There have been a whole lot of announcements from the major search engines this week, that all webmasters should be aware of – especially from Google, because while its market share may have slipped slightly (while Bing-powered search has grown a bit), it’s still by far the most used search engine.

Cutts on Why Your PageRank Would Drop

While not exactly an announcement, Google’s head of web spam Matt Cutts did post a video discussing reasons why Google Toolbar PageRank would drop. We talked about this a little bit more here, but you can hear exactly what he had to say in this video:

There is a part in there where he mentions that if you were caught selling links, but have stopped and want to earn Google’s trust back, you should submit a reconsideration request. On that note, Google announced that it is getting “more transparent” with its reconsideration requests.

Better Communication

“Now, if your site is affected by a manual spam action, we may let you know if we were able to revoke that manual action based on your reconsideration request,” explain Tiffany Oberoi and Michael Wyszomierski of Google’s Search Quality team in a joint blog post. “Or, we could tell you if your site is still in violation of our guidelines. This might be a discouraging thing to hear, but once you know that there is still a problem, it will help you diagnose the issue.”

“If your site is not actually affected by any manual action (this is the most common scenario), we may let you know that as well,” they add. “Perhaps your site isn’t being ranked highly by our algorithms, in which case our systems will respond to improvements on the site as changes are made, without your needing to submit a reconsideration request. Or maybe your site has access issues that are preventing Googlebot from crawling and indexing it.”

Google says it’s not able to reply to individual requests with specific feedback, but that now webmasters will be able to find out if their site has been affected by a manual action and will know the outcome of the reconsideration review.

Google Using Blocked Site Data in Algorithm

Earlier this year, Google announced some new domain blocking features, which included a browser extension, and a link next to search results, which allow users to block sites that they don’t like. This was part of Google’s big quality clean up initiative, which also includes the Panda update and the +1 button. Initially, the sites blocked were on a personalized basis, but that is no longer completely the case. Google search quality engineer Johannes Henkel is quoted as saying, “We’ve also started incorporating data about sites people have blocked into our general search ranking algorithms to help users find more high quality sites.”

Pagination and View-All in Search Results

Google is “making a larger effort” to return single-page versions of content in search results, when the content is broken up among multiple pages. Think multiple page articles and content slideshows. Google says users tend to prefer single page versions of content, but sometimes these can load slowly, so there are also times when the multiple pages work better.

“So while a view-all page is commonly desired, as a webmaster it’s important to balance this preference with the page’s load time and overall user experience,” Google indexing team software engineers Benjia Li & Joachim Kupke say in a joint blog post on the Webmaster Central blog.

You can read more about the technical specs here. They summarize it all nicely: “Because users generally prefer the view-all option in search results, we’re making more of an effort to properly detect and serve this version to searchers. If you have a series of content, there’s nothing more you need to do.”

To better optimize your view-all page, you can use rel=”canonical” from component pages to the single-page version; otherwise, if a view-all page doesn’t provide a good user experience for your site, you can use the rel=”next” and rel=”prev” attributes as a strong hint for Google to identify the series of pages and still surface a component page in results.

They talk even more about the specs of using rel=”next” and rel=”rev” in this post.

Rich Snippets for Apps

Google is also showing rich snippets for apps in search results now. They’re getting info for these from various places including: Android Market, Apple iTunes and CNET.

About the Author:
Chris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Follow WebProNews on Facebook or Twitter. Twitter: @CCrum237 Google: +Chris Crum

Google wants to use authorship markup as ranking signal, requires Google Profile

Long story short: if you’re looking to help your search engine rankings, you might need a Google Profile (the backbone of Google+).

As previously reported, Google has a new series of tutorial videos, and in a new one, Google’s Matt Cutts and Othar Hansson discuss “authorship markup”.

Google announced this back in June saying it is “experimenting ” with using the data to help people find content from authors in search results.

In the new video, Cutts asks, “Will people get higher rankings? Is there a rankings boost for rel=’author’?”

