Google yesterday blogged on its Mobile Ads Blog about location bid adjustment and offer extensions available with the Enhanced Campaigns.
This blogpost informs marketers about the following things:
The controversial BitTorrent website, PirateBay, is no longer present amongst the top results when users search for the brand keyword 'pirate bay,' irrespective of the user’s location. However, for other search terms 'The Pirate Bay' is still listed on top. Google has refused to comment on the the downranking of the PirateBay website.
An interesting thing about the recently launched portal by Google 'How Search Works' is that one can see examples of those pages which Google had removed manually from their index on the Fighting Spam page.
The most recent webmaster video by Matt Cutts is about AJAX, pushState and hashbang (#!) style. In this video Matt Cutts recommends the use of PushState to update URLs.
The over-publicized Google ban on the site Interflora was removed on 3rd March. It is very strange that Google has not yet commented on this particular ban. Usually, they have been outspoken and upfront about previous public penalties, such as the ones imposed on JCPenny, BuildMyRank, BMW.de and Ricoh.de. A ban so big as the one imposed on Interflora deserves few comments from Google, as Interflora was missing from branded search queries for almost eleven days.
Yesterday, Google posted on Google+ announcing the addition of a way to filter the search terms within the search term report.
Here is what Google said about this addition:
‘Wordpress or Blogger for SEO’ has been the big question for the webmasters. Most vouch for WordPress though there are many who will go for Blogger any day. Matt Cutts throws light on the issue.
Fighting Spam section of How Search Works , a new website launched by Google, shares some real examples of ‘pure spam’ pages that have been removed from search results. It may give you an insight on how their spam algorithm works. (For more information on How Search Works, refer to our March 2 publish.)
Search Quality Rating Guidelines officially released by Google is just a curtailed version of the old one that was leaked by an insider. The most recent version of the document had 161 pages, while the public document released by Google consists only 43 pages.
Human search quality raters with Google use the document when grading the search results. Google, as part of their efforts to be transparent, has released the document.
For webmasters who were not very sure about the review process by Google spam team, Matt Cutts has come up with an explanation. The question was – ‘When Google does a manual review do you guys use a "set standard" when banning (removing from the index) sites or do you guys ban based on if it "looks bad" or even smells like spam?’
@pagetraffic
