Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.
Search Engine Roundtable Stories:
Other Great Search Forum Threads:
This week at the Search Engine Roundtable I posted the monthly Google webmaster report. Google rich snippets are showing up from third-party sites. Google snippets are showing a lot of untitled title tags in the search results. A Google engineer explains why your AdSense earnings may drop. Google said most invalid clicks from from publishers. Poskanzer from ACME.com was banned from AdSense which caused a huge snowball effect. Facebook announced their IPO and outstanding numbers. France fined Google because their maps product is free, I kid you not. Local Paid Inclusion - yea, is that even possible? Turns out no and the ripple effect from it. That was this past week at the Search Engine Roundtable.
Make sure to subscribe to our video feed or subscribe directly on iTunes to be notified of these updates and download the video in the background. Here is the YouTube version of the feed:
For the original iTunes version, click here.
Search Topics of Discussion:
Please do subscribe via iTunes or on your favorite RSS reader. Don't forget to comment below with the right answer and good luck!
A Google News Help thread has Erik from Google saying it can take several weeks for Google to review your publication for inclusion into Google News.
Erik S. said "depending on the volume of inclusion requests we receive, it can take up to several weeks to hear back about your site. We do promise to look at it though."
A year ago, Google simply told us to expect significant delays for inclusion into Google News.
So it is nice to have at least a "several weeks" number as opposed to "significant delays."
Forum discussion at Google News Help.
Bryson Meunier, one of the most vocal people on mobile search topics and someone who disagrees with me on mobile SEO techniques in some areas, has posted in the Google AdWords Help a important request.
He wants the Google Keyword Tool to add an option to break out searches conducted on tablet devices versus desktop devices and standard smartphone devices. Right now, you can only see searches by "mobile devices with full internet browsers."
He said:
It stands to reason that tablet searchers will have different keywords and volume than smartphone searchers. Can we get tablet searches broken out separately in the keyword tool? Given how valuable the segment is many marketers are building content specifically for tablet owners, and it would be helpful to know which keywords they use so that we can help them find what they're looking for faster.
Of course I agree.
Bryson has a more detailed write up on this at Search Engine Land.
I should note, Google does allow advertisers to target tablet users versus smartphone users - but just doesn't give the keyword research data to us.
Forum discussion at Google AdWords Help.
Moritz Tolxdorff announced on Google+ that the top contributors in the forums are hosting a Google+ hangout to answer questions on Google+.
He said, "we are going to host the first TC Help Desk hangout this week." They hope to continue to do this hangout weekly. He added that they are volunteers not being paid by Google.
These Hangouts will be exclusively for those who have questions about Google+ Top Contributors from the Google+ Help Forum will be available to answer your questions, and give some advise.
We are not working for Google, we are just volunteering in helping others!
So if you want in, just go to his Google+ page at around 1pm EDT today.
There is a lot more discussion around this topic on John Mueller's page.
Forum discussion at Google+.
Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.
Search Engine Roundtable Stories:
Other Great Search Forum Threads:
When you say the name Bruce Clay and you are someone who reads this blog, you know who I am talking about. Bruce Clay - that name - makes you think of an individual who provides outstanding SEO services, expensive SEO services, but all white hat, ethical, and someone who has a deep deep understanding of search that goes well beyond most others in the industry. You also look at him as one of the older, wiser and definitely more respected individuals in the industry.
So when the news came out that he and his company is somewhat behind a new "Local Paid Inclusion" program that is backed by Google, Yahoo and Bing - I was stunned, shocked and a bit worried for the industry and Bruce's name.
The program launched under localpaidinclusion.com, which now redirects to the official statement from Bruce Clay, Inc. on this topic. It initially read:
Local Paid Inclusion is a Google, Yahoo and Bing contracted service and is offered as an approved official program in cooperation with those search engines. Local Paid Inclusion promotes a local businessâ profile page, like those found in Google Places, Yahoo Local and Bing Local, into a top position on the search result page for up to 30 keywords per profile page.
This is a NEW program offered by Google, Yahoo!, Bing and 18 other major directories and indexes that places a business profile into a premium area above all other local profiles. Combine this with all of your other optimization programs to maximize your traffic.