Hansson then replies, “It’s obviously early days, so we hope to use this information and any information as a ranking signal at Google. In this case, we want to get information on credibility of authors from all kinds of sources, and eventually use it in ranking. We’re only experimenting with that now. Who knows where it will go?”

For the time being, what you get, he explains, is your photo showing up next to your results. The idea is to show photos next to results. That’s the goal with this project, he says.

“If people believe it’s a good idea, you know, using HTML5 hopefully might help Google and any other search engine figure out more about content on the web, and what’s trustworthy and what’s less trustworthy over time,” says Cutts.

Given the emphasis Google has been putting on trustworthy content (see Panda update), it’s easy to imagine this not only becoming a ranking signal, but a significant one.

Here’s where it gets even more interesting. You have to have a Google Profile to use it. Kind of like Google+. Another interesting strategy to get people using Google’s new social network, no? And while still managing to keep things search-related. Well played, Google.

When the authorship markup is used, it leads to an author photo being displayed in Google search results when applicable. For example, if I write an article and that article appears in search results, it would come with a picture of me (from my Google Profile) next to it, and that would link to my Google profile. So, as an added bonus for Google, this will greatly increase the visibility of the Google Profile, and no doubt contribute to further growth of not only Google profiles, but Google+.

The Google Profile does actually keep the feature from being abused though. “To make sure that I can’t start writing nonsense and attributing it to Matt…you have to link back from your Google Profile to the site,” explains Hansson. “You need to control both endpoints basically.”

To use the markup on a single author site, you basically just need to:

1. On every post, add a link somewhere on the page pointing to your Google Profile (more visibility for Google Profiles)

2. On that link, add an attribute rel=”author”

3. The link can go in the footer or the header or wherever you can make it work.

4. You can wrap it around an image if you want.

If you have multiple authors on the site, like each author’s post to that author’s Google Profile. “That could be as simple as just at the bottom of each post, have the author actually insert a link themselves, with this attribute on it,” says Hansson. “Another thing that a lot of sites have, is…author bios.”

Link the bio to the author’s bio page, add rel=author on the links to the bio, and from the bio page add rel=”me” links to the Google Profile, and link the Google Profile back to that page.

“This obviously requires authors to make Profiles, and it requires webmasters to do the markup,” says Hansson.

Cutts says they’re trying to work with CMS manufacturers so that individual people don’t’ have to do all the work if they don’t want to.

For more detailed instructions on how to implement authorship markup, see Webmaster Tools help.

By the way, Google has been pretty weird with authors lately, though this is unrelated to the authorship markup discussed here, as far as I can tell.

About the Author:
Chris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Follow WebProNews on Facebook or Twitter.
Twitter: @CCrum237

Social networking has grown steadily in scope and importance over the last decade, and over the past few years, Facebook’s position as the top dog of social networking services has been solid and unquestioned. Enter Google+. Google’s attempts to step into the realm of social networking have been plentiful and almost undeniable failures, but Google+ is undoubtedly their strongest showing yet, and has the best chance of success. It is growing steadily in popularity, but how well does it work and what sets it apart from its competitors? Read on.

Social Networking, Google Style

Google has a long, tumultuous, and mostly unknown and ignored history with social networking. The following is a rundown of their previous attempts.

Orkut: As far as I am aware, this is Google’s earliest and (until now) most successful attempt at a social networking platform. It didn’t ever gained much popularity in the United States, but it is huge in Brazil to this day, and it also has a following in India and other various countries.

Open Social: Launched in 2007, it’s not technically a social network in and of itself. Open Social is Google and MySpace’s attempt to create a common programming interface that can be applied across several social networks, allowing programmers to easily integrate these networks into websites and other applications. This has largely been drowned out by Facebook.

Friend Connect: Launched in 2008, Friend Connect was Google’s next attempt at a Facebook or MySpace style social network, but it took the approach of using various open standards (including Open Social) to create this network across different types of accounts and websites. I had not even heard of it until I started researching for this article.

Google Lively: This was Google’s attempt to create Second Life style 3D environments that could be installed onto any website, where users could log in with their personas and interact with each other. It only lasted for a few months before it was discontinued in 2008.

