The Internet Marketing Driver

  • GSQi Home
  • About Glenn Gabe
  • SEO Services
    • Algorithm Update Recovery
    • Technical SEO Audits
    • Website Redesigns and Site Migrations
    • SEO Training
  • Blog
    • Web Stories
  • Contact GSQi

Archives for March 2014

Did the Softer Panda Update Arrive on March 24, 2014? SMBs Showing Modest Recovery Across Industries

March 31, 2014 By Glenn Gabe 17 Comments

Softer Panda Update on March 24, 2014

As a consultant helping a number of companies with Panda recovery, I’ve been eagerly awaiting the March Panda update.  Based on the data I have access to, I was able to pick up and analyze Panda UJan14, UFeb14, and the infamous UFeb14Rev (where Google re-rolled out the algorithm update after mistakenly hammering movie blogs).  Needless to say, it’s been an interesting beginning to the year Panda-wise. And if you’re wondering what U{Month}{Date} is, that’s the naming convention I’m using for unconfirmed Panda updates.

And in case you forgot, Google announced in July of 2013 that they wouldn’t be confirming Panda updates anymore.  As I explained in a post soon after that, unconfirmed Panda updates can cause mass chaos and can drive webmasters dealing with mysterious traffic losses insane.  But, I also explained that if you have access to a lot of Panda data, you can sometimes pick up the updates.  And that’s where SEOs helping a lot of companies with Panda can come in very handy.  Those SEOs have turned into human Panda barometers and can help identify when the specific updates roll out. Remember, we know that Panda is supposed to roll out monthly, and can take about ten days to roll out.  It’s not real-time, but Google trusts the algorithm enough to unleash it once per month.

I have been able to identify a number of updates since July of 2013, including UJan14 from January 11th and the flawed UFeb14 from February 11th (which was the movie blog fiasco I mentioned earlier).  But it’s been relatively quiet since then from a Panda standpoint.  I’ve only seen some moderate movement around 3/11/14, but nothing that I could nail down as Panda.  But then the 24th arrived, and it quickly became clear that something widespread was taking place.  Just like a Panda update.

Upward Movement Across Panda Victims
During the week of March 24th, I was checking organic search trending across clients and quickly noticed a number of increases from Google Organic.  The first one that caught my attention was a website that had been battling Panda for a long time.  It’s an ecommerce site that has seen many ups and downs since February of 2011 when Panda first arrived (and more downs than ups if you know what I mean).  The 25th showed an 18% increase in traffic, and it has consistently remained higher since then.  Google Webmaster Tools now shows increases in impressions and clicks starting on the 24th.  Comparing the entire week to previous weeks reveals Google Organic traffic was up 15%.

An example of a bump in Google Organic traffic starting on 3/24/14:

Panda Recovery Begins on 3/24/14

And that site wasn’t alone.  I was seeing similar lifts in Google Organic traffic across a number of Panda victims I have been helping.  That lift ranges from 9% to 24%, with a few outliers that saw much larger increases (45%+).  Note, those sites seeing larger increases didn’t have massive amounts of traffic, so it was easier to show a much larger lift.  That being said, the lift was significant for them.  But overall, I mostly saw moderate recoveries versus significant ones during this update.  And that leads me to think we just might have seen the “softer” Panda update that was supposed to help small to medium sized businesses (SMBs).

 

Matt Cutts and a “Softer” Panda
At SMX West, Matt Cutts from Google explained that they were working on a “softer” version of Panda that would make it less of an issue with certain websites.  Matt said the “next generation” Panda would be aimed at helping small businesses that might be affected by Panda.  Well, based on what I’m seeing, it sure looks like the new Panda could have rolled out.  Almost all of the companies I analyzed that were positively impacted by the 3/24 update could be categorized as SMBs.  They aren’t big brands, major corporations, they don’t have a lot of brand recognition, and some are run by just a few people.

In addition, most of the recoveries fell into the 10-20% range, which were modest increases.  Don’t get me wrong, that’s still a nice lift for some of the companies that previously got hit by Panda, but it’s not a massive recovery like you might see during other Panda updates.  For example, a company I was helping that got hit by Phantom in May of 2013 ended up recovering in August and surged by 68% in Google Organic.  That’s a big recovery.  So, modest recoveries line up with a “softer” algo that could help small businesses (in my opinion).


March 24, 2014 – A Good Day for (SMB) Panda Victims
Below, I have included some screenshots of Google Organic trending for companies impacted by Panda UMarch14.  You can clearly see a lift starting on the 24th and remaining throughout the week.  Note, these companies span various industries, so it wasn’t tied to one specific niche.