What this means is local businesses that participate can essentially pay for the top local ranking position!
Both Google and Bing denied having any deal with a paid inclusion program with Bruce or his companies or anything like this with any other company.
Bruce Clay apologized but said they were mislead, while the company that mislead them denied any of this completely.
You can read the whole timeline at Search Engine Land. I won't go through it all - I cover the industry and the industry doesn't feel the same way about Bruce as they did.
I am sad to say I feel Bruce's image has been hurt by this and I feel he has let down the industry with this program. In time, everything will heal but right now, this has to hurt.
Some are giving him credit, claiming this is just one big link bait tactic - but even Bruce wouldn't exchange links for a tarnished name.
Update: There is one more story you should read, one from Chris Silver Smith - a widely respected local SEO expert - who wrote about the view from UBL. See it over here - it is pretty detailed.
I asked my Twitter followers to let me know what they think about it and this is what they had to say:
@rustybrick Those who tout ethics all over their website and marketing are often the ones people need to worry about.
â" Jill Whalen (@jillwhalen) February 2, 2012@rustybrick Bruce Clay is why Google updated privacy policies, he has an EXCLUSIVE agreement to sell your information-stalker paid inclusion
â" Phil Britton (@localsearchguy) February 2, 2012@rustybrick what's up with the whole we didn't collect money, only pre registration information bit? As if that's cool. #leadgengonewild
â" Aaron Putnam (@aaronputnam) February 2, 2012@rustybrick"BCI has ceased to engage in Local Paid Inclusion while we dig into confusing and contradicting statements." #needisaymore
â" gabriel (@gabs) February 2, 2012@rustybrick "You keep saying Local Paid Inclusion but I don't think you know what it means!" ;-)
â" Matt Keough (@MattKeough) February 2, 2012@rustybrick When NJ SEO's heard about Clay's play they cried "Bruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuce!" confusing Springsteen fans everywhere.
â" Frank Reed (@frankreed) February 2, 2012@rustybrick There used to be a TVC in Australia. The theme song: "one day, one day, one day you're gunna get caught with your pants down"
â" Chris Dimmock (@Cogentis) February 2, 2012Search fraud LOL RT @rustybrick I might do a post on the BruceClay thing --- Give me a one liner tweet you want me to include in the post.
â" Ezhil Raja (@ezhil) February 2, 2012@rustybrick Is BC really search marketing authority like @dannysullivan ?With the latest episode has he lost the credibility?
â" Arpit Srivastava(@arpitconsultant) February 2, 2012Personally, this whole situation makes me very sad for Bruce and the industry.
Forum discussion - well, everywhere in the SEO community.
In January, we had Google release a major update to their personalized results with Search Plus Your World. We had a new Panda release, Panda 3.2. We had Google release an algorithm that penalizes sites based on ad layout. So it was a busy month.
The ongoing WebmasterWorld thread has discussion mostly about Panda but some recent chatter about three things:
The first might be an issue with some sites and Google Analytics, I am digging deeper.
Overall, here are the most important topics we covered on Google SEO in the past 30 days:
For the January 2012 Google SEO report, click here.
Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.
Google was fined $660,000 in France over unfair competitive practices with Google Maps.
The AFP has the crazy news:
In a ruling Tuesday, the Paris court upheld an unfair competition complaint lodged by Bottin Cartographes against Google France and its parent company Google Inc. for providing free web mapping services to some businesses.
The court ordered Google to pay 500,000 euros ($660,000) in damages and interest to the plaintiff and a 15,000 euro fine.
The French company provides the same services for a fee and claimed the Google strategy was aimed at undercutting competitors by temporarily swallowing the full cost until it gains control of the market.
Since Google is offering their mapping service for free, as does Bing Maps, Ask Maps, Yahoo Maps, MapQuest and so on - but because Google is doing it, they have to pay $660,000 in damages.
What am I missing? Is it just that France just really hates Google?
Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.
Google AdWords representative, Laura, said in a Google AdWords Help thread that the main reason there are "invalid clicks" on ads is due to publishers.
