Google’s Penguin update has sent the SEO industry into something of an ironic flap.
Almost a fortnight after Penguin went live, webmasters are still moaning and complaining that Google got it wrong.
And in some cases, the detractors have a point.
Penguin was designed to destroy the dark arts of SEO. Black hat tactics – such as keyword stuffing, or paying for spammy inbound links – have been utilised by cheeky webmasters attempting to manipulate the rankings. And Google’s had enough.
Penguin aimed to torpedo sites which used keyword stuffing to trick spiders into thinking their content was relevant, whilst also blacklisting sites which had paid for dodgy incoming links in an attempt to falsify credibility.
But Penguin clearly hasn’t worked exactly as Google planned.
Search industry forums are reporting examples of apparently ‘white hat’, honest websites being downranked, with examples of horrific, spammy ‘black hat’ sites suddenly displaying on the front page of Google for completely unrelated search terms (see below).
The thing is, though, is that Penguin hasn’t altered much in reality. It’s certainly not a game changer.
Google has always had good practice guidelines. But it hasn’t always had a way to police whether sites are adhering to those guidelines.
Penguin, therefore, is essentially a Google search copper, plodding the everlasting beat that is the results pages, looking for traces of the notorious Internet crimelords Webspam and Spammy Links, and attempting to bring the perpetrators of online offences to justice.
Now, the problem. It’s bit like a search version of RoboCop – Penguin appears to have been appointed judge, jury and executioner by Google.
And that, it seems, is where the problem lies. Penguin is programmed – it has been coded to look for telltale signs of black hat SEO. It’s not a human, and it’s not capable of rational thought (unless Google’s keeping something from us).
As such, Penguin was always going to be prone to mistakes – especially after first launching. That in itself should account for the ‘funny behaviour’ reported by webmasters immediately after Penguin went live. Some went as far as to claim Penguin “broke Google” – others petitioned for the update to be reversed.
Google realises that placing arbitrary decision-making into the hands of a dumb robot isn’t going to reap foolproof results and is prepared to reinstate accidentally downranked websites.
Webmasters who feel unfairly punished by Google can flag up their complaint. Those meeting Google’s good practice guidelines should be reinstated as a result. Conversely, you can also report instances where spammy, rotten sites are returning high in the results when they really shouldn’t be.
This level of teething problems and fall-0ut clearly wasn’t part of Google’s intention with the Penguin update.
Google wanted Penguin to go some way towards levelling the playing field for search engine optimisation. Some feel it’s an attempt to push people towards paid ad-based Internet marketing.
It’s clear Google still has some work to do, either way.
And until then, those genuine sites which have lost rankings – and business as a result – are going to have to weather the storm.
Penguin wasn’t a game-changer – it was simply a means to enforce the ‘rules’ already laid out by Google.
Those who had got away with breaking, or just bending, the rules for some time have now been penalised. That may’ve meant some previously top-ranking sites suddenly plummeting.
Anyone adhering to Google’s best practice guidelines, on the whole, will have avoided a hammering from Penguin.
The cases where legitimate sites got downranked are few and far between, and Google has set up the right channels to rectify this. If Google refuses to reinstate a site, chances are, there’s some spam, links or some other ‘black hat’ problems somewhere.
That said, respondents on a handful of search forums have provided examples of spammy, rubbish websites which are now appearing on page one of Google.
One great example is to search “Paypal France”. The first page of results for this search returns no fewer than three websites selling viagra.
Not only are these sites totally unrelated to the search term “Paypal France” – they’re also stuffed with keywords.
In terms of content, it’s nasty. Really nasty.
In fact, these search returns are exactly what Google engineer Matt Cutts said Penguin would whitewash.
Yet, it hasn’t.
Even the page description, displayed directly under the website URL, shows how badly stuffed some of these pages are.
One reads: “During relative of pele’s observing sugar in brazil there was no rheumatoid film viagra paypal france.”
It’d be hard for anyone to argue that this search result:
i) makes any sense
ii) is of any use to anyone, ever
iii) is not blatant, keyword-stuffed spam
iv) should be on page one of Google for any search term other than “examples of ridiculous spammy content”
It’ll be interesting to see how these anomalies iron out in the coming weeks, and whether Google refreshes Penguin so it looks a lot more closely at the factors which might separate a genuine site from a fraud.