Panda Recovery SMB on 3/24/14 GA Data

 

Panda Recovery on 3/24/14 Google Webmaster Tools

 

Panda Recovery on 3/24/14 Google Analytics

 

Panda Recovery on 3/24/14 GWT

 

Panda Recovery on 3/24/14 Searchmetrics

 

 

Common Characteristics and Drivers for Recovery
If you have been impacted by Panda in the past, or if you are simply interested in the algorithm update, then I’m sure you are wondering why these specific companies recovered on 3/24.  And no, not all companies I’m helping with Panda recovered.   Now, only Google knows the refinements they made to the Panda algorithm to soften its blow on small businesses.  That said, I think it’s important to understand what Panda victims have addressed in order to better understand how the algorithm works.

Below, I’ll cover some of the common problems I’ve been helping companies tackle over the past several months Panda-wise (the companies that recovered during UMarch14).  I’m not singling out certain factors as the trigger for this specific update and recovery.  But I do think it’s worth covering several of the factors that were causing serious problems Panda-wise, and that were rectified over the past few months leading up to the recoveries.

Over-optimized Thin Pages
Several of the websites that experienced recovery had serious problems with thin pages that were over-optimized.  For example, pages with very little content combined with over-optimized title tags, meta descriptions, body copy, etc.  And the body copy was typically only a paragraph or two and was clearly written for search engines.

Over-optimized Titles and Panda

Doorway Pages
Along the same lines, several of the companies employed doorway pages to try and gain organic search traffic across target keywords.  For example, they would reproduce pages and simply change the optimization to target additional keywords.  For some of the sites I was helping, this was rampant.

Duplicate Pages and Panda

Keyword Stuffing
Some of the companies that saw recovery were keyword stuffing pages throughout their sites.  For example, all core page elements excessively contained target keywords.  The copy was extremely unnatural, the on-page titles (which were often the h1s), were clearly targeting keywords, the navigation was all using exact match anchor text, and the footer was crammed with more keyword-rich content and exact match anchor text links.  And many times, the target keywords were repeatedly bolded throughout the content.  It was obvious what the goal was while analyzing the pages… it was all for SEO.

Keyword Stuffing and Panda

Excessive Linking Using Exact Match Anchor Text
Some of the websites that saw recovery were previously weaving exact match anchor text links into every page on the site.  So, you would visit a page and immediately find exact match or rich anchor text links from the copy to other pages on the site.  It was excessive, unnecessary, and made for a horrible user experience.  And as I explained above, several of the sites were also employing spammy footers with exact match anchor text links (and many of them).

Affiliate Links
Several of the companies that saw recovery were including followed affiliate links in the site content.  Those links should absolutely have been nofollowed.  During initial audits I would uncover followed affiliate links, flag them, and document them in a spreadsheet.  When sharing my findings with my clients, some of the links were so old that my clients didn’t even remember they were there!  “Affiliate creep” can cause big problems post-Panda.  Nofollowing all affiliate links or removing them was important for sure.

Followed Affiliate Links and Panda

Nuking Duplicate Content or Noindexing Thin Pages
Some of the companies that saw recovery had an excessive amount of duplicate or thin content.  Upon surfacing the problematic urls, my clients either removed or noindexed those pages.  In some cases, that impacted tens of thousands of pages (or more).  Addressing “low-quality” content is one of the most important things a company can do Panda-wise.  And that’s especially the case if some of those pages were ranking well in Google (prior to the Panda hit).  You can read more about the sinister surge in traffic before Panda strikes to learn more about that phenomenon.

Noindexing Content and Panda

 

Warning: Some Sites Slipped Through The Panda Cracks
I also wanted to quickly mention something that can happen with algorithm updates.  There were two sites I analyzed that showed a modest recovery that shouldn’t have recovered at all.  They were rogue sites that some of my clients had set up in the past that were simply sitting out there.  Those sites are not getting a lot of attention from my clients, and there has been very little work on those sites from a Panda standpoint.  Needless to say, I was surprised to see those sites positively impacted by Panda UMarch14.  Sure, they didn’t surge in traffic, but they definitely increased starting on the 24th.  This also leads me to believe that we saw the softer Panda update that Matt Cutts mentioned.

False Panda Recovery on 3/24/14
Summary – Be In It For The Long Haul
As I explained earlier, Matt Cutts promised a “softer Panda” at SMX West that could help small businesses.  Based on what I have seen, that new update might have rolled out on 3/24.  I saw a number of companies that were dealing with Panda problems recover to some extent starting on that date.

If you have been hit by Panda, then the recoveries I documented above should signal hope.  The companies that saw recovery have worked hard to rectify a range of “content quality” problems.  Audits were completed, problems were identified, and a lot of work was completed over the past few months.

The good news is that a number of the websites making significant changes saw a positive impact from Panda UMarch14.  I think it underscores a Panda philosophy I have been preaching for a long time.  You must be in it for the long haul.  Short-term thinking will not result in recovery.  You need to have the proper analysis completed, identify all content-related problems, and work hard to rectify them as quickly as  you can.  And Google crafting an algorithm update that softens the blow of Panda sure helps.  So thank you Matt Cutts.  From what I can see, there are companies seeing more traffic from Google today than they did a week ago.  And that’s never a bad thing.

