Did Google's Farmer Update Positively/Negatively Affect Your Search Traffic?
-
Oddly the handful of sites that I have which should have most probably been affected negatively actually saw boosts in traffic, CTR on ads and eCPM on ads. Not huge jumps.. but yeah.. I benefited which was odd. These domains are testbeds I set up a long time ago to find the upper limit of what you can "get away with" in google so I know where to draw the line.
Other interesting facts. I rand some tests over the weekend (may not be large enough to be statistically relevant yet) but it seems the farmer update has almost no impact on indexation of poor or duplicate content given enough raw link juice (no anchor, ip diversity or any other cool factors, just a flat link from a big ol' bucket of link juice) which I find disappointing. =/ I expected a bit of a challenge after all this hoopla. Even though I rock the greyhat Im still pretty anti dupe/crap content.
-
Awesome use of the new Q&A Rand!
One of my biggest content sites actually has seen an increase in traffic since the "farmer" update. The content on it is definitely a tick above content farmed crap, but it's also not 5-star.
For what it's worth, it's monetized with AdSense ads and there's really no branded traffic to speak of naturally.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Looking for an SEO consultant/agency specializing in ecommerce and data architecture? Any suggestions?
Looking for an SEO consultant/agency specializing in ecommerce and data architecture? Any suggestions?
Industry News | | EE-Tom1 -
Using 'Pipes' for Page Titles
A couple of years ago I was told to take off the 'pipes' for my page titles. To be more organic ....now I am being told it is best to put them back. For example I just read it is a good idea to do the following: 'Using pipes to separate these words would look like: SEO Company | Franchise Services | Higher Visibility Although this might not be the creative title you’re used to seeing on blogs, it’s a title that is incredibly optimized for Google (yet it still lets readers know what they can expect).' Should I replace the titles of my poor performing pages, with the common format which I am told is: Page Branding | keyword 1 |keyword 2 or keyword 1 | keyword 2 | Page branding. And I should keep the piping. Any opinions?
Industry News | | Llanero0 -
100's of versions of the same page. Is rel=canonical the solution???
Hi, I am currently working with an eCommerce site that has a goofy set up for their contact form. Basically, their are hundreds of "contact us" pages that look exactly the same but have different URLs and are used to help the store owner determine which product the user contacted them about. So almost every product has it's own "contact us" URL. The obvious solution is to do away with this set up but if that is not an option, would a rel=canonical tag linked back to the actually "contact us" page be a possible solution? Or is the canonical tag only used to show the difference between www vs non-www? Thanks!
Industry News | | RossFruin0 -
Google Alert not working - anyone else have this problem?
I have a Google Alert that has stopped pulling in recent results even though a web search indicates that the pages are being indexed. None of the alert settings have changed. Anyone else have this happen recently and know how to remedy this problem?
Industry News | | BostonWright0 -
Google Will Penalize Sites Repeatedly Accused Of Copyright Infringement
Has someone filed a large number of DMCA “takedown” requests against your site? If so, look out. That’s the latest penalty that may cause you to rank lower in Google’s search results. It joins other penalties such as “Panda” and “Penguin.” We’re dubbing it the “Emanuel Update” in honor of Hollywood mogul Ari Emanuel, who helped prompt it. Read more here: http://searchengineland.com/dmca-requests-now-used-in-googles-ranking-algorithm-130118 What do you guys think MOZERS?
Industry News | | Chenzo0 -
What if the Internet ran out of room? In fact, it's already happening.
Have you heard about this - you should of by now! Read the full article here: http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/ My thoughts are the recent updates and those of which that have been undisclosed at this point are closely related to the expanding of the addresses that will be assigned. What do you think? watch?v=-Uwjt32NvVA&feature=player_embedded
Industry News | | Chenzo0 -
Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here: With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact. As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that. However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant. Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written? Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+? Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO; Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541 -
Google places rejected
google has rejected a few listing i have for certain businesses, i have read the guidlines and I am well inside them. It does say that if business name is changed you need to re-verify, but does not allow you to do so. I think google have lost their way, they should stop building operating systems and electric cars and get their web site sorted out.
Industry News | | AlanMosley0