If they do, may I suggest this level of closer inspection should henceforth be known as ‘observing sugar in Brazil’?
The last big algorithm change from Google was called Panda. This one was Penguin.
Speculation is rife that Google is following a pattern with its search engine updates.
The obvious bits are: animals (cute ones at that), which begin with a ‘p’, and are black and white.
Guesses for next update name include Panther, and Pigeon (derived from vowel use: pAnda, pEnguin, pIgeon etc…).
On the black and white theme, some have posited that Google is separating ‘white hat’ tactics from ‘black hat’ tactics via the use of bestial metaphor.
I have my own theory behind the name, which takes us back to the ironic flapping of the SEO industry.
Take Google’s ‘average user’ – someone with little knowledge of anything. Google plays to the lowest common denominator.
If you don’t know anything about quantum theory, and you Google it, you’d want something reputable, trustworthy and reliable to return on the front page of the results. The same goes for any search term.
With webspam sites, you might get a top search result which says “Quantum Theory” on the page name, and includes the phrase in the description too. But on closer inspection, a bunch of other, unrelated words are in the description. This is known as keyword stuffing.
Click the link, and you won’t find a repository of sparkling information about relativity, worm holes, or physics. No. You’ll probably get a bunch of bad links, nonsense sentences, and the odd advert for a miracle diet instead.
In search terms, that result is useless.
Now imagine you’re looking for a bird. You’d expect a bird to fly, right?
Only, Penguins can’t fly.
So perhaps, Penguin was designed to root out sites which seem genuine, which look like they are fit for purpose, but, on closer inspection, are actually technically useless. Like a Penguin’s wings.
Or maybe I’ve overcomplicated it.
News brought to you by ClickThrough – experts in SEO, Pay Per Click Services, Multilingual Search Marketing and Website Conversion Enhancement services.
Business networking site LinkedIn has acquired the team behind popular content sharing platform SlideShare.
SlideShare – which allows professional users to create and host presentations, videos and PDFs online – was launched in 2006 and now has 29 million unique users a month.
LinkedIn paid $119m (£74m) to acquire SlideShare, saying it aligns “perfectly” with LinkedIn’s mission.
A SlideShare app on LinkedIn was already proving popular with professionals. It is thought LinkedIn will now integrate SlideShare into its core site as it looks to improve its ‘product’.
LinkedIn’s current success – it has amassed 161 million global users – is based on the popularity of social networking sites like Facebook. However, unlike Facebook – where users connect with ‘friends’ (random and real-life) -LinkedIn’s niche has been to focus entirely on professional networking.
As a result, the site has become a mainstay for professionals looking to move up the career ladder, make business connections or find new staff.
In fact, LinkedIn has become something of a playground for recruiters and service providers: it has made one-step transglobal headhunting a reality, whilst Internet marketing content can be sent directly to the inboxes of some of the world’s most prestigious and connected CEOs.
The acquisition, confirmed by LinkedIn on May 3, cost $119m in cash and stocks (a split of around 45%55%).
LinkedIn said it was now looking to integrate SlideShare into its core site – giving professionals simple access to tools allowing them to create and share work online, whilst signficantly boosting the site’s attractiveness to new users.
LinkedIn’s CEO, Jeff Weiner, explained: “Presentations are one of the main ways in which professionals capture and share their experiences and knowledge, which in turn helps shape their professional identity.
“These presentations also enable professionals to discover new connections and gain the insights they need to become more productive and successful in their careers, aligning perfectly with LinkedIn’s mission, and helping us deliver even more value for our members.”
SlideShare CEO Rashmi Sinha, added: “We built SlideShare to help professionals share presentations and connect people through content.
“What we can build with LinkedIn, the largest professional network on the Internet, is the most natural extension of this vision.”
Shortly after announcing the acquisition, LinkedIn revealed its first-quarter revenue for 2012 – showing a 101% rise year on year.
LinkedIn’s revenue for the first quarter was $188.5m (£116.5m), with income from the same period rising from $2.1m to $5m. More than half the total revenue comes from LinkedIn’s “hiring solutions” unit, whilst display advertising revenue rose by around 73%.
LinkedIn floated on the stock market last year, with stocks worth around $45 at the start. They have risen by around 70% since.
News brought to you by ClickThrough – experts in SEO, Pay Per Click Services, Multilingual Search Marketing and Website Conversion Enhancement services.