GG

 

Filed Under: algorithm-updates, google, seo

Smartphone Rankings Demotion in Google Search Results Based on Faulty Redirects [Case Study]

March 27, 2014 By Glenn Gabe 2 Comments

Smartphone Rankings Demotion in Google Search Results

In June of 2013, Pierre Far from Google explained that providing a poor mobile experience could impact a site’s rankings in the smartphone search results.  Basically, if a site is making mistakes with how it is handling mobile visits, then that site risks being demoted in the search results when users are searching from their smartphones.  And as smartphones boom, that message scared a lot of people.

Specifically, Pierre listed two common mistakes that could cause a poor user experience.  First, having faulty redirects could force users to irrelevant content, or to just to the mobile homepage of a website.  For example, imagine searching for a specific product, service, review, blog post, etc., and finding that in the search results.  But as you click through, the site redirects you to the mobile homepage.  That sounds really annoying, right?  But it happens more than you think.  And that’s especially true since the problem is hidden for desktop users.

But that June day in 2013 passed, and businesses moved on.  Sure, mobile is important, it’s taking over, blah blah blah.  In addition, I’m sure many wondered if Google would really demote a site in the smartphone search results.  I mean, why move a powerful site like yours down in the results when your pages really should rank highly (like they do on desktop)?  Google would probably only do that to low quality sites, right?..  I think you see where I’m going with this.

 

Faulty Redirects – An Example Caught in the Wild
Last week, I was checking Techmeme for the latest technology news and clicked through an article written by Electronista.  I forget which story the article was about, but Electronista was listed first for the news at hand.  So I clicked through and was immediately redirected to the mobile homepage.  I navigated back to Techmeme, clicked the listing again, and was promptly redirected again.  So I visited another site listed for the story on Techmeme and got the information I was looking for.

*ALERT* – That’s exactly the user experience Google is trying to avoid happening to people searching Google.  And that’s one of the core scenarios that Pierre listed that could result in a rankings demotion.  So that got me thinking.  What about other pages on Electronista?  Were they also redirecting mobile users to the mobile homepage?  And if this problem was widespread, were they being demoted in the smartphone search results?  And so I dug in.

Side note: I’m not targeting Electronista by writing this.  Actually, I hope this post helps them.  I can only imagine that if they fix the problem, then their traffic from smartphone users on Google will skyrocket.


An Example of a Faulty Redirect on Electronista

I’m sure you are wondering how this looks.  Here’s a quick example.  Let’s say I was researching a Nexus 7 tablet and comparing it to an iPad mini.  Electronista has an article focused on that topic.  On desktop or tablet, I visit that url and can view the entire post.  But on my smartphone, visiting that url redirects me to the mobile homepage (via a 302 redirect).

Desktop URL resolves correctly:

Desktop URL on Electronista.com

When searching on my smartphone, the site incorrectly redirects me to the mobile homepage:

Redirect to Mobile Homepage on Electronista.com

 

Here is the 302 redirect in action:
302 Redirect to Mobile Homepage on Electronista.com

 

Examples of Demoted Smartphone Rankings
Electronista.com has 143K pages indexed in Google.  And every url I checked on my smartphone is redirecting to the mobile homepage.  So it wouldn’t take Google very long to pick up the problem, and across many pages on the site.  But now I needed evidence of rankings being demoted based on this problem.

So I fired up SEMRush and checked the organic search reporting for Electronista.com.  I started picking keywords that the site ranked highly for (on page 1 on Google).  Then I started searching on my desktop and smartphone using Chrome for Android (incognito mode).  And low and behold, I noticed the problem almost immediately.  Smartphone rankings were either much lower or non-existent for content that was ranking highly on desktop.  Almost all of the keyword/ranking combinations I checked revealed the demotion in the smartphone search rankings.

Note, not every Electronista listing was being demoted.  There were a few outliers where the page still ranked well (as well as it did on desktop search).  But the user experience was still horrible.  I was redirected to the mobile homepage and forced to fend for myself.  Needless to say, I wasn’t going to start searching the mobile site for the url I expected to see.  I just bounced.  And again, Google doesn’t want its users to have to deal with this situation.  Instead, Google will just demote the search rankings on smartphones.

A picture is worth a thousand words, so let’s take a look at some examples.  Below, I have provided screenshots of the demotion in action.  You’ll see the desktop search results first and then the smartphone search results below that.

