A purported leak of 2,500 pages of internal documentation from Google sheds light on how Search, the most powerful arbiter of the internet, operates.
The leaked documents touch on topics like what kind of data Google collects and uses, which sites Google elevates for sensitive topics like elections, how Google handles small websites, and more. Some information in the documents appears to be in conflict with public statements by Google representatives, according to Fishkin and King.
Rand Fishkin, who worked in SEO for more than a decade, says a source shared 2,500 pages of documents with him with the hopes that reporting on the leak would counter the “lies” that Google employees had shared about how the search algorithm works.
Am I supposed to care that the poor SEO assholes that need to get their ads more visibility weren’t being given all the instructions on how to do that by the search engine?
Most of this article is SEO “experts” complaining that some of the guidelines they were given didn’t match what’s in the internal documents.
Google is shit, but SEO is a cancer too. I can’t be too bothered by Google jacking them around a bit.
And I supposed to care that the poor SEO assholes that need to get their ads more visibility weren’t being given all the instructions on how to do that by the search engine?
No. You’re supposed to care that a company is pointlessly* lying, thus it’s extremely likely to deceive, mislead and lie when it gets some benefit out of it.
In other words: SEO arseholes can ligma, Google is lying to you and me too.
*I say “pointlessly” because not disclosing info would achieve practically the same result as lying.
need to get their ads more visibility
I occasionally encounter the desire for a search engine to surface non-advertisement content :)
Now if they lied to advertisers and told small bloggers, reputable news agencies, fediverse admins, etc. the insider secrets… now we’re talkin’!
Historically, Google had a give-and-take with SEO. You can’t make SEO companies go away, but you can curb the worst behavior. Google used to punish bad behavior with a poor listing, and you had to do some work to get it back into compliance and tell Google it’s fixed up.
It wasn’t ideal, but it functioned well enough.
The drive to make search more profitable over the past few years seems to have meant dropping this. SEO companies can get away with whatever. If they now have the whole manual, game over. Google of a decade ago might have done something about it. Google of today won’t bother.
Edit: If you’re going to downvote me, please take the time to explain why you think I’m wrong. Stop being the hive mind.
Tell me you don’t know shit about SEO without telling me you don’t know shit about SEO.
Just because there are people who do bad things doesn’t mean the industry is bad or have bad intentions. SEO isn’t ads. Advertorials can be a tactic of SEO, but it’s not SEO as a whole. Same with clickbait because it works, and I guarantee you also fall for it constantly.
SEO is about understanding what someone needs and creating an experience to ensure that someone finds the answer to what they need through content and/or a product to solve their needs.
This can be achieved through copywriting, researching search trends and queries, technical analysis of websites and how they render, providing guidance on helpful assets (photos, pdfs, videos, form, copy, etc), PR outreach because links are how people move around online or discover things, social planning because social media are a form of search engines, and more.
And finally, SEOs are not responsible for how Google treats shit. That’s Google who is responsible. Google is the one that tweaks the algorithm and doesn’t catch spammy shit. In fact many SEOs catch it and report it to Google’s reps, but they are the ones who can ensure the right team(s) fix the issue.
Fuck SEOs - that is why you are getting downvoted. Organic content creation has been ruined by you AND google. Own your problems, beg forgiveness, stop playing the stupid game where there are no winners
You’re exactly the person I was talking about - the hive mind. You don’t critically think and you blame an entire industry that has niches and actors of all sorts. You’d probably say all black people are bad because a few on a street did something wrong once.
Please, tell me YOUR industry so I can have fun shitting on it and drawing asinine conclusions.
wait what is “social planning” and how is it different from conventional marketing on social media. That seems pretty far removed from search engines
Great question! Search engines crawl social media and discover links. It can be a sign of trust and authority if it’s shared widely, which can help boost signals of page importance to Google (or other engines) and help with pushing up in organic ranking positions.
Harmonizing brand details (name, address, phone number, website link) across all social platforms is important so you don’t send mixed signals or lead to unneeded redirects.
There’s also figuring out what page(s) you want to ensure are showcased if multiple URL links are allowed or maybe your social team doesn’t know all of the page assets you have to satisfy their audience, such as an orphaned page. These are part of what are called “backlinks”.
Hashtags do matter for some platforms and knowing how to research them for intent is wise.
There’s also open graph (OG) metadata that you can set on a webpage that allows your metadata to be different on social platforms than you would use for a search engine - tailor to your audience!
Edit: one other thing is, while not social media, maybe connecting with a social team (if there is one) to find out if any posts need to be applied to Google Business listings via a Google Post for local locations.