Google Adword Rotation
As you may be aware, from next week, Google are changing the way in which AdWords are rotated.
The Rotate AdWords feature has been popular with many PPC account managers due to its ability to allow for testing. The Rotate Ad feature allowed ads to be shown for an indefinite period of time, but the change means that ads will only be shown for 30 days and then the best performing ads will be shown unless edits are made to the ad group. For any PPC account manager handling many client accounts and campaigns, this presents a new set of problems – how to manage and monitor all accounts to ensure that the right ads are being shown when testing has suddenly become that much harder?
From Google’s perspective, displaying higher performing ads is of course the desired end result – more clicks, more revenue. But how will this work for advertisers if there is insufficient data, particularly with long tail, low traffic and niche terms where 30 days is quite simply insufficient to gather enough data to understand (especially in an A/B test) which ad will perform better?
There does not appear to have been an explanation from the Big G precisely how this will benefit advertisers. Yet. Right now, it seems a one sided deal that is not even optional. Had it been optional, it would no doubt have joined the many tools inside the Google account which the vast majority of PPC users are unaware of but which canny, dedicated, expert PPC players would have been able to access.
The is already a backlash to this announcement, and a petition has been started to try to persuade Google to return the required level of control to professional PPC agencies.
How do you feel this affects your business or PPC agency and account managers? Do you think this is a purely monetary decision by Google or is there more to it? We welcome your comments, as always.
Josh Smithyman, ClickThrough Marketing’s newest team member and all-round SEO whiz, is hoping for local football fame tonight as he takes to the pitch for a big cup final match.
We’re known for hitting goals here at ClickThrough – and we’re also a bit of a sporting bunch ourselves (remember our Sport Relief cycle challenge?) – so we were delighted to hear that our fresh-faced SEO linkbuilder would be using his keen analytical skills to hit some goals of a distinctly grassier kind.
The game looks to be a tense one, with two giants of the Cannock Chase League battling it out for the coveted trophy. The marketing-mad midfielder plays for Lamb and Flag, who’ll be putting their best feet forward for the match against local rivals Winding Wheel.
Josh was the image of gentlemanly sportsmanship when we asked him which team were destined for glory:
“I’m excited about the game, but it could go either way. We’ve been training our socks off, but the Winding Wheel boys are at the top of their game too,” he said.
“I’d put a straight 50/50 probability on this one.”
We also asked Josh, who joined our team last Monday, how he was planning to use his SEO skills on the pitch.
“SEO is much like a game of football,” he said. “It will certainly be in the back of my mind as I walk out under the floodlights.
“It’s all about co-operation. Building a network of links between yourself and your teammates. Without that, there’s no chance of getting a top ranking result,” he concluded.
Check back soon to find out how Josh got on. In the meantime, we wish him and his team the best of luck for the big game.
Webmasters and SEO staff who feel wrongly penalised by the keyword stuffing Penguin update can now report their concerns to Google.
Engineer Matt Cutts has tweeted a link for webmasters to flag problems with the Penguin search engine update – accepting that some genuine, honest sites have been negatively affected by the algorithm tweak.
The post gives people the chance to flag sites which are now ranking well, despite being full of nasty spam, as well as providing a feedback form for those who felt their site suffered unfairly after the launch.
Google search engine updates are released regularly to improve search results for users. That involves a series of complex algorithm changes designed to weed out those who use unfair tactics to manipulate the search rankings.
The latest tweak, Penguin, has directly targeted sites utilising keyword stuffing strategies. The ramifications for Internet marketing are clear: focus on natural, quality content.
Webspam sites usually have huge paragraphs of random keywords, odd hyperlinks jammed into unrelated content, or hidden text boxes full of key phrases.
Google recognises that many ‘white hat’, genuine SEOs can struggle to rank against these webspam sites – so Penguin was designed to level the playing field. It was also supposed to give websites who haven’t dabbled in search engine optimisation the chance to rank for their selected keywords.
Many websites reported huge Google ranking losses after Penguin launched on April 24. Three days later, Google has tweeted a link for webmasters to flag sites which they think were unfairly downranked.
The form requests a sample URL for the affected website, associated search queries, and a comments box for feedback. You can access the form here.
Everyone agrees that improving the quality of information on the Internet is a good thing. Those firms employing high-quality SEO copywriters shouldn’t have been affected by this update. Adhering to Google’s best practice guidelines for search engine optimisation minimises the chances of being negatively affected by its search engine updates.