Google Wave: This was a communications format that was intended to combine features from e-mail, message boards, and social networking schemes to enable a conversation-style information exchange (or wave) that could include various type of media added by various networked contributors. Google has basically abandoned the project, but it still exists under the name Apache Wave.

Google Buzz: A social network that has been integrated into Google’s e-mail service, Gmail, since 2010. It allows people to share information with one another in a social networking format right inside the Gmail interface. Ironically, Google Buzz has barely generated any buzz at all.

So what’s to say this attempt will be any better? Read on.

Circles

Circles are the core concept of Google+, and the key feature that sets it apart from its competitors. Anybody you wish to communicate with goes into one or more of your “circles”, or groups of people you know. You can have a circle of friends, a circle of co-workers, a circle of family members, etc, and nobody but you can see what circles you have or who is in them. Then when you write a status update, you also choose which circles to share it with. This makes privacy a breeze, a fact that sets Google+ firmly apart from Facebook, where privacy settings are terribly complex to manage and seem to change every few months. Even better, when you’re setting up your personal information in Google+, there is a place in every field to specify with which circles that information is shared. For example, I have my phone number set up to only be visible by friends and family, but I have my profession set to be visible by all my circles. It’s a snap. Then when you go to look at status updates that others have posted (which is in an interface similar to Facebook in basic appearance), you can filter the information by circles with just one click. It works extremely well, and you can color me impressed.

Hangouts

Another unique feature in Google+ is the concept of a hangout. A hangout is basically a video chat room, where you can invite friends and talk freely amongst each other. Webcams are becoming very widespread, and are even built into laptops and netbooks. It sounds great, but it is not without its setup. To even get started with hangouts, you are asked to download and install the “Google Voice and Video plugin”, and then you have to find a fríend who is on Google+ (and is in one of your circles) who is willing to do the same thing. However, once you’re done with all that, the streaming video seems to work flawlessly so long as you have a good internet connection. Even through the limited resources of a netbook, I didn’t run into any hiccups. Once again, I’m impressed.

Missing Features

With all of its clean look and smooth operation, there are some features that are conspicuously missing from Google+. Most notably as of the writing of this article, Google+ lacks any way to set up an account for a business or organization (called “Pages” on Facebook). In fact, Google is actively taking down standard user accounts that are set up for organizations. They claim that they are working on some sort of platform for business accounts, but demand is high, so they risk alienating new users if they take too long. Another conspicuously absent feature is a way of setting up an event, or any sort of calendar entry for that matter.

Conclusion

Google+ is definitely a top-quality effort by Google to break into the social networking field, but only time will tell whether it can topple Facebook from its position as top dog in the pack. For my money, though, it has a good chance. It doesn’t have all the features yet, but with its clean interface, simple no-brainer privacy, and fun methods of interaction, I highly recommend checking it out.

About The Author
This article is presented by Jacob Strandlien, who operates Savvy Duck Computers, providing Eugene-Area Computer Repair and related services.

Among the other services provided by Savvy Duck Computers are expert reviews and evaluations of computers, software, and related products and services. These reviews can be viewed in full at Savvy Duck Reviews.

Who YOU are matters. Surely who THEY are matters too.

Let me start off by being very clear. Google is not getting rid of PageRank in favor of the +1 button. Google is, however, looking at the data from the +1 button as a signal of content quality, and +1s will no doubt continue to be largely coveted by webmasters and content creators web-wide.

It’s been pretty clear since Google first announced the +1 button (even before they announced Google+) that the feature was designed to send Google signals for quality content. It was essentially billed as a way for web users to tell Google when a piece of content is good enough to be a good search result.

Wired is running a story now saying that Google has confirmed its plans of turning the button into “a crowdsourcing tool that helps re-order search results and fight web spam”.

“Google will study the clicks on +1 buttons as a signal that influences the ranking and appearance of websites in search results,” a Google spokesperson is quoted as saying. “The purpose of any ranking signal is to improve overall search quality. For +1′s and other social ranking signals, as with any new ranking signal, we’ll be starting carefully and learning how those signals are related to quality.”

