Google’s head of search, Danny Sullivan, has confirmed that the search engine has not launched algorithmic actions aimed at abusing the site’s reputation.
This clarification addresses speculation within the SEO community that recent traffic drops are related to Google’s previously announced policy update.
Sullivan says no update has been released
Lily Ray, an SEO professional, shared a screenshot on Twitter that shows a significant drop in Groupon website traffic starting May 6.
Ray suggested that this was evidence that Google had begun implementing algorithmic penalties on sites that violate the company’s site reputation abuse policy.
However, Sullivan quickly chimed in, stating:
“We haven’t put in place any algorithmic actions on site reputation abuse. Well I imagine when we do, it will be very clear. Publishers who see changes and think that’s it, it’s not, the results change constantly for all sorts of reasons.”
We have not implemented algorithmic actions to abuse the site’s reputation. Well, I imagine that when we do, it will be very clear. Editors who see changes and think that’s it, it’s not, the results are constantly changing for all kinds of reasons. Stocks currently only…
— Google SearchLiaison (@searchliaison) May 23, 2024
Sullivan added that when actions are rolled out, they will only affect specific content, not entire websites.
This is an important distinction because it suggests that even if a site has some manually penalized pages, the rest of the domain can still rank normally.
I don’t know what this chart is based on. Third-party viewability statistics? Or is this data for each site reported directly from Search Console? But beyond that, again, we haven’t added any algorithmic components for site reputation abuse. What I said in my original answer is still…
— Google SearchLiaison (@searchliaison) May 23, 2024
Background on Google’s site reputation abuse policy
Earlier this year, Google announced a new policy to combat what it calls “site reputation abuse.”
It refers to situations where third-party content is published on authoritative domains with little oversight or involvement from the host site.
Examples include sponsored posts, advertisements, and content from partners that have little or no relevance to a site’s primary purpose.
Under the new policy, Google is taking manual action against offending pages and plans to incorporate algorithmic detection.
What this means for publishers and SEOs
While Google hasn’t released any algorithmic updates related to site reputation abuse, manual actions have publishers on high alert.
Those who rely heavily on sponsored content or partner posts to drive traffic should audit their sites and remove any potential policy violations.
Sullivan’s confirmation that no algorithmic changes have occurred may provide temporary relief.
In addition, their statements also serve as a reminder that significant fluctuations in rankings can occur at any time due to a variety of factors, not just the implementation of specific policies.
FAQ
Will future Google algorithmic actions affect entire websites or specific content?
When Google eventually implements algorithmic actions for site reputation abuse, those actions will target specific content rather than the entire website.
This means that if certain pages are in violation, only those pages will be affected, allowing other parts of the site to continue to rank normally.
What should publishers and SEOs do in light of Google’s site reputation abuse policy?
Publishers and SEO professionals should audit their sites to identify and remove any content that may violate Google’s Site Reputation Abuse Policy.
This includes sponsored posts and content from partners that does not align with the main purpose of the site. Taking these steps can mitigate the risk of manual penalties from Google.
What is the context for the recent traffic drops seen in the SEO community?
Google claims that the recent takedowns of coupon sites are not linked to any algorithmic actions to abuse the site’s reputation. Traffic fluctuations can occur for a variety of reasons and are not always linked to a specific algorithm update.
Featured Image: sockagphoto/Shutterstock
[ad_2]
Source link