It’s simply a question of playing fair.
News brought to you by ClickThrough – a best practice Internet Marketing Agency.
Google’s latest webspam algorithm tweak now has a name: the Penguin update.
The search engine has tweaked its system to try to weed out sites using webspam to manipulate the rankings.
But the update has seen many genuine sites downranked, with some less genuine ones suddenly appearing nearer the top of the results pages.
Some SEOs have dubbed the update ‘Titanic’ – in a cheeky nod to the way it has sunk strong sites.
Those Internet marketing firms affected by Penguin (of which, ClickThrough Marketing is not one), are now working on ways to re-establish sites that got hit by Penguin – whilst attempting to understand what factors Google is using to differentiate between quality content, and spam.
Introducing the update, Matt Cutts, from Google, said the idea was to level the search engine optimisation playing field – to penalise sites with huge swathes of keywords on a page (known as ‘keyword stuffing’), and those using link building schemes to fake veracity.
Google’s last big update like this was Panda – an equally cute animal name for an equally harsh update. Panda was designed to look at the quality of web content – meaning sites using ‘spinning software’ to robotically generate content would be found out, and lose ranking as a result.
Panda smashed through a host of previously well-ranked sites: many article repository sites were affected (due to the fact quality control on such huge volumes of copy is nigh-on impossible).
Using automatic means to verify the quality of content can be a difficult thing to rely on – and obviously, some genuine sites would be negatively affected, whilst some less genuine ones would see a boost.
Anyone working in SEO is acutely aware that Google is forever moving the goalposts. The vicious circle will no doubt continue, running along the lines of: Google releases an update, websites lose ranking, webmasters find a new way to increase ranking, Google releases another update, websites lose ranking… and so on and so on.
As time goes on, the indifferences caused by these updates will be rebalanced – especially if quality site owners continue to produce quality content. At least, until the next raft of search engine updates.
News brought to you by ClickThrough – experts in SEO, PPC, Multilingual Search Marketing and Website Conversion Enhancement services.
Google’s latest update – dubbed Penguin – is designed to stop ‘keyword stuffing’. The change was announced in an official Google blog post containing eight keywords in the first seven sentences. So what exactly is keyword stuffing, and is it still possible to optimise quality content without being penalised?
Here, Ali Harris, content manager for leading UK internet marketing company ClickThrough Marketing, looks at the implications of the latest chapter in Google’s cat and mouse game with the SEO industry.
SEO is a delicate art. We’re all painfully aware of the fine line between good, natural keyword density, and ‘keyword stuffing’.
I’m a big proponent of natural, keyword-rich copywriting – we’ve always aimed to produce high-quality, rank-topping content which strikes the right balance between readability and optimisation.
The general rule of thumb for SEO copywriters dictates it’s unwise to obviously overload an article with keywords. Google agrees – and the search engine giant has just released an algorithm update designed to root out and down rank websites which use keyword stuffing to trick its spiders and manipulate ranking.
The update is now live – and has officially been dubbed Penguin, despite the outcry of social-media savvy SEOs, who nominated ‘Titanic’.
Google engineer Matt Cutts originally warned that Google would be penalising ‘overly optimised’ sites. Google has since said ‘over optimisation’ was a poor choice of words: the update is designed to destroy webspam, not SEO.
None of our current clients has been downranked as a result of Google’s recent search engine updates – but, oddly, we’ve had a number of random calls from non-clients panicking because their website’s suddenly disappeared off page one, asking what they can do to fix it.
Many reputable webmasters have seen similar ranking divebombs – hence the cheeky suggestions to call the update Titanic.
Google has issued its own advice, of course, on top of its best practice guidelines, and the bottom line stresses the importance of high quality content.
But there’s an elephant in the room – the original announcement came in an official Google blog post which, surprisingly, was stuffed face-first with keywords.
The post on Google’s official blog features eight instances of ‘search engine optimization’-style keywords in the first seven sentences. ‘Search engine optimization’ features three times in the first paragraph alone.
For most SEO copywriters, this approach to front-loading keywords is usually a total no-go – based entirely on the fear that Google would discount their efforts as spam at best.
So, how come Google is looking to penalise ‘keyword stuffing’ whilst essentially overusing keywords itself?
