Continue reading →

Royal Wedding Google Doodle is a Stretch

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 41   Group: General   Tags: bing shopping redesign

Continue reading →

Google Reportedly Acquiring Like.com

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 49   Group: General   Tags: google panda update victim hubpages posts quality standards recovery effort

Continue reading →

Mobile Version of Bing Gets New Features

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 25   Group: General   Tags: osama bin laden searches spike 100 000 yahoo

Continue reading →

More Link Spam Examples in Google

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 31   Group: General   Tags: google panda update webmasters crack code

Continue reading →

Is Google a Search Company?

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 43   Group: General   Tags: blekko powers search topix months existence

Continue reading →

150,000 Osama bin Laden Links Spanning Just 5 Days, Courtesy of Google News

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 29   Group: General   Tags: demand media search data released ahead earnings call

Continue reading →

Yahoo Completes Bing Transition for Organic Results (in US and Canada)

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 33   Group: General   Tags: state news industry pathetic

Continue reading →

Google: Flying Camera Drone Just for Exec's Personal Use

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 28   Group: General   Tags: google competitive practices brought panda conversation

Continue reading →

More Link Spam Examples in Google

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 32   Group: General   Tags: google instant previews support flash

Javascript is allowed for paid accounts in banners only. Data were stripped!

A couple weeks ago, we reported that DuckDuckGo had followed its own blocking of content farms (like eHow) by promoting content from wikiHow. This begged the question: how much better is wikihow's content? We had a conversation about that with Jack Herrick, founder of wikiHow (and one-time owner of eHow). In The fact, we had a second one conversation about that as well (look for an article in which quick) . 

We also had a conversation with DuckDuckGo founder Gabriel Weinberg. Part of that was about how DuckDuckGo differs from Google with regards to privacy. The subject then turned to search quality, happy farm that blocks, and the hard-wiring of select content to the top of the search results. 

"Right from the beginning when we launch two and a half years ago, one of the main motivations for even doing the search engine in the first place was to remove what It would call "useless places" (I try to use the term 'useless', not spam - Although it guess people take offense with both)," Weinberg tells WebProNews. "Most of is algorítmico, so we drag us the web a lot, looking for these sites that just have announcements in them basically. Media.. Demand is on a little different category, where they do have content on its places. It is only lower quality content on average. So for those type of sites - these big farms of content, that engender very low quality content, I sort of waited to see user complaints about it, and then do investigation myself."

"In this case, the right of the beginning, I was getting lots of complaints about eHow and the other (**)., and there are many sites," he continues. "Eventually, I started looking into the past, and that not well-documented articles where people who have worked for Demand Media in evaluations of the content, and longer work for it, and have written up their experience and but there is a lot of there are some high quality pages for sure, a lot was in the Internet really low-quality, inaccurate stuff, and there's so does neither notifies. “

" All they now, that when you block something like eHow, users adds. &Quot; so is a pretty one notice is that 'you've got better results,'" he is a lot more hard because easy decision to make at that point from our perspective. From Google's perspective things. They can enter they can get in trouble...they're under government scrutiny, and all sorts of (As we) that trouble for censorship...it's much easier for a startup to do (That by the way is is for Google."

http://images.ientrymail.com/webpronews/video/embe... repeat-x left top; font: 14px 'Lucida Grande', Tahoma, Verdana, Times, serif;"> /videos.webpronews.com/video/getcode.php?movie_name=wpns11_duckduckgo', 'Code', 'scrollbars,height=450,width=500')" class="right" href="javascript:return false;">More WebProNews Videos

He then explained the reasoning for the wikiHow "hard-wiring" I mentioned, of information of zero-click, the phrase wikHow has been using to describe it). 

"We have this concept, which the theme exactly, "Weinberg explains. which really shows a box above the results when you match More similar over the first one "It's not really hard-wiring the first result. It's with literally 40 sources in result, there'll be this box occasionally that gives you instant answers. We've done this CrunchBase, Wikia - all the types this point. Wikipedia is the biggest, but we also do control. Then Wikihow is really of high quality wikis that have good content and spam under reasons why they are is better just our 40th source of one of those."

It is an interesting one, however, considering it comes from the previous owner of eHow. 

"The good process of content of user-engendered, that they're more akin to Wikipedia, where they have this and generally they have a where spam is kept down, and they have editors look at things, a lot of higher quality. lot less pages than eHow, and their pages are The search for something. .. You obtains this So it just make sense to when you how does you do it'. And information right at the top of the results that says, 'ok, this is entire article. Then under that, it says 'more at WikiHow' if you want to see the in the months past of the couple you'll get regular results."

Weinberg says he hopes search engines will look more closely at these search quality issues.