Of course it is unwise to place too much emphasis on just a single ranking signal. At least that’s what Google would have webmasters believe. They’re tossing around very similar language with regard to the +1 button ranking as they historically have when people worry about PageRank too much: “There are more than 200 signals that we use to determine the rank of a website, and last year we made more than 500 improvements to the algorithm.”

Just as you’ve seen plenty trying to boost their PageRank through black hat tactics, it does not seem unreasonable to assume that these same people will try to exploit the +1 button. A major weapon against this that Google has is its strict Google+ account name policy, which has been a bit controversial thus far.

It became clear in recent days that Google+ is all about identity as far as Google is concerned. Eric Schmidt drove this point home, as discussed here. While this makes sense for a variety of reasons (including the potential integration of Google+ with products like Google Wallet), it also makes a great deal of sense in that it shows Google exactly who is +1ing what, which should in turn help them enforce any policy (current or future) concerning abuse of the button for gaming search.

In terms of white hat tactics, you may do well to consider things like this research comScore just shared. +1′s now mean more sharing of content to the actual Google+ network – people’s circles, which should (in theory) translate to increased traffic from Google+ itself. So, it may help to know about the kinds of people who are using Google+, as opposed to Facebook, for example. comScore’s data looks at those searches containing the Google+ and Facebook brands. It’s probably not exact, but many of those searching for Google+ content are likely going to be users of the service.

“The most striking differences between Google+ searchers and Facebook searchers are in Age and Income level,” says Eli Goodman, who leads the business development team at comScore. “Google+ searchers overwhelmingly skew towards 18-34 year olds. Clearly Google+ is a popular brand with the younger segments, and good knowledge for Google to have as they develop their acquisition strategy and evolve their user base. Since Facebook is a much more mature brand in the social networking space, their search audience falls closely in line with the search population at large.”

“The income skews are even more distinct, essentially polar opposites of each other,” he adds. “More than 32% of Google+ searchers have a household income of $100K or greater, compared to 23% of Facebook searchers. Google+ is definitely off to a fast start in reaching the most desirable income segments, which may make it more attractive to advertisers.”

Google’s quest for quality

In terms of Google using the +1 button as a way to combat spam, this also goes hand in hand with another new(ish) announcement from Google that it is calling upon users to report scrapers in some new algorithm testing.

“We are asking for examples, and may use data you submit to test and improve our algorithms,” the company says on a “Report Scraper Pages” form, found here.

This followed another recent announcement from Cutts about a major refresh to Google’s spam reporting process.

Google seems to be putting more emphasis on quality of results than ever before (I haven’t even mentioned the Panda update in this article…or the domain blocking tools Google launched this year). It does appear that Google’s grand social plan with Google+ is a major factor in that, and is sure to have everyone clamoring for +1s, which will not only provide a boost in ranking signals for content, but potentially traffic from the social network itself. And you can bet that WHO is +1ing things matters, just like with PageRank – WHO you’re getting links from matters.

Between things like Google’s emphasis on identity with Google+ itself and the authorship markup it’s pushing (which links people to their Google profiles), it’s clear that who you are matters in the Google world, and that also means that it matters who THEY (the people +1ing your content) undoubtedly matters too. Build your personal brand.

About the Author:
Chris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Follow WebProNews on Facebook or Twitter. Twitter: @CCrum237 Google: +Chris Crum

Google Turns The +1 Button Into Its “Like” Button (Finally)

Google has announced changes to the +1 button that could mean huge things for sites and businesses in terms of driving traffic. Google has turned the +1 button into what it should have been when Google+ was launched: a means of sharing content to your Google+ Circles. Or in other words, Google’s version of the “like” button.

Before, the +1 button was basically just a way of telling Google that content was good enough to be considered a good search result. It presumably still serves this function as well. +1s simply showed up in the +1s tab on a user’s profile. You know, where none of your friends see them.

Now, you can share content with your circles more easily like you’re using a social network – which you now are.

For publishers, this should be tremendously helpful in boosting traffic from Google+. It means more visibility and more reason for people to share your content on Google+.