Red Camera For Sale (ranks #8 on desktop and N/A on smartphone)

Desktop search results:
Desktop Search for Red Camera on Google

Mobile search results:
Mobile Search for Red Camera on Sale on Google

 

LTE Microcell (ranks #10 on desktop and N/A on smartphone)

Desktop search results:
Desktop Search for LTE Microcell on Google

Mobile search results:
Mobile Search for LTE Microcell on Google

 

HTC Vivid Radar (ranks #3 on desktop and #20 on smartphone)

Desktop search results:
Desktop Search for HTC Vivid Radar on Google

Mobile search results:
Mobile Search for HTC Vivid Radar on Google

 

Google Nexus 7 Versus ipad mini (ranks #8 on desktop and #18 on smartphone)

Desktop search results:
Desktop Search for Google Nexus 7 Versus iPad Mini on Google

Mobile search results:
Mobile Search for Google Nexus 7 Versus iPad Mini on Google

Skullcandy Pipe Review (ranks #5 on desktop and #10 on smartphone)

Desktop search results:
Desktop Search for Skullcandy Pipe Review on Google

Mobile search results:
Mobile Search for Skullcandy Pipe Review on Google

 

And here are a few where the rankings were not demoted.  They should be demoted, but they weren’t (at least for now):

 

Commodore 64 remake
Mobile Search for Commodore 64 Remake Review on Google 

 

Windows 8 touch screen requirements
Mobile Search for Windows 8 Touch Screen Requirements on Google 

 

 

How To Avoid Demoted Smartphone Search Rankings (Listen up Electronista)

The solution to this problem is fairly straightforward.  If you are using separate webpages for mobile content, then you should redirect your desktop pages directly to the mobile url for that content.  Do not redirect all requests from smartphones to the mobile homepage.  As Google explains, “This kind of redirect disrupts a user’s workflow and may lead them to stop using the site and go elsewhere.”  And by the way, Google also says that it’s better to show smartphone users the desktop content versus implementing a faulty redirect to the mobile homepage.  I completely agree.

In addition, make sure you use rel alternate on your desktop pages pointing to your mobile pages.  And then use rel canonical on your mobile pages pointing to your desktop pages.  You can read Google’s documentation for handling various mobile setups here.

Update: Pierre Far from Google provided some feedback based on reading this case study.  I asked Pierre how quickly Google would remove the demotion once the redirect problem was fixed.  Here is what Pierre said:
“When a fix is implemented, we’d detect it as part of the usual crawling and processing of each URL.”

So, it seems that once the redirects are corrected, Google will detect the proper setup as it recrawls the site.  As it does that, the pages should return to their normal rankings.  If Electronista makes the necessary changes, I’ll try and figure out how quickly their smartphone rankings return to normal. Stay tuned.

Avoid Smartphone-only Errors
I covered faulty redirects and the impact they can have on search rankings, but there’s another scenario that can get you in trouble.  Google also explains that smartphone-only errors can also result in demoted smartphone rankings.  And in my experience with auditing websites, these types of errors can go unnoticed for a long time.

For example, if you incorrectly handle Googlebot for smartphones, then you could incorrectly present error pages to users.  In addition, the code that handles mobile pages could be bombing, which would also present errors to smartphone users.  Needless to say, I highly recommend testing your setup thoroughly via a number of devices, checking your site via mobile emulators, and crawling your site as Googlebot for smartphones.  The combination will often reveal problems lying below the mobile surface.

Note, Google Webmaster Tools also recently added smartphone crawl errors.  The report provides a wealth of information about the errors that Googlebot for Smartphones is running into.  And that includes server errors, 404s, soft 404s, faulty redirects, and blocked urls.  I highly recommend you check out your reporting today.  You never know what you’re going to find.

Smartphone Crawl Errors Reporting in Google Webmaster Tools

 

Summary – Turning Demotions into Promotions
As mobile booms, more and more people are searching from their smartphones.  Google is well aware of the problems that mobile users can face while searching for, and viewing, content on their phones.  And in response to those problems, Google will demote your rankings in the smartphone search results.  Electronista is currently implementing faulty redirects, and based on that setup, its rankings are being heavily demoted.  Don’t let this happen to you.  Check your setup, view your reporting in Google Webmaster Tools, and then quickly fix any problems you are presenting to mobile users.  Think of all the traffic you might be losing by not having the right mobile setup in place.  The good news is it’s a relatively easy fix.  Now fire up those smartphones and visit your site.  :)

GG

Filed Under: google, seo

Flawed Google Algorithm Updates, Movie Blogs, and Copyright Infringement – Tracking The Panda Updates From February 2014

March 2, 2014 By Glenn Gabe 25 Comments

Summary:  Google ended up rolling out two major algorithm updates in February of 2014.  The first, which seemed like the monthly Panda update, caused serious collateral damage with a number of prominent movie blogs. After hearing from one movie blog owner, Matt Cutts of Google got involved, and Google refined the algorithm.  Two days later, Google Organic traffic surged back to the movie blogs, signaling that Google rolled out the algorithm update again. This post provides details, analysis, and findings based on analyzing movie blogs impacted by the UFeb14 and UFeb14Rev algorithm updates.