"It's definitely come to a turning point to evaluate harshly relevance to the bias with you and other people reporting...the problem is it's really all anecdotal, "he says. &Quot; you search engines, so a lot of this evidence is has their metric internal one of relevance, have to give Google credit in that respect. They anecdotal, but they are able barely and we have ours, etc. but a lot of these articles are wait that obtain be anything else, because there's no standard metric. I more attention recently. “

that (** says). has aggregated wikiHow. We will do more attention, and I do think that it has gotten Raise Herrick. DuckDuckGO will continue to add more sources to the zero-click concept, the way it has added wikiHow. We'll have more about wikiHow's quality and editorial practices shortly, from a conversation with founder Jack Herrick.

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 30   Group: General   Tags: easier startup google action content farms

Google's Matt Cutts has indicated in recent weeks That Google works in projects that will deal with some of the search engine's quality matters with considerations to the content farms. It looks like one of those projects is now here. &Nbsp; Google has launched a Chrome extension that lets users block sites from search results.

Will you use the Chrome extension to send signals to Google about search quality? Let us know. 

If you're a Chrome user, you can now blocks some happy farm you want, on a personalized basis. And while it may be personalized, there's more...

"We've been exploring different algorithms to detect content farms, which are sites with shallow or low-quality content," says Cutts. "One of the signals we're exploring is explicit feedback from users."

"If installed, the extension also sends blocked site information to Google, and we will study the resulting feedback and explore using it as a potential ranking signal for our search results," says Cutts. (emphasis added)  

Now that's interesting. 

However, we can only assumes that a pretty one small percentage will actually take advantage of this tool, so how much weight does such a signal actually carry? Only a certain percentage of The users of Google utilize Chromium in the first place, and I'm guessing only a small Chromium users percentage will go to the lengths of actually installing this extension, and that's of the some that know really of it. Then, how many of those that find out about it, and they install it, does really use it on an ongoing basis, looking to send Google search the signs of quality through its daily one lives. I'm guessing not a lot. 

Is this the grand solution to the content the farm/search quality problem? Probably not. But it's a start. At the very least, those concerned about the quality Of its results of the search has a new way to filter their own personal Google experience. One issue is that splits of the content farms actually do have some quality content. I'd hate to miss out on the good stuff, just because I don't want the majority.  

Of course, that's the approach Blekko has taken. DuckDuckGo also has an interesting strategy, which founder Gabriel Weinberg shared with us. He says it's easier for a StartUp wants that the take measures on content farms than it is for Google.  "From Google's perspective is a lot more hard because they can get in trouble...they're under government scrutiny, and all sorts of things, "said WebProNews. &Quot; they can get in trouble for censorship...it's much easier for a start to do it (like us) than it is for Google."

Does has to be every or nothing with content farms? I guess time will tell. Cutts has said they wants to resolve the problem algorithmically, as opposed to using human editing. 

I wonder which sites will be blocked by users the more. That would be an interesting list to see. I wonder if will be similar to Blekko's banned list.

The extension is called the Personal Blocklist Extension.  

Do you think this is the right direction for Google to take to increase search quality? Share your thoughts.

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 22   Group: General   Tags: user feedback google ranking signal

Matt Cutts posted a new Webmaster Help video in which It answers its own question rather than a user-submitted one (like usual). Specifically, he asks if there is no counsel that does like to change from what he's said in the past. &Nbsp;

"I did a video back in May of 2010, that said we does not utilize, for example, the Warble at all in our rankings other than as a normal web page, and the ties are treated completely like normal web pages," he says.

He then references a recent Danny Sullivan article which breaks down how both Google and Bing use Twitter. He notes that Google worked with he to assure their certainty. "It says that in some cases we do look at, for Example, how reputable a detail person on Twitter might be, and we can use that in our classifications in some ways."

And another thing that Cutts wanted to update...

"SafeSearch, when I wrote the very first version, years and years and years ago - provided that being not able to crawl something - so for example, if is blocked for robots.txt, since then people have deliberately said, 'I would like a safe version - a family-safe version of Google, we do say, 'oh, if we haven't been able to crawl it, then we don't knows if is porno or not, so we're not going to be able to return it users, “says Cutts.

"So, the Library of Congress or WhiteHouse.gov or Metallica in a point. ..Nissan, had blocked various pages from being crawled in the search engines, and so to be safe, we said, 'you know what? We don't know if that is relative-sure or not, so we won't return it',"  he adds.

"Luckily, the team of SafeSearch has obtained much more sophisticated, and better, and more robust since I wrote the original version, so Now that's something that we might change. If something is prohibited of to be dragged, but for whatever reason we think that it might be safe, now we will begin to return it in our search results."

It's always good to set the record straight.

Visit the website:  

Comments: 0   Views: 25   Group: General   Tags: google twitter safesearch matt cutts advice