won't let them open any new accounts, CAN they still open a Google Webmaster Tools account?

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#54

Post by Semiapies »

swombat wrote: post #25

Move along, nothing to see. Flagged this, as it's non-news... "crappy spammy-looking site gets delisted from Google". The only notable aspect of this is that somehow IMDb is syndicating this trash.

It's of interest to me mostly because of all the people here rushing to defend a spam site.

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#55

Post by meatbag »

Semiapies wrote: post #50
aresant wrote: post #18

Caution, monopoly at work.

Every time I see both a complaint about Google's ad policies and learn any facts about the case beyond whiny blog posts, it somehow turns out that the complainer broke the rules of the agreement - and often quite flagrantly. This case certainly doesn't break the trend. As a web-geek, am I supposed to feel bad that someone failed to game the system?

Strongly agree with this comment. The "wounded indignation" tone is very familiar to me, as the online SEO community is full of these stories which don't seem to go anywhere and which hamper real discussion. Reminds me of alcoholics who are deep in denial - "I don't have a problem, you should have ducked when I threw that TV at you!"

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#56

Post by jrockway »

jules wrote: post #42
idlewords wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://begthequestion.info/

It's easier to change what the minority thinks it means than what the majority thinks it means.

No it's not. The majority arrived at its conclusion by coincidence. The minority arrived at its conclusion by research and thinking. It is much easier to convince the majority, as the minority is not going to be receptive to your argument.

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#58

Post by billswift »

tjogin wrote: post #38
TheSOB88 wrote: post #37

Probably, someone with money contacted Google and asked them to do it. StudioBriefing did news articles about the entertainment industry, so it probably had pissed off some company or other high-rolling entity.

What is "probable" about that theory?

It's "probable" in his mind because it's his theory.

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#59

Post by kprobst »

meatbag wrote: post #52
Readmore wrote: post #28

I had the same sort of thing happen to my blog. Google refused to show my ads due to 'landing page or ad quality' but I couldn't ever determine what the problem was or get anyone to review the site after that. If Google has an achilles heel it's definitely lack of customer service.

Google is not required to provide customer service. If "SEO" is important to you, I recommend rereading Google's terms of service and landing page quality guidelines. Google Webmaster Tools is the best way to get feedback on your particular site, though I don't recommend using it on every site in your network.

Yeah, I'll just take my business elsewhere... oh wait.

Re: We Have Been De-googled

#60

Post by meatbag »

billswift wrote: post #53
meatbag wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't comment on "efficient" or "streamlined" but I would echo this recommendation to at least create a Google Webmaster Tools account before complaining to the Internet at large.

If Google won't let them open any new accounts, CAN they still open a Google Webmaster Tools account?

Consultants sometimes provide a Google Webmaster Tools verification file to the site owner in question. Once the site owner uploads this to the site's root directory, the consultant will be able to access Google Webmaster Tools data on the site through their own Google account. However I've never tried this with a banned site- It is certainly possible that Google will see the domain name and refuse to show any data. Also if the site has been banned for a period of time which is longer than Google's expiration date for stored data (I forget what the time increment is... 1yr? 6 mo.s?) there might be no data to speak of. This is still ok; assuming Google makes GWT available to banned sites, all we would be looking for is a reasonable description of the problem above and beyond "we banned you for some cryptic reason".
Post reply on HN