Google - Big Changes - Stemming

[rmjvol]

There seems to be several significant changes going on at Google. One that they've admitted to is their new use of word stemming (http://www.google.com/help/basics.html) .

Word stemming is used by SE's to return results for words based upon a particular stem. For example, a search for the word "cooker" might potentially return results with cooker, cook, cooking, cooks, cookbook... Previously, Google did *not* do this. A search for cooker would only return pages that either had that exact word on the page or in anchor text pointing at the page.

This is a *big* change. But I wouldn't call it a fundamental change.

Expect some fundamental changes to show up soon.

Google seems to be trying to make it *much* more difficult to rank well on what webmaster wants to rank well on. They want sites to rank well on what they think your site's about. The problem is they don't always get it right.

Ross

[gngweb]

The problem is they don't always get it right.

No, the problem is that people want to fool Google. If there weren't people messing around with the algorithms, Google could focus on other things.

Assume that there are, say 100,000 words in the english language that are "interesting" search terms. Everyone on the web wants their site to show up in the top 20 searches. That means that there are 2,000,000 top-20 spots ... and there are several billion web pages.

I strongly suspect that there are well over 2,000,000 "optimized" pages, so no matter which way you look at it some people are going to say that any changes Google makes.

It just so happens that in this latest round of changes have penalized many optimized pages.

But when you stand back and think about the problem, should an optimized page truly rank higher than an non-optimized page?

Why? What makes an optimized page any more of an authority on the subject in question than whatever it is that Google returns excluding optimization?

[rmjvol]

No, the problem is that people want to fool Google.Absolutely agree that some people want to fool Google.

Attempts to trick Search Engines have been around since before Google was a college paper. Google's rise coincided with Alta Vista's inability to effectively filter out tricks and provide relevant results. Yahoo's selection of Google to provide its SE results was a big factor but it all revolved around Google being good at providing relevant results.

What I take issue with is your implication that any optimization is an attempt to fool the SE's. Unless you've got a warped definition of "fool" (to deceive - To cause to believe what is not true; mislead.), to lump all optimization efforts into the pile with "tricks to fool the SE's" is just wrong.

Optimization for search engines can take many forms. It can be as simple as making sure to use the words that searchers are likely to type into Google. Or it could be replacing a simple title tag of "Company Name, Inc." with a more informative "Company Name, Inc. - Web Hosting." (http://hostingmatters.com/web_hosting.html) That's good for both surfers and the SE's.

Sure, some people try to use it to have a p0rn site come up when you search for Denver web design (http://www.google.com/search?num=10&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=denver+web+design&btnG=Google+Search). BTW, check out how relevant the #4 listing is. Not an adult site, but I'll agree that's one of the guys with black hats at work (well, maybe dark grey). But deceptions like that are the exceptions, not the rule, with regards to SEO.

Check Google's suggested definition (http://www.google.com/search?q=seo+definition&btnG=Google+Search&num=50&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8) for SEO. ...the process of making a site and its content highly relevant for both search engines and searchers. Successful search marketing helps a site gain top positioning for relevant words and phrases. I don't see anything in there that says you need to fool anybody. I see a win-win-win for webmasters, searchers & the SE's. Webmaster creates highly relevant content, optimized content, Google ranks it highly, searcher finds highly relevant content. Who's not happy? Probably only the webmaster that has another relevant site that didn't take the time/money to understand the way SE's work.

Are you implying that a site that sells authentic Australian boomerangs is fooling somebody if it makes an effort to rank well on a search for authentic Australian boomerangs (http://www.google.com/search?num=10&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=authentic+Australian+boomerangs&btnG=Google+Search)? That's just not logical.

Let's say you've got a web design prospect asking for a sample of your work. You know their favorite color is purple. So the 2 layout options you offer them both have purple in them. Did you just trick them? Fool them? No, you took into consideration what you know to be their preference.

That's optimization.

To get a page ranked highly for a search phrase, let's say I know that Google likes to see 1) the exact phrase in the title tag, 2) the exact phrase a couple times in text in the body, and 3) the exact phrase in anchor text linking to the page. If I sell web hosting, am I tricking Google if I use the phrase web hosting in my title, mention my web hosting services in the page content and also have my sitemap anchor text be Web Hosting Services instead of using "http://hostingmatters.com/web_hosting.html" as the anchor text?

That's optimization.

A new client approaches me because a search on Google for their name, Trans Healthcare, doesn't have them show up in the top 100 results. What underhanded tricks should I suggest, you ask.

Me: "Your site is built entirely in Flash which Google essentially doesn't read. And you have no links pointing to your site. Build a non-flash version for Google and I'll add a link from one of my sites to you."

Them: "Ross, that's simply diabolical. I love doing sneaky things like that!"

Me: "No, that's not diabolical, that's optimization. That'll be four million dollars." ;)

It just so happens that in this latest round of changes have penalized many optimized pages.And alot of non optimized pages got penalized. And a lot of pages that were lightly optimized and tried to follow the rules (http://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html) got penalized. And a lot of sneaky, underhandedly optimized pages are still doing fine. That's why I said Google doesn't always get it right.

The BIG winners in the latest round of Google fluctuations have been Amazon, ebay & other LARGE players. Perhaps the biggest winner has been Google itself. Many, many small businesses have found success in competing against the WalMart & BestBuy down the street by working harder and smarter on the web. Their efforts at web promotion have kept some of them in business. The radical changes have hit them the hardest at the worst time of the year. Many online retailers do the bulk of their annual sales right now, during the holiday season. Many will have to spend $$ with Google's advertising to try to recover the relevant traffic that has been lost. Google's revenue goes up. Hmmm, revenue going up nicely just before an expected IPO (http://news.com.com/2030-1069-5112098.html). Wonder how that will affect the finances of those that tweak the algorithms...

In a rose colored world where Google has no motive other than to provide the most relevant results, we can depend upon getting those most relevant results only if Google can comprehend (not just recognize) the topic, authority and relevancy of a page or site in relation to the desire of the searcher. They simply can't do that yet. That's why they sometimes get it wrong. That's why I'll continue to help my clients to help Google to help searchers.

One final thought. There are quite a few people that think SEO's provide a valuable service. From small business owners looking to keep their doors open in the face of stiff (sometimes unfair) competition, to Fortune 100 companies that know where the best ROI can be found. There's even a couple guys that said:Many SEOs provide useful services for website owners...You can read the rest of the thoughts of Larry & Sergey (http://www.google.com/webmasters/seo.html) regarding preople who do optimzation at their little website.

Ross, Diabolical SE Manipulator

[gngweb]

What I take issue with is your implication that any optimization is an attempt to fool the SE's.


Whoa, whoa, whoa....

I make no such implication. There is nothing wrong with the enhancements that you point out (the ones that Google themselves post).

I do say that there is a problem with over optimization...for if there isn't a problem why would Google bother messing with the algorithm?

To say that a search engine is "doesn't always get it right" is to say that there is a "right".

This implies that there is a set of rules that are not being correctly followed by Google.

There are no published rules (at least not by Google). Those that do get published are subject to change. And the reasons for the changes are because there is a problem (see above).

I've worked the search-engine side of the problem. We didn't want to mess with our algorithms...we had more than enough work to do keeping our servers and crawling boxen running optimally. But for our results to be worth anything, we were forced to allocate precious resources to just this issue.

[The Google cynics will say they are messing with the algorithms to improve paid-for results...but I give Google the doubt for now...]