Flawed Panda Update from February 2014

I’ve been following a fascinating SEO situation over the past ten days.  And based on my analysis, I might have found something big.  As in Panda big.  So if you’re the type of person that’s interested in algorithm updates, or if you have been impacted by algo updates in the past, then this post is for you.

As I explained in my last post about the UJan14 update, Panda rolls out monthly, but Google won’t confirm those updates anymore.  In addition, it could take ten days to fully roll out.  That combination makes for a confusing situation for webmasters dealing with Panda attacks.  But, SEOs neck deep in Panda work can often see those updates, as they are helping a number of companies recover, while they also have companies with fresh hits reach out to them.

Those SEOs can act as human barometers for Panda updates.  And since I’m helping a number of companies deal with Panda hits, and I often have companies hit by algo updates reach out to me, I’m fortunate to have access to a lot of Panda data.  And that data can often signal when Panda rolls out each month.  In my last post, I documented the UJan14 update, based on seeing several companies recover and hearing from those on the flip side (the ones that got hit).  Those websites unfortunately got hammered, typically by 25-40% – overnight.

At the end of that post, I mentioned that the February Panda update looked like it was rolling out (right around February 11, 2014).  That made a lot of sense, since it was exactly one month from the previous Panda update.  By the way, I am using the naming convention U{Month}{Year} to track unconfirmed updates by Google, so February’s update would be UFeb14.

Well, it seems I was right.  After my post, I saw a number of companies impacted heavily by UFeb14, and most saw that impact beginning around February 11th through the 14th.  Based on seeing those hits and recoveries in early February, it was already a big deal that Panda was rolling out.  But little did I know what was coming…  and it was big.

Peter Sciretta of SlashFilm Tweets and Matt Cutts Responds

On February 21, 2014, Peter Sciretta from SlashFilm tweeted the following to Matt Cutts:

@mattcutts any ideas why so many movie blogs are losing more than half their google traffic this past month? Very troubling.

— Peter Sciretta (@slashfilm) February 21, 2014

 

Boy, that got my attention for sure.  I always look for common themes when analyzing Panda to see if any new factors have been added to the algo, if there was collateral damage, etc.  As many in SEO know, Matt definitely responds to some people reaching out with messages, so I waited to see if he would respond.  And he did, on February 22nd, Matt responded with the following tweet:

@slashfilm I hope to dig into this soon. Sorry it’s been a few days.

— Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) February 22, 2014

 

OK, so that response was very interesting.  First, he hopes to dig into this soon… Really?  Wow, so Matt is digging into an SEO situation based on a tweet?  That was the first signal that Panda could have gone rogue.  Second, he apologized for the delay in responding.  Yes, another sign that Panda could have eaten some bad bamboo and went ballistic on sites that weren’t actually Panda targets.

So I ran to SEMRush and SearchMetrics to check out the damage.  And there was damage all right… Serious damage.  Check out the trending from SEMRush for SlashFilm:

SlashFilm Drop on February 14, 2014

Which led me to check out other sites in that niche.  And I found ScreenRant also had a huge drop.

SlashFilm Drop on February 14, 2014

And they weren’t alone.  A number of prominent movie blogs got absolutely crushed during UFeb14.  Based on SEMRush data, the movie blogs I analyzed lost between 40% and 50% of their Google Organic traffic overnight.  Boom.

U-Shaped Trending – The Blogs Bounce Back
What happened up to that point was already enough to have me heavily analyze the movie blogs, but the story was about to get better.  Each morning following Matt’s tweet, I planned to quickly check the trending for the movie blogs I was monitoring to see if there were any signs of recovery.  If Matt was checking on the situation, and if it was indeed a flaw in the algorithm, then Google could possibly roll out that algorithm update again.

The 23rd was quiet.  No changes there.  And then the 24th arrived, and what I saw blew me away.  SlashFilm’s trending popped.  Yes, it absolutely looked like they started to recover.  Check it out below:

SlashFilm Recovery on February 24, 2014

And ScreenRant showed the same exact jump.  Wow, this was big.  We just witnessed a flaw in the algo get rolled out, cause serious collateral damage, get re-analyzed, tweaked, and then rolled out again less than two days later.  And then the movie blogs recover.  I don’t know about you, but that’s the fastest Panda recovery in the history of Panda!  :)  Fascinating, to say the least.

So, I tweeted Barry Schwartz and Peter from SlashFilm about what I saw, and Peter did confirm they were seeing a big recovery.  He also said the following, which I thought was interesting:

@glenngabe @rustybrick I heard it was just an error on google’s side

— Peter Sciretta (@slashfilm) February 25, 2014

And that’s some error… It’s a great example of how catastrophic major algorithm updates can be, especially when there’s a flaw in the algorithm that causes collateral damage.  Losing 40-50% of your organic search traffic overnight could end some companies.  And then there’s the most important question that Panda victims have been asking themselves since this happened.  What if Peter didn’t complain to Matt Cutts?  Would Google have picked up the problem on its own?  How long would that have taken?  And how much damage would those movie blogs would have experienced traffic-wise, business-wise, etc?  All great questions, and only Google knows.