Is Matt Cutts’ post an example of the much-vaunted ‘quality content’ which won’t be affected by the update? Or is it just sloppy copy?
The key here is readability. Yes, the first paragraph could probably be edited down to more simple sentences, and the triplicate mention of ‘search engine optimization’ perhaps wasn’t entirely necessary in traditional good writing terms (where repetition should generally be avoided).
But this is an article about search engine optimisation, honestly talking about search engine optimisation, to people interested in search engine optimisation. And therefore, including that term repeatedly in such a small space is seemingly okay, in Matt Cutts’ writing mind at least.
This update is designed to crusade against sites which use keywords as a crutch – where key phrases are randomly jammed into an unrelated paragraph, or whole pages are turned over to farm lists of various search terms. Other tactics include hiding little boxes of text at the bottom of a page, or putting keyword links into completely unrelated pieces of content.
These tactics can help rubbish websites rank higher than genuine sites – something Google wants to stamp out to ‘reward’ honest SEOs, level the playing field, and ensure users only get to see informative, quality search results – not spammy farms full of nonsense.
It hasn’t gone entirely to plan so far – examples abound of honest site rankings being obliterated, whilst spammy, low-quality sites suddenly soar up the SERPs.
The resulting downranking and outcry from honest webmasters could be put down to a lack of information about what Google was looking at with Penguin.
Of course, giving everyone a hint of what the changes entail would’ve given the spammers a heads up to make the necessary changes to avoid punishment – but the fact so many apparently white hat sites have suffered suggests webmasters need a little bit more information on these matters.
But where do most people go for information? Google search.
The name Penguin took a day or two to surface, but now it has, there are no official Google results on page one for a ‘Google Penguin update’ search.
At least we have a name now. When the update launched a day ago, there was one important announcement on keyword stuffing from Google’s own mouth – that on the official blog, written by Matt Cutts, stuffed face-first with keywords.
You’d hope that post would probably return in a Google search result for ‘keyword stuffing’.
It doesn’t.
Nor does it appear for search terms ‘keyword stuffing change’, ‘keyword stuffing algorithm’ or, even, ‘keyword stuffing Google’.
And herein lies the problem. With utter keyword overload in Matt Cutts’ announcement post, even the mighty Google can accidentally over-optimise their content. Where does that leave the rest of us?
We’ll be paying particular attention to the rankings over the next week, to see if honest webmasters survive and nefarious spammers are punished as the dust settles on the Penguin webspam algorithm update – here’s hoping Google does, too.
About the author:
Ali Harris is an award-winning journalist with more than ten years’ experience in printed press, public relations and online PR. He is the content manager for ClickThrough Marketing, an Internet marketing agency based in Lichfield, UK, specialising in SEO, PPC and conversion enhancement. For more information about ClickThrough Marketing’s web content services, call 0800 088 7486.
As Google rolls out another wave of significant changes with the inevitable fall-out, many site owners and those in the SEO industry are left considering changes that may yet be to come.
Whilst the latest algorithm updates seem primarily targeted at improving the approach taken by some to link building, many believe that Google is aiming to reduce the level of ‘over-optimisation’ across all elements of SEO.
Anyone responsible for a site’s content strategy should be mindful of this: if Google is, as has been suggested, penalising sites for over-optimising on keywords in link anchor text, it is logical to assume that similar penalties may apply – now or in the future – for the same over-optimisation in on-page content.
As with linking, Google seems unlikely to change its stated position on content. In essence, write for your users, not the search engines. Keep it unique, relevant, focused and of the highest possible quality. Keyword stuffing content at high density would seem to be a risky undertaking in 2012.
Quality became one of the most over-used words in the business dictionary in the late 1990′s. Everyone from major brands to the local skip hire firm suddenly embraced total quality management, delivering quality skips on quality trucks, driven by quality staff.
The word is similarly over-used in today’s online industry. We have yet to meet a content provider who didn’t offer ‘high quality content’. The reality is often at variance with the sales pitch and yet it is entirely possible for a business to safely outsource the provision of written content.
However you produce material, ensure that it is written by in-country writers who are prepared to thoroughly understand your organisation, your value proposition, your target audience and your objectives.
Timing is also essential. If your budget will cover, for example, 100 pieces of content, it is likely to be of far greater value to add this over a couple of months than as a single batch. Why? Google is, understandably, looking to reward sites that put the effort into adding new content on a regular basis.
