Image Gallery: teacher poems

Top SEO News

Google will keep in secret the number of search quality algorithms Oct 08 How many search quality algorithms does Google use? This question was put to the John Mueller, the company’s employee during the last video conference with webmasters. The question was: "When you mention Google's quality algorithm, how many algorithms do you use?" Mueller responded the following: "Usually we do not talk about how many algorithms we use. We publicly state that we have 200 factors when it comes to scanning, indexing and ranking. Generally, the number of algorithms is a casual number. For instance, one algorithm can be used to display a letter on the search results page. Therefore, we believe that counting the exact number of algorithms that Google uses is not something that is really useful [for optimizers]. From this point of view, I can’t tell you how many algorithms are involved in Google search."

Gary Illyes shares his point of view on how important referential audit is Oct 08 At the Brighton SEO event that took place last week, Google rep called Gary Illyes shared his opinion about the importance of auditing the website's link profile. This information was reported by Jennifer Slagg in the TheSEMPost blog. Since Google Penguin was modified into real-time update and started ignoring spam links instead of imposing sanctions on websites, this has led to a decrease of the value of auditing external links. According to Gary Illyes, auditing of links is not necessary for all websites at the present moment. "I talked to a lot of SEO specialists from big enterprises about their business and their answers differed. These companies have different opinions on the reason why they reject links. I don't think that helding too many audits makes sense, because, as you noted, we successfully ignore the links, and if we see that the links are of an organic nature, it is highly unlikely that we will apply manual sanctions to a website. In case your links are ignored by the "Penguin", there is nothing to worry about. I've got my own website, which receives about 100,000 visits a week. I have it for 4 years already and I do not have a file named Disavow. I do not even know who is referring to me. Thus, in the case when before a website owner was engaged in buying links or using other prohibited methods of link building, then conducting an audit of the reference profile and rejecting unnatural links is necessary in order to avoid future manual sanctions. It is important to remember that rejecting links can lead to a decrease in resource positions in the global search results, since many webmasters often reject links that actually help the website, rather than doing any harm to it. Therefore, referential audits are needed if there were any violations in the history of the resource. They are not necessary for many website owners and it is better to spend this time on improving the website itself, says Slagg.

Googlebot still refuses to scan HTTP/2 Oct 08 During the last video conference with webmasters Google rep called John Mueller said that Googlebot still refrains to scan HTTP. The reason is that the crawler already scans the content that fast, so the benefits that the browser receives (web pages loading time is decreased) are not that important. "No, at the moment we do not scan HTTP / 2. We are still investigating what we can do about it. In general, the difficult part is that Googlebot is not a browser, so it does not get the same speed effects that are observed within a browser when implementing HTTP / 2. We can cache data and make requests in a different way than a regular browser. Therefore, we do not see the full benefits of scanning HTTP / 2. But with more websites implementing push notification feature, Googlebot developers are on the point of adding support for HTTP in future.” It should be recalled that in April, John Mueller said that the use of the HTTP / 2 protocol on the website does not directly affect the ranking in Google, but it improves the experience of users due to faster loading speed of the pages. Therefore, if you have a change, it is recommended to move to this protocol.

Google does not check all spam reports in manual mode Oct 08 Google employee named John Mueller stated that the search team does not check all spam reports manually during the last video conference with webmasters. The question to Mueller was the following: "Some time ago we sent a report on a spam, but still have not seen any changes. Do you check each and every report manually?" The answer was: No, we do not check all spam reports manually. " Later Mueller added: "We are trying to determine which reports about spam have the greatest impact, it is on them that we focus our attention and it is their anti-spam team that checks manually, processes and, if necessary, applies manual sanctions. Most of the other reports that come to us is just information that we collect and can use to improve our algorithms in the future. At the same time, he noted that small reports about violations of one page scale are less prioritized for Google. But when this information can be applied to a number of pages, these reports become more valuable and are prior to be checked. As for the report processing time, it takes some considerable time. As Mueller explained, taking measures may take "some time", but not a day or two. It should be recalled that in, Google received about 35 thousand messages about spam from users every month. About 65% of all the reports led to manual sanctions.