Digging Into the Panda Data
For those of you that are familiar with my work, my blogging, etc., you probably know what’s coming next.  There’s no way in heck I would let this situation run by without heavily analyzing those movie blogs that experienced a serious drop in traffic.  I had many questions.  Why did they get hit?  Were there any consistencies across the websites?  What factors could have led to the flawed drop on 2/14/14?  And what was the flaw in the algorithm that triggered Panda hits on the movie blogs?

So I started collecting data immediately, and I would refresh that data each day.  That’s until I had time in my schedule to analyze the situation (which based on my chaotic schedule wasn’t until 5AM on Saturday morning).  But I’ve now spent a lot of time going through data from movie blogs that got hammered on 2/14/14 and that recovered on 2/24/14.  I’ve also dug into sites that only saw changes on one of those dates (to give me even more data to analyze).

I used SEMRush to uncover all of the keywords that dropped significantly in the rankings starting on February 14, 2014.  I also was able to export the landing pages for each of the keywords.  That was key, as Panda targets low-quality content.  Analyzing that content could help me uncover problems that could have caused the Panda attack.  I did this heavily for both SlashFilm and ScreenRant, as they both experienced a heavy drop on 2/14 and then a large recovery on 2/24.  But I also analyzed other sites in that niche that experienced problems and recoveries during February.  As I mentioned earlier, there were a number of movie websites impacted.

Analysis-wise, I heavily analyzed both sites manually and via crawls.  The crawls were used to flag certain problems SEO-wise, which could lead me down new paths.  My manual analysis was based on my extensive work with helping companies with Panda (knowing certain criteria that can cause Panda attacks).  The combination of the two helped me identify some very interesting factors that could have led to the faulty Panda hits.

Here’s what I found… and stick with me.  I’ll take you through some red flags before explaining what I think the actual cause was.   Don’t jump to conclusions until you read all of the information.
 
1. Thin Content
It was hard to overlook the overwhelming amount of thin content I was coming across during my analysis.  And when Panda targets low-quality content, which can often be extremely thin content, that had my attention for sure.  For example, pages with simply an image, blog posts that were just a few sentences, etc.

Thin Content on Movie Blogs

But, this was not a unique factor for February (or for just movie blogs), which is what I was looking for.  Previous Panda updates could have absolutely crushed these blogs for thin content already… so why now?  That led me to believe that thin content, although a big problem with the movie blogs I was analyzing, wasn’t the cause of the UFeb14 hit they took on 2/14/14.   It met the “consistency” factor, since it was across the movie blogs, but wasn’t unique to this update.  Let’s move on.

 

2. Affiliate Links
I’ve helped a number of companies with Panda that were engaged in affiliate marketing.  Unfortunately, many affiliate marketers have gotten crushed since February of 2011 when Panda first rolled out.  So, it was interesting to see what looked to be followed affiliate links to Amazon on a number of pages I analyzed.  Those pages were thin, provided a quick mechanism to send along affiliate traffic to Amazon, and could absolutely get a website in trouble SEO-wise.

Affiliate Links on Movie Blogs

But two things stuck out…  First, compared to overall indexation on the sites I was analyzing, the number of pages with affiliate links was low (at least for the affiliate links I picked up).  Second, I did not find the same type of links across movie blogs that were hit.  So, the “consistency” factor was not there.  Time to move on (although I would caution the movie blogs that providing followed affiliate links violates Google Webmaster Guidelines).

3. Zergnet and Other Content Syndication Networks
Moving from inconsistency to consistency, I found a common thread across almost every movie blog I analyzed.  I found Zergnet links at the bottom of each post.  Zergnet is a content syndication network (similar to Outbrain, Zemanta, etc.)  On the surface, and in their most current form, these networks shouldn’t impact SEO negatively.  The links are nofollowed, which they should be.

But, in the past some of the networks were used to gain followed links from relevant websites across the web.  And that violates Google Webmaster Guidelines.  Actually, I’m helping several companies right now try to clean up followed links from older pages that still have followed links via Zemanta.  Here’s what the Zergnet links look like on the movie blogs:

Zergnet Links on Movie Blogs

But, like I explained above, the current implementation of Zergnet links is fine right now.  All of the links are nofollowed, which should shield the sites from any Google damage.  Let’s move on.

4. Videos, Trailers, and Copyright Infringement – Bingo
When the movie blogs got hit, a number of people in SEO (including myself) started making the connection between YouTube, copyright infringement, and the algo hits.  As movie blogs, one could only imagine that there were a lot of posts about movies that contain video clips, trailers, etc.  So, I was interested in seeing how much video footage I would come across during my analysis, and how much of that was problematic copyright infringement-wise.