Clearly by no means everyone’s budget will support the daily addition of articles, blog posts, advisory pieces and so forth. However, if a fresh index of your site picks up something new even on a weekly basis, this may help in differentiating you from less committed competitors.
Length also matters. Whilst 200 words may be of value as an above the fold category summary on an e-commerce site, it provides for relatively little depth or insight as a blog post or advisory piece. Once again, if budgets are limited, you are almost invariably better advised to produce slightly fewer pieces of greater length.
The informational and static content on your site matters, of course. However, its value is likely to be significantly multiplied by frequent additions. Long live the Deity.
Google has always continuously innovated; I’ve followed them as a user and an SEO since they were launched in 1998. But, it does feel in 2011 and 2012 that the frequency of change at Google is accelerating, particularly with their anti-webspam measures that can negatively affect legitimate SEO.
As reported in ClickThrough’s industry news, Google made another significant change to its algorithm this week. As you’ll know, Google makes hundreds of changes to it’s algorithm each year, but a handful, like the Panda updates of 2011 which target search spammers can have a significant impact.
When you look at the examples used to explain the the type of spam they are now targeting – then you can see their intention. Here’s an from an example of a site Google calls out who they say they will penalise for irrelevant anchor links:
This is the second or third major update already in 2012. Indeed it feels like there has been a rolling programme of changes if you look at the levels of discussion in the specialist SEO forums, for example, this thread has over 700 messages! Many of the comments are from disaffected site owners who have been negatively affected. Some will push the boundaries of what’s acceptable ethically and within Google’s guidelines, but there are many false positives where an algorithm update affects what most would consider legitimate “white hat” marketing.
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the impact of Google’s changes, it raises serious questions for businesses looking to gain commercial benefit from SEO, in particular, how they review and mitigate the impact of Google’s changes. These are some of the implications of these changes which you should discuss with your agency or internal SEO responsible people or person:
So, there’s a lot to check beyond number of visits from natural search. I’ve always thought that the companies with the more granular approach to reviewing analytics and customer insight and put in place strategies to target the phrases that matters are the ones that will prosper through SEO. I think these new Google algorithm updates make this more true than ever.
Internet marketing companies and search engine optimisation experts are poring over their websites today, after Google released its latest algorithm changes, designed to weed out “webspam” sites which manipulate search rankings.
Google’s latest tweak will punish sites using dirty tactics to trick search spiders – such as keyword stuffing
Most reputable SEO companies use “white hat” techniques for search engine optimisation and Internet marketing. But various nefarious webmasters ride roughshod over their good work: creating unnatural copy which reads like a random selection of words, or stuffing completely unrelated keyword links into articles.
“Good” SEO involves a mix of techniques – including ensuring onsite copy contains the right keywords in the right volume, writing the right title tags and descriptions, and a mix of regular, quality content updates; meaningful blog posts and newsworthy press releases.
Inbound links are another metric Google uses for PageRank – based on the premise that users will happily share links to sites which host trustworthy, valuable and informative content. Sites full of spammy rubbish clearly wouldn’t be linked as they are useless.
Linkbuilding schemes are a relatively complex area, but a good strategy will ensure the right websites for your industry are hosting links to your content. “Bad” linkbuilding schemes include buying backlinks from random sites, or participating in link schemes where vast swathes of sites backlink to each other in a bid to dupe Google’s algorithm.
It seems Google is actually manually reviewing sites which its algorithm has flagged as having “unnatural links”. Around one-million messages have been sent to webmasters who Google suspects have dabbled in black hat link schemes. The fact Google has done this send-out manually shows how important it is to get this right: webmasters who’ve built links with great content may still be flagged by the robotic algorithm – human review checks whether the spiders were right.
The latest update will see these “bad” SEO practices penalised – so sites who use honest, white hat techniques don’t get pushed down the rankings by cheats.
“The change will decrease rankings for sites that we believe are violating Google’s existing quality guidelines,” said Google engineer Matt Cutts in a blog post. “We’ve always targeted webspam in our rankings, and this algorithm represents another improvement in our efforts to reduce webspam and promote high quality content… our advice to webmasters is to focus on creating high quality sites that create a good user experience.”
News brought to you by ClickThrough – specialists in Search Engine Optimisation and Internet Marketing.
