TRAFFIC
now be punished (at page level) where the
anchor diversity had an abnormally low
portion of ‘other’ types of links – i.e. not
containing the brand, or keyword and nontransactional link text, often a call-to-action.
We always have to keep in mind that in
an increasingly variable environment where
we are unable to isolate all the variables,
much of the data, which ties together
cause and effect, is merely circumstantial
evidence, but over time, when the same
cause and effect appears to result in the
same symptom, we become more confident
in our theories, and this confidence drives
our strategy.
So we have identified two ways for
Google to find and punish spammers, and
by applying these filters using different
thresholds related to the norms within a
SERP, Google now had a way to punish foul
play based on entirely diffe rent, acceptable
norms. These vary from SERP to SERP.
Given that some SERPs are a cesspool, it
was once again game-on for the spammers,
simply a matter of spamming better than
the competition (which in the world of SEO
means: ‘business as usual’).
1. Those who believe rumours, propaganda,
chatter and gossip
2. Those who analyse the data and make
decision based on facts
I had made it a personal policy to stay
away from the forums, and make decisions
based on facts. Penguin, in all its iterations,
appears to be a simple incremental
tightening of the thumb screw formerly
known as May Day (with the addition of
Disavow data), and since there have been
a few iterations, we have to assume it will
continue to tighten.
We can see from Figure 1 that the latest
iteration of this tightening of the threshold
occurred on Jan 24 2014.
Figure 1
Google leaves trace evidence for
forensic seos to investigate
The wonderful thing about an algorithm
update is that a significant change provides
those observing with a large volume
of results which could be analysed and
accurately interpreted. One way to do this
is to group those sites which suffered and
those that benefited and understand the
common denominators of each group.
I have no doubt that this was the reason
Google had already begun making multiple
changes simultaneously making it harder
to isolate the variables and draw solid
conclusions. By the time Penguin was
rolled out, it seemed as if Google had also
involved its press office (I was hearing
about their shiny new algorithm on the
mainstream media).
Since there was now an increasing
number of Big Data-aggregating-forensicSEOs, new methods of dispersion and
misdirection were required. Propaganda
was driving an increasing number of
reactionary SEO decisions, which in turn
was messing with the data and making it
even harder still to isolate the variables.
There are two types of SEO:
32
iGB Affiliate FEBRUARY/MARCH 2014
Figure 2 shows one of the many domains
impacted on January 24 (casinoaction.com
for the phrase: play casino games).
As you can see, there is a increase in
volatility which indicates some harsh
punishment is being dished out, while
the increased thickness of the cyan band
indicates an abnormally large number
of sites are being punished. Figures 3
and 4 show another site to be affected:
oddschecker.com for the phrases ‘betting
online’ and ‘online betting’.
We have some compelling yet
circumstantial evidence of an algorithm
update on January 24, 2014, however, let’s
look at the simplified anchor profile data,
since we can’t rule this out as part of a wave
Source: http://my.reach.ai
Figure 2
Figure 3
Source: http://my.reach.ai - Casinoaction.com
Source: http://my.reach.ai – Oddschecker.com – ‘betting online’