And since we live in an embeddable world (with YouTube and other video networks making it easy to embed video clips on your own website), questions started to arise about how Google could treat the various parties involved in copyright infringement. In other words, who is the source of copyright infringement?  And how can you police others SEO-wise that might be part of the problem?  What about websites that simply embed public YouTube clips?  All good questions, and I was eager to dig in.

It wasn’t long before I came across webpages with video clips that had copyright infringement problems.  Now, those clips were typically sourced at YouTube or other video networks like Yahoo Video.  The great part about YouTube clips that were taken down is that they will literally provide a message in the clip that the user associated with the account has been removed due to copyright problems.  That made my analysis easier, to say the least.

So, trailer by trailer, video clip by video clip, I came across more and more examples of videos and users removed due to copyright infringement.  Here are some screenshots based on my research.  Notice the copyright infringement messages on pages that got hammered during the UFeb14 algorithm update:

Copyright Infringement Notice for YouTube Videos

 

More Copyright Infringement Notice for YouTube Videos

And ladies and gentlemen, this is where I think the flawed algo incorrectly targeted the movie blogs.  SlashFilm, ScreenRant, and others weren’t the source of copyright infringement.  They were simply end users that embedded those clips in their own posts.  So, if YouTube originally let the clips reside on its own network, and freely let users embed those clips on their own sites, could Google actually penalize those destination websites?

That wouldn’t be right… The penalty should simply be a bad user experience for visitors of the blogs, since the clips won’t play.  Now, if the movie blogs were creating their own videos that violated copyright laws, then I get it.  But shouldn’t that damage come via the Pirate Update?  I heavily analyzed the Pirate Algorithm recently, and you can read more about my findings by following that link.

So, it was interesting to see copyright-driven factors severely impact websites during what seemed to be the monthly Panda update.  Is Google incorporating more Pirate factors into Panda?  Are we seeing the maturation of Pirate into a rolling monthly update like Panda?  Was this the first time Google tried to incorporate Pirate into the monthly update?  All good questions.

Back to Video & More Embed Problems…
Visit after visit, page after page, I came across all types of video embed problems on the movie blogs.  For example, I saw copyright notices, blank videos (like the videos were removed from the services being used), embed code actually on the page versus the videos, messages that a video was now marked as private, etc.  All of this could very well be tied to copyright infringement.

Video Embed Problems on Movie Blogs

 

More YouTube Embed Problems on Movie Blogs

CinemaBlend and Recovery During UFeb14Rev
And the plot thickens…  The examples listed earlier were based on analyzing sites that experienced a major hit on 2/14 and then recovered on 2/24.  But what about other movie sites during that timeframe?  Did any experience unusual declines or surges?  Yes, they did.  I started checking many sites in the movie blog niche, and one in particular caught my attention. Check out the trending for CinemaBlend.com:

CinemaBlend Panda Recovery

Wow, they experienced a huge surge in traffic once UFeb14Rev rolled out (the revised algorithm update that rolled out once Matt Cutts got involved).  It looks like they originally got hit in January (I’m assuming by UJan14).  Connecting the dots, if CinemaBlend recovered during the revised February update, then could they have been wrongly impacted in January?  Why would they recover during UFeb14Rev and not just UFeb14?  Yes, I had to dig in.  Down the rabbit hole I went…  And yes, this was becoming my own version of Inception.  One SEO rabbit hole led to another rabbit hole.  Maybe I should create a movie trailer about it and embed it here.  :)

I began digging into the data, based on CinemaBlend’s recovery and was eager to see if video clips, trailers, and copyright infringement would surface.  But what I found was really interesting… The pages looked clean… but almost too clean.  There were pages optimized for trailers, when in fact, there were no videos embedded on the page.  At least now.  The more pages I checked, the stranger that situation became…   Many trailer pages either contained blank spots where videos once resided, or the pages just contained no videos at all.  Very strange.

So it begs the question, did CinemaBlend quickly deal with their Panda hit from January?  Did they analyze their landing pages seeing a drop and remove dead video clips, videos that were flagged for copyright infringement, etc?  I can’t say for sure, but the crime scene looked too pristine to me.

Video Trailer Page on CinemaBlend

What This Means For SEOs, Panda Victims, Movie Sites, and Google
Based on what happened during February, there are some important points I wanted to list.  If you are dealing with a Panda situation, if you are susceptible to Panda, if you are an SEO helping others with Panda, or if your business simply relies on Google Organic traffic, then the bullets below should be of extreme importance to you.

  • Google Does Make Mistakes
    And when those mistakes are tied to major algorithm updates, collateral damage could occur (in grand ways).  Based on what happened with the movie blogs, I think all of the website owners owe Peter Sciretta a drink (or a bonus).  Without Peter speaking up, it’s hard to say how long that ugly situation would have gone on.  Instead, it was only ten days.
  • Know What You Post (and the source of that information)
    As more and more algorithm updates are being crafted in Google labs, and subsequently injected into the real-time algorithm, it’s more important than ever to know your site inside and out.  Know what you are posting, where it’s from, if it’s original, if you are breaking any copyright laws, if it’s scraped, etc.  If you don’t, you are leaving yourself susceptible to future Panda and Pirate attacks.  Talk about a shot across your bow.  :)  Be vigilant.
  • Unconfirmed Updates Create Madness in Webmasters
    I called this when it was first announced, but Panda updates without confirmation can be disastrous for webmasters.  It’s hard enough for SEOs neck deep in Panda work to decipher what’s going on, but it’s exponentially harder for people outside of SEO to know what happened.  It’s one of the reasons I’ve been writing more and more about Panda updates.  I want to make sure we document major algo updates that seem to be Panda (roll out once per month, target low-quality content, etc.)  Without some form of identification, we’ll be living in a quasi, post-apocalyptic web.  Queue another trailer, this time with Matt Cutts standing in for Mad Max.  :)
  • Track and Document Everything You Can (And Speak Up)
    It’s more important than ever to analyze your website, your analytics reporting, Google Webmaster Tools data, etc.  Use annotations in Google Analytics to mark dips and surges in traffic, add information about confirmed and unconfirmed algorithm updates, export your data regularly, and monitor the competition.  If you end up in a situation like the movie blogs, you’ll have a lot of data to analyze, to hand SEOs that are helping you, and even to provide Google if it comes to that.

 

A Quick Note About UFeb14 and UFeb14Rev
I know a number of people have reached out to me since UFeb14 rolled out on 2/11/14 asking for more details.  I focused this post on the movie blog situation, based on how unique and fascinating it was.  But, I do plan to write more about the latest Panda update (so stay tuned).  As I said earlier, it’s important to document as many algorithm updates as we can so webmasters impacted by those updates can have some idea what hit them, what the root causes of their problems are, etc.

Summary – Flawed Algorithms, Movie Blogs, and Collateral Damage
Based on my experience with Panda, the past ten days have been fascinating to analyze.  Needless to say, you don’t often see algorithm updates roll out, only to get refined days later before a second rollout.  But that’s exactly what we saw here with UFeb14 and UFeb14Rev.  On the one hand, it was great to see Google move quickly to rectify a flaw in the UFeb14 algorithm update.  But on the other hand, it makes you wonder how many other flaws are out there, and how many sites have been wrongly impacted by those flaws.

For Peter Sciretta, and his fellow movie bloggers, they dodged a serious bullet.  Actually, it was a magic bullet.  One that first passed right through their hearts, pulled a 180, headed back to Google, was taken apart and refined, and then shot back out across the web.  But how many other flawed bullets have been shot?  Wait, it sounds like a great storyline for a new movie.  Maybe Peter can connect me with some movie producers.  :)

GG

Filed Under: algorithm-updates, google, seo

Connect with Glenn Gabe today!

Latest Blog Posts

  • How to compare hourly sessions in Google Analytics 4 to track the impact from major Google algorithm updates (like broad core updates)
  • It’s all in the (site) name: 9 tips for troubleshooting why your site name isn’t showing up properly in the Google search results
  • Google Explore – The sneaky mobile content feed that’s displacing rankings in mobile search and could be eating clicks and impressions
  • Bing Chat in the Edge Sidebar – An AI companion that can summarize articles, provide additional information, and even generate new content as you browse the web
  • The Google “Code Red” That Triggered Thousands of “Code Reds” at Publishers: Bard, Bing Chat, And The Potential Impact of AI in the Search Results
  • Continuous Scroll And The GSC Void: Did The Launch Of Continuous Scroll In Google’s Desktop Search Results Impact Impressions And Clicks? [Study]
  • How to analyze the impact of continuous scroll in Google’s desktop search results using Analytics Edge and the GSC API
  • Percent Human: A list of tools for detecting lower-quality AI content
  • True Destination – Demystifying the confusing, but often accurate, true destination url for redirects in Google Search Console’s coverage reporting
  • Google’s September 2022 Broad Core Product Reviews Update (BCPRU) – The complexity and confusion when major algorithm updates overlap

Web Stories

  • Google’s December 2021 Product Reviews Update – Key Findings
  • Google’s April 2021 Product Reviews Update – Key Points For Site Owners and Affiliate Marketers
  • Google’s New Page Experience Signal
  • Google’s Disqus Indexing Bug
  • Learn more about Web Stories developed by Glenn Gabe

Archives

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • GSQi Home
  • About Glenn Gabe
  • SEO Services
  • Blog
  • Contact GSQi
Copyright © 2023 G-Squared Interactive LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. Are you ok with the site using cookies? You can opt-out at a later time if you wish. Cookie settings ACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. You can read our privacy policy for more information.
Cookie Consent