Cyber attack that took place on May 12 affected 200,000 users from 150 countries July 11 The victims of the mass cyberattack that occurred on May 12 were 200 thousand users from 150 countries. This information was stated by the press-secretary of the European police department (Europol) Jen Ohn Jen Hurt. According to him, there are many affected companies, including large corporations. He also noted that the cyber attack may continue on May 15, when people come to work and turn on their computers. The virus, called WannaCry blocks access to files and requires affected users to pay $ 300 ransom in bitcoins. Unless the price is paid in three days, hackers threaten to double this amount, and after 7 they remove all files from the computer. The first reports of cyber attacks appeared in the media and social networks on Friday, May 12. According to Europol, the malware was launched from the National Health Service of England. Then it affected networks in other countries. The virus infected computer networks of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Megafon and other organizations in Russia. Proofpoint specialist Darien Hass and author of the MalwareTech blog managed to stop the spread of the virus using code to access a meaningless domain on May 13. However, the WannaCry creators released a new version of the virus, which no longer refers to this domain name. It is noted in Europol that the motivation of hackers is not fully understood. Typically, this type of attack is revenue-oriented. However, in this case, the amount of the repurchase is small. According to the ministry, only a few companies and individuals agreed to pay $ 300 to attackers, following the recommendations of law enforcement agencies. According to The Guardian, the accounts of the creators of the extortion virus received $ 42,000 from approximately 100 people. The intruders have not been revealed yet.

The Italian authorities fines WhatsApp for $ 3 million euros July 11 The Italian Antimonopoly Authority fined WhatsApp service developers for 3 million euros. This information was reported reported by Reuters. According to the agency, WhatsApp imposed conditions on the users that obliged them to agree to data transfer to Facebook parent company. In particular, they were persuaded that without agreeing on this they would not be able to continue using the service. The WhatsApp press service commented on this situation the following way: "We are considering this decision and preparing a response to the authorities." The supervisory authorities of all EU countries demanded that WhatsApp last year to suspend the transfer of Facebook data because of users’ doubts' in agreeing on the conditions. The fact that WhatsApp will open Facebook access to the user base became known in August.

How Google processes pages with the Canonical and noindex attributes Aug 14 During the last video conference with webmasters, John Mueller answered the interesting question: how does the search engine process pages that both contain the Canonical and Noindex attribute? The question to Mueller was: "I once was at a seminar where I was told that if you use rel = canonical and Noindex on a page, then Canonical will transmit the Noindex canonicalized page. Is that true?". Answer: "Hmm. I don’t know. We discussed this issue for a long time, at least inside the team. In particular, what should we do in this case. Using Canonical, you are telling that two pages should be processes identically. Noindex reports that the page that contains it must be removed from the search. Therefore theoretically our algorithms can get confused and decide that you need to delete both pages. Correct? Or they can process them in different ways, taking into account Noindex attribute. As a matter of actual practice, it is most likely that algorithms will decide that the rel = canonical attribute was added by mistake."

Publishers have found a way to beat Facebook's ranking algorithms July 25 The AdAge Edition noted that publishers have found a way to beat Facebook's ranking algorithms. They began to attach short videos in MP4 format instead of pictures; since videos re usually given priority in the users' tapes. New tactics are used by large publishers, such as BuzzFeed, and smaller ones, among them is ForShitsAndGiggles. For example, the 48-second "video" published by BuzzFeed has received more than 1.4 million views in just a couple of weeks: Other examples also include short videos that last only a few seconds. The Facebook representative in the AdAge commentary says that the social network does not prioritize the video before other types of publications in the news line. But if the user usually interacts with the video, he will often see posts of this format in his tape: "We are constantly improving the news line to show you the most relevant stories, and prevent attempts to deceive the system." Nevertheless, Russ Torres, the USA Today Network vice president of video content and strategy believes that in fact Facebook promotes the video in line. BuzzFeed and ForShitsAndGiggles have not yet commented on this aspect.

Google uses ccTLD for geotargeting and Search Console settings July 25 John Mueller, Google spokesman described the way the search engine targets search results for users living in different regions of the globe. According to Mueller, geographic targeting uses factors such as ccTLDs or Search Console settings. For geotargeting we use mostly the ccTLD or search console setting, so place the server. — John ☆.o(≧▽≦)o.☆ (@JohnMu) July 7 Earlier Google analyzed the server location determining the region where the website should be ranked best. Apparently, now this factor is not counted.

Google ignores canonical links when an error is suspected Aug 03 Google ignores canonical links if it is suspected that an error could have been made during their implementation. This was told by the search representative, John Mueller during the last video meeting with webmasters. One of the participants asked Mueller at the meeting: "If a large number of canonical links points to the same page, can this lead to some problems with website?" Mueller replied the following: "No, it is not necessary. The only problematic situation that may occur is when all these pages point to the main page as canonical. In this case, our systems understand that the rel = canonical attribute was wrongly implemented and thus, they ignore this data. But if the website contains a large number of pages with the same content (URLs with different parameters, etc.), using the rel = canonical attribute is an ideal option in this situation." It should be recalled that earlier this month the Moz founder, Rand Fishkin, prepared a review of the best practices for the URL canonicalization.