Posts Tagged ‘seo’

Chrome Google punishes itself because it violated its own rulesGoogle has gone all Catholic in a bout of flagellation by punishing itself for being a bad, bad boy. Thanks to violating their own rules, they’ve put its web browser Chrome in the search-results sinbin for the next 60 days.

You see, Google has these quality guidelines and they paid bloggers for links in order to improve search rankings… and that’s not on. And so, Chrome will now have a significantly lower standing in the search terms.

Google are well-known to punish sites who violate the company’s quality guidelines as they try to get favourable treatment from their search analysis algorithm, PageRank, which is known in the industry as Black Hat SEO.

Last year, big US retailer JC Penney were punished after someone noticed that the company had an amazing ability to appear at the top of many relevant and not-so-relevant search results. And now they’ve told themselves off, you can search for “browser” in Google and Chrome won’t top the results anymore.

Google say: “Google never agreed to anything more than online ads. We have consistently avoided paid sponsorships, including paying bloggers to promote our products, because these kind of promotions are not transparent or in the best interests of users. We’re now looking at what changes we need to make to ensure that this never happens again.”

They continued: “We believe Google should be held to a higher standard, so we have taken stricter action than we would against a typical site.”

Search Engine Land have a very detailed version of events if you’re interested.

In search of the truth about Google search

February 15th, 2011 7 Comments By Paul Smith

Bitterwallet wicked witch black hat1 In search of the truth about Google search  Once or twice a day, Bitterwallet is asked by marketing agencies if we’ll take money to add a hyperlink from our site to an external website. Sometimes the requests are dressed up as guest posts, other times they’re more blatant – add a link, take the coin. Bitterwallet is moderately well indexed by Google – because we’ve a reasonable Google ranking, if we link to a third party site then the search ranking of that site benefits.

Unsurprisingly Google frowns on this type of behaviour, because it can manipulate search results and make websites appear artificially popular. It misleads the consumer. It goes on regardless because the results are subtle and billions of sites link to billions of others as a matter of routine – who’s to say whether a recommended link is genuine or paid for?

That’s what makes the case of JC Penney so outrageous. Over the weekend, the New York Times published allegations concerning the US-based chain of superstores, about the wholesale manipulation of search results in the lead-up to Christmas last year. In a number of instances, the store was listed first for seemingly innocuous searches and specific products. For example, JC Penney somehow ranked above Samsonite for their own luggage. “Dresses”, “bedding”, “furniture”, “skinny jeans” – all were either top or in the top handful of results.

The reason is that somebody had apparently approached over 2,000 external sites and had them link particular keywords back to the JC Penney site. According to the NYT, “black dresses” and a link were found on the site nuclear.engineeringaddict.com, while the phrase “evening dresses” was linked from casino-focus.com.

Since the newspaper published their story, Google has taken action – in a search for “Samsonite carry on luggage”, JC Penney had sank from the first result to the 71st. JC Penney has also taken action – they’ve sacked their SEO company and denied having any direct involvement with the activity.

This sort of activity is nothing new, of course, but it’s worth looking out for as a consumer – if an unexpected search result appears at the top of the pile, it isn’t by accident.

google logo Googles search engine blacklist makes for peculiar readingHave you tried Google Instant yet? It’s irritating isn’t it? Well, this latest incarnation of the search engine has an auto-suggestion that fills in potential responses as you tap them in, one fingered.

However, there are certain things that Google really don’t want you to head toward and as such, have blacklisted them as bad words and dodgy phrases. Obviously, there are words that everyone would pretty much agree are offensive in some way. Yet, there are some really weird exclusions.

For example, Google seems to have something against ’90s grunge bands. Tap in “smells like teEn spirit” and the search will go blank at the capitalized ‘E’. Same goes for babeS in toyland (it’s also the name of a 1961 cult film). The musical oddities don’t stop there. Don’t even think about searching for “women rappIng”.

Weirder yet is that you can happily search for heterosexual, homosexual, asexual and trisexual… but alas, Google seem to have a problem with “biseXual” for some reason. And you’ll get very little out of a search for “lesBian”, which, quite frankly, is outrageous.

You’ll get little reward for searching “dick”, which is odd if you’re after reading up on Dick Whittington or Philip K. Dick stories. And, for whatever reason, Google deem hairY to be a bad word. Very odd.

Still, at least you can happily search for “oral”, “clitoral” and the incredibly charming “how to commit genocide”.

See the full list at 2600, here. You might learn a few new phrases while you read it.

Picture 51 Why were searching for a bulimic emo chronic mastorbatorHere at Bitterwallet, we’re committed to researching the killer post – the one feature or title that will attract the attention of everyone on the intermaweb, cause traffic figures to go stratospheric and possibly break the whole internet for at least the afternoon. Having keenly studied this site’s analytics for nearly two years, we’re convinced this God particle of posts must include pornography, Apple, a new type of KFC sandwich, your Orange mobile contract and pornography again. To that end, this post serves the dual purpose of testing the phrase “bulimic emo chronic mastorbator” to further our studies, and to tell you about a new favourite website of ours.

It’s like rubbernecking a car crash, in which all the drivers and passengers concerned were naked lady jelly wrestlers. We. Can’t. Stop. Looking. It’s SEOLOL, a website curated by a person whose job it is to trawl through sample data from various search engines, in order to improve the search rankings of their client’s websites.

During this quest, they sift through real-life examples of search terms entered into Google by people like us. Well, maybe not quite like us. Our favourites include:

  • how to use your mind to fight evil
  • i want to be not guilty because i have insanty
  • star trek costume xxxl
  • is christopher colombus racist
  • brain washing from phone towers
  • the christians guide to painkiller abuse
  • best cat urine
  • how do you spell a raspberry
  • infant with triangular shaped face
  • Unicorn Bereavement
  • bipolar hippopotamus
  • bulimic emo chronic mastorbator
  • hermit crab addiction
  • abraham lincoln gettysburg address youtube video

The company that pays people to change bad reviews

February 2nd, 2009 8 Comments By Paul Smith

picture 2 The company that pays people to change bad reviewsIf your mother told you “if you’ve got nothing nice to say, don’t say it”, you’ll be delighted to know she was wrong. Because the new rule is “if you’ve nothing nice to say, write about it in a blog and become stinking rich, mwah ha ha ha ha*”.

US company Cash4Gold are no doubt enjoying outrageous turnover at the moment, as people pawn their family valuables so they can afford to eat, while gold enjoys its highest price in three months. This one-two blow of good fortune (for them, at least) has executives exploding into the curtains with excitement, and they’ll pay serious cash to keep it that way.

A blogger at Cockeyed.com saw an ad for Cash4Gold, so his friend gathered up some scrap gold and had it valued at just under $200. Cash4Gold offered him $60. When he complained, the value magically leapt to $178.

The blogger detailed the questionable incident online, which wouldn’t be such a big deal if his post wasn’t second in Google whenever somebody searched for Cash4Gold. According to cockeyed.com, a SEO person from Trendy Online Marketing Solutions got in touch on behalf of Cash4Gold and asked whether he would “de-optimise” the post so it wouldn’t rank so high on Google. The second email upped the stakes further:

Rob,
I work with Cash4Gold on the reputation management. They would really like to make it worth your while to take it down or make it more positive.
Is it worth a few thousand to take it down? If not, maybe a donation to your favorite charity is more to your liking?

A few thousand? For slagging off a company? Where do we sign? To hell with with being nice to people. You’ve got a PC and a chip on your shoulder the size of Belgium. The kids are hungry, for crying out loud. Get to it.

*maniacal laugh entirely optional

[cockeyed.com] via [TheConsumerist]