Post by amirmukaddas on Mar 11, 2024 2:46:15 GMT -5
Unfairly called the Medical Update , it's the biggest move in Google's history. Since August 1st we have witnessed a real reversal of response pages, with average fluctuations of 9.4 (out of 10) detected by the Semrush Sensor . Since August, the great professionals as well as the "Seophytes" have been observing the situation. Many colleagues have expressed their hypotheses, but none alone seems to cover the entire population of observed cases. Getting to the bottom of it seems impossible, because the quality of Google's response pages seems to have deteriorated so much and on multiple fronts. But what logic is hidden behind this situation? Yes, it's true that the medicine/health/wellness sector is in serious crisis after the latest update, but be careful, it's not the only one. We have food blogs sunk and e-commerce in the ballpark at multiple levels. Until now we have believed that this move by Google was an almost blind shuffle of response pages, because some historic brands have collapsed and others have grown regardless of the quality of content, traffic, social interactions or the presence of ads.
Big money” bubble hypothesis Given that since May, with the introduction of the GDPR, many websites have allowed you to refuse cookies , Google would no longer be able to profile adverts as before and in view of a gigantic loss of turnover, to say the least, it would have been decided to remove visibility to important editorial websites that only sell products and services, redistributing traffic to less authoritative sites, even poor or poorly managed ones, which however monetize with AdSense adverts. This hypothesis would explain the worsening of the SERPs and moreover it would Denmark Telegram Number Data constitute an abuse of a dominant position of biblical proportions, but fortunately it is denied on several occasions by the same owners of medium-sized web projects that monetize with AdSense, many of whom have suffered losses of important traffic. So no, the hypothesis should be discarded, fortunately I add. “Soop it up” Gombolot hypothesis Google has apparently decided to remove visibility of company websites (including e-commerce) that produce editorial content .
He would have done so both because these contents are "biased", created by those who try to sell you a particular product/service, and because with the internal blog the companies position themselves as intermediaries with the end customer. But the only intermediary "must" be Google, which would therefore have taken away traffic for search keywords from companies, leaving them only visits coming from branded searches. According to this hypothesis, perhaps even more horrifying than the previous one, companies could no longer position editorial content by search terms, which instead would remain the prerogative of only blogs and magazines, preferably equipped with the AdSense program. Fortunately, this hypothesis also fails to the extent that we observe significant losses in visibility for dozens of blogs not linked to particular companies.
Big money” bubble hypothesis Given that since May, with the introduction of the GDPR, many websites have allowed you to refuse cookies , Google would no longer be able to profile adverts as before and in view of a gigantic loss of turnover, to say the least, it would have been decided to remove visibility to important editorial websites that only sell products and services, redistributing traffic to less authoritative sites, even poor or poorly managed ones, which however monetize with AdSense adverts. This hypothesis would explain the worsening of the SERPs and moreover it would Denmark Telegram Number Data constitute an abuse of a dominant position of biblical proportions, but fortunately it is denied on several occasions by the same owners of medium-sized web projects that monetize with AdSense, many of whom have suffered losses of important traffic. So no, the hypothesis should be discarded, fortunately I add. “Soop it up” Gombolot hypothesis Google has apparently decided to remove visibility of company websites (including e-commerce) that produce editorial content .
He would have done so both because these contents are "biased", created by those who try to sell you a particular product/service, and because with the internal blog the companies position themselves as intermediaries with the end customer. But the only intermediary "must" be Google, which would therefore have taken away traffic for search keywords from companies, leaving them only visits coming from branded searches. According to this hypothesis, perhaps even more horrifying than the previous one, companies could no longer position editorial content by search terms, which instead would remain the prerogative of only blogs and magazines, preferably equipped with the AdSense program. Fortunately, this hypothesis also fails to the extent that we observe significant losses in visibility for dozens of blogs not linked to particular companies.