“Clicking the +1 button is a great way to highlight content for others when they search on Google.,” says Google’s Vic Gundotra. “But sometimes you want to start a conversation right away—at least with certain groups of friends. So beginning today, we’re making it easy for Google+ users to share webpages with their circles, directly from the +1 button. Just +1 a page as usual and look for the new ‘Share on Google+’ option. From there you can comment, choose a circle and share.”

“When you share content from the +1 button, you’ll notice that we automatically include a link, an image and a description in the sharebox,” he adds. “We call these ‘+snippets,’ and they’re a great way to jumpstart conversations with the people you care about.”

Publishers can customize +snippets. You can alter the markup to fit the kind of content you provide. “You may already be using this markup to build rich annotations for your pages on Google Search,” says Group Product Manager Daniel Dulitz. “If not, marking up your pages is simple. Just add the correct schema.org attributes to the data already present on your pages. You’ll set a name, image, and description in your code.”

More on the markup types here.

A New inline annotations feature may remind you a bit of some Facebook social plugins. “Now, when a person visits a page that someone they know has +1′d, they can see a name and face reminding them to pay special attention to your content,” says Duliz.

You can add inline annotations by updating your +1 button code from the configuration tool.

A report from BrightEdge last month found that adoption of the Google +1 button was already on the rise. The launch of Google+ itself only served to increase this adoption, and this new functionality should increase it even more. Why not use it on your content? It can influence your search rankings for the better and encourage social traffic.

About the Author:
Chris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Follow WebProNews on Facebook or Twitter. Twitter: @CCrum237 Google: +Chris Crum

The war is long and there are many casualties, but it must be fought

For all of you webmasters still lamenting over Google’s infamous Panda update, it’s important that you don’t take it personally. You were simply a casualty–correctly or no–in Google’s never-ending war against spam content in its search results.

Google has long been preaching the gospel of quality content, and they are committed to keeping their index as spam-free as possible. Does such knowledge make potential Panda casualties easier to understand? Let us know what you think.

Think of it as collateral damage, those of you who feel you were undeservedly punished. As indicated, Panda is just another in a long line of updates designed to clean the trash out of Google’s search index, and thanks to an awesome infographic from SEO.com, Panda update victims can track the history of the war, one that started in earnest in 2003, which is around the same time Google’s hold over the search engine industry was entering the “iron-clad” stage.

Perhaps the perspective will give them some solace, as well the willingness to be prepared against future Google purges. The infographic in question. It’s a large file–almost 3000 pixels tall even with the size reduction–so be sure to click it for the full version:

While the information contained about each algorithm update is indeed intriguing, the bottom part of the graphic, is even more compelling. It demonstrates just how many content farms were crushed when Panda came rolling through.

Clearly, if Google even gets a hint that a site’s content is suspect–either poor quality or scraped–that site was nuked, er, Panda’d, by the purge, and while there were indeed a number of sites that got caught in the collateral damage crossfire, the infographic clues us in as to why such drastic measures are necessary.

Google’s search index, left unattended, would be a wasteland of spam sites, content farms, and prescription drug outlets.

Furthermore, if your site was one of the unintended victims, reports are, if the necessary corrections/alterations are made, Google will open the doors of its index and allow your site back in.

Some interesting tidbits from the infographic, at least from this perspective:
Google makes 400 updates to its algorithm each year, so even if there isn’t a widely-publicized released update with a catchy name, Google is constantly tailoring.
There were over three years between the “Big Daddy” update (2006) and “Caffeine” (2009). Before that there were many major updates on a yearly basis. 2003 saw four separate ones, while there were two each in 2004, 5, and 6.
Does the extended wait between Big Daddy and Caffeine mean Google was actually satisfied with the quality of their index, save for the minor algorithm tweaks? Whatever the case, this graphic does a great job of informing webmasters about Google’s index-purging ways. It should also be a warning against complacency when it comes to website quality control.

About the Author:
Chris Richardson is a search engine writer and editor for WebProNews. Visit WebProNews for the latest search news. Google: Google+