Yes - Google said that "usually" invalid clicks come from AdSense publishers. Either the publishers are:
(1) Clicking on their own ads or;
(2) Telling their friends and users to click on their ads.
Google's Laura said:
I don't think there's any connection between AdWords suspensions and AdSense ones. AdSense "invalid clicks" suspensions are usually just that: publishers clicking on their own ads or encouraging their visitors to do so. If you think you didn't violate that policy, contact AdWords support.
So there you have it - usually those invalid clicks are AdSense publishers fault.
Forum discussion at Google AdWords Help.
Image credit to ShutterStock for the fuzzy click.
As expected, Facebook filed their IPO registration with the SEC.
The numbers are fascinating, and I was tweeting some of it. We posted some nice charts on the numbers and Danny did the S-1 review at Marketing Land.
So will you be buying into the IPO?
Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.
Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.
Search Engine Roundtable Stories:
Other Great Search Forum Threads:
Search for [gout] on Bing and you will see a brand new "feature" in the search results.
Bing now will show you the full article and content from some partner third-party sites directly on Bing. Bing adds a link to "Read the full article by Mayo Clinic" and links to a Bing Health web page, which is content licensed and paid for by Bing.
Here is a screen shot of the Bing Search Results:
Here is a screen shot of the landing page on Bing Health:
A WebmasterWorld thread has BingDude, an official Microsoft Bing representative explaining the rational for this:
Folks have to keep in mind that Bing is a decision engine, focused on "task completion". We've stated this from the outset, so trying things like these types of tests help us determine if this type of SERP behaviour strikes a positive or non-positive note with searchers.
How can I get Bing to license my content? And do I want them to? At least they aren't just scrapping it and showing it to users without paying for it.
Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.
Update: This actually is not new, Matt covered this at SEL back in 2010.
Yesterday Keri Morgret, a contributor here, SEOmoz associate and owner of Strike Models pinged me asking if I noticed complaints of people noticing Google labeling the title tag in the search results as "untitled."
This is not all that uncommon, especially if there is an HTML mess up with the title tag or Google gets confused with the site's true title.
At first, I thought it was a one or two off case and an issue with the site at hand. I looked into the code on one example and something seemed off in that case.
But now I am getting reports of more and more users complaining of this. I received emails and tweets of people showing me that a search for [adwords keyword tool] even shows an untitled blue link in the Google results:
I am not sure if Google tweaked their title tag detection techniques recently, but it is possible something may be up.
Forum discussion at SEOmoz Forums.
Update: John Mueller from Google commented on this on my Google+ post saying:
John Mueller - +Aaron Bradley as far as I know, this is just a quirk with this particular URL, and not something general that has changed.
We are always working on improving how we pull and display titles in search (see http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2012/01/better-page-titles-in-search-results.html ), but this particular URL is a bit of an edge-case that shouldn't be seen as a representative of any general change in that direction :)
It has been three years since Google changed their favicon to the multi colored icon we have today. But now we are seeing reports of some users reporting a new all blue favicon being tested by Google.
The image to the right show off the new all blue Google Favicon. You can see it at google.com/images/google_favicon_128.png as well, to prove this is something Google is hosting.
It looks the same structurally as the colored one most of us see today - but this is one is all blue. Here is an enlarged colored favicon:
That launched in January 2009, between May 2008 â" January 2009 we had the blue lowercase G, and from who knows when till May 2008 we had the classic G with colored box. Here is the history of those icons in the URL bar.
I am not sure if Google will go all blue soon or if this is for a specific Google property only.
Forum discussion at Google Blogoscoped Forums.
Google had a fun and addictive game back in 2006 named Google Image Labeler. It basically had you type what the image was and when you and your opponent matched, you moved on to the next image.
But some time in 2011, the game went offline.
Google actually promoted the game on their home page in 2007.
It was a nice way for Google to get people to tag images but I guess that data harvest is no longer needed. Here is a video of the game from back in 2007:
There is a thread at Google Web Search Help where users are pleading for Google to bring back the game. If you want the game back, join the thread, maybe you can resurrect something Google decided to kill.
Forum discussion at Google Web Search Help.
Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.
Search Engine Roundtable Stories:
Other Great Search Forum Threads: