WebProNews

Tag: HubPages

  • Google Panda Update: HubPages Goes From Victim To Victor

    As you may know, Google launched its latest iteration of the Panda update early last week. The company confirmed this for us on Friday. Shortly after that, SearchMetrics compiled lists of the top winners and losers. Some were surprising (as usual), and some weren’t.

    Perhaps one of the biggest surprises was the placement of Hubpages on those lists. Panda enthusiasts probably recall HubPages getting hit pretty hard by the Panda update, as the company hardly let us forget. CEO Paul Edmondson was very vocal about the whole thing in the aftermath of the Panda massacre. Now, HubPages has made the top winners list.

    When asked about his feelings on this, Edmondson told WebProNews, “HubPages has always cared about quality. We’ve done a tremendous number of things to highlight the best of HubPages.  Our internal metrics now show significant redistribution of traffic to higher quality pages.”

    While being vocal about Panda, as mentioned, Edmondson had called out Google in the past for treating its own YouTube property differently, despite YouTube and HubPages having similar models in acceptance of user-generated content – each with its fair share of lesser-quality content. YouTube was actually the top winner this time around too, per SearchMetrics’ data.

    You may also recall Edmondson’s idea to implement subdomains across the site, as to separate content from other content on an author-by-author basis.

    When asked about the main factors he thinks turned things around with this latest update, Edmondson said, “HubPages has a tremendous amount of high quality content.  Stuff that is so good that they’re labors of love. We concentrated on giving the best content the best opportunity.”

    He didn’t mention the subdomaining, but the site implemented this back in July, after some testing appeared to indicate that it helped the better stuff rise in search visibility.

    It’s really quite interesting that the Panda update was always tied to discussion about content farms, yet with this latest round, sites like eHow, EzineArticles, Suite101, etc. are off the grid, as far as the losers list, and HubPages was even able to become one of the top winners.

    Either way, the fact that HubPages was able to do a complete 180 on the Panda scale should give webmasters who have been victimized, a bit of hope. On the other hand, DaniWeb was able to make a 110% recovery before getting slammed again with this update.

  • Google Panda Update: HubPages Enables Subdomains to Help Content Recover

    Is subdomaining the answer to a recovery from the Google Panda update? After some testing, HubPages is convinced that it can play a significant role, at least for a site of its type, which includes numerous article from numerous authors.

    The company announced new changes to its site on its blog today reflecting this thinking, and saying that as a result, it “should allow each author to be judged by Google separately.”

    Right now, HubPages is letting authors set up their own subdomains. HubPages’ Simone Smith writes:

    To test the success of moving accounts to subdomains, we ported over several accounts over with the expectation of some traffic improvement based on an earlier experiment, but with the understanding that there was some risk involved. We have concluded the test, and after 2 weeks of observing Google’s response, we saw a dramatic recovery among many accounts, validating the decision to move each Hubber’s account under his/her own subdomain. We expect that, with the move, some accounts will recover traffic, while others won’t.

    Based on these positive results, we have opened up the option to move Hubber accounts over to subdomains to the entire community.  Moving to your own subdomain will comprise 2 steps:
    1. Selecting your subdomain, and
    2. Activating the move.

    HubPages has a more detailed walkthrough of the process here.

    The company says that in most cases, the subdomain will be users’ usernames or usernames without spaces, periods, underscores, etc. For those that aren’t available, they’ll present other, similar options or let users suggest other options.

    Users will be able to claim subdomains for about a week, then they’ll be automatically assigning subdomains based on usernames.

    It will be interesting to watch HubPages over the next couple months, and see how its overall traffic is affected buy this change. If it proves successful, I suspect we’ll see some other victims of the Panda update implementing similar strategies.

  • Google Panda Update: The Solution for Recovery?

    Many sites are still wondering how they can come back from being hit by the Google Panda update. Google has certainly stressed quality, and victims of the update have been striving to improve it, but have had little luck in terms of boosting their rankings for the most part.

    Have you been able to recover any search traffic after being hit by the Panda update? Let us know.

    When we talked to Dani Horowitz of DaniWeb, she told us about some other things she was doing that seemed to be helping content rank better, but it was hardly a full recovery in search referrals.

    An article ran at WSJ.com about HubPages, one of the victims that we’ve written about a handful of times. CEO Paul Edmondson is claiming that the use of sub-domains is helping its content work its way back up in Google – something he stumbled upon by accident, but also something Google has talked about in the past.

    The article quotes him as saying that he’s seen “early evidence” that dividing the site into thousands of subdomains may help it “lift the Google Panda death grip.” Amir Efrati reports:

    In June, a top Google search engineer, Matt Cutts, wrote to Edmondson that he might want to try subdomains, among other things.

    The HubPages subdomain testing began in late June and already has shown positive results. Edmondson’s own articles on HubPages, which saw a 50% drop in page views after Google’s Panda updates, have returned to pre-Panda levels in the first three weeks since he activated subdomains for himself and several other authors. The other authors saw significant, if not full, recoveries of Web traffic.

    The piece also points to a blog post Cutts wrote all the way back in 2007 about subdomains. In that, Cutts wrote, “A subdomain can be useful to separate out content that is completely different. Google uses subdomains for distinct products such news.google.com or maps.google.com, for example.”

    HubPages is rolling out subdomains for all authors, which in theory, should help the site’s performance remain tied to the quality of the output by specific authors. This is also interesting given that Google recently launched a new authorship markup, putting more emphasis on authors in search results.

    When that was launched, Google said in the Webmaster Central Help Center, “When Google has information about who wrote a piece of content on the web, we may look at it as a signal to help us determine the relevance of that page to a user’s query. This is just one of many signals Google may use to determine a page’s relevance and ranking, though, and we’re constantly tweaking and improving our algorithm to improve overall search quality.”

    It may be a little early to jump to the conclusion that subdomains are the silver bullet leading to a full Panda recovery, but for those sites with a mix of great quality and poor quality content, this could very well help at least the great stuff rise. It will be interesting to see how HubPages performs over time, once the new structure has been live for a while.

    Google’s statement on the matter (as reported by Barry Schwartz) is: “Subdomains can be useful to separate out content that is completely different from the rest of a site — for example, on domains such as wordpress.com. However, site owners should not expect that simply adding a new subdomain on a site will trigger a boost in ranking.”

    To me, it sounds like if your entire site was hit by the Panda update because of some content that wasn’t up to snuff in the eyes of Google, but some content is up to snuff, you may want to consider subdomain, at least on the stuff that Google doesn’t like – to “separate it out”. You’ll have to do some content evaluation.

    Edmondson’s concept of doing it by author actually makes a great deal of sense. It makes the authors accountable for their own content, without dragging down those who have provided quality content (again, in theory). Not everybody hit by Panda is a “content farm” (or whatever name you want to use) though. For many, it won’t be so much about who’s writing content.

    Content creators will still do well to consider Google’s lists of questions and focus on creating content that is actually good. I case you need a recap on those questions, they are as follows:

    • Would you trust the information presented in this article?
    • Is this article written by an expert or enthusiast who knows the topic well, or is it more shallow in nature?
    • Does the site have duplicate, overlapping, or redundant articles on the same or similar topics with slightly different keyword variations?
    • Would you be comfortable giving your credit card information to this site?
    • Does this article have spelling, stylistic, or factual errors?
    • Are the topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?
    • Does the article provide original content or information, original reporting, original research, or original analysis?
    • Does the page provide substantial value when compared to other pages in search results?
    • How much quality control is done on content?
    • Does the article describe both sides of a story?
    • Is the site a recognized authority on its topic?
    • Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites don’t get as much attention or care?
    • Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?
    • For a health related query, would you trust information from this site?
    • Would you recognize this site as an authoritative source when mentioned by name?
    • Does this article provide a complete or comprehensive description of the topic?
    • Does this article contain insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond obvious?
    • Is this the sort of page you’d want to bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend?
    • Does this article have an excessive amount of ads that distract from or interfere with the main content?
    • Would you expect to see this article in a printed magazine, encyclopedia or book?
    • Are the articles short, unsubstantial, or otherwise lacking in helpful specifics?
    • Are the pages produced with great care and attention to detail vs. less attention to detail?
    • Would users complain when they see pages from this site?

    Those are, by the way, “questions that one could use to assess the ‘quality’ of a page or an article,” according to the company.

    What do you think of the subdomain theory? Tell us in the comments.

  • Google Competitive Practices Brought Into the Panda Conversation

    We’ve been covering a lot of the fallout from the Google Panda update, and have reported on HubPages specifically a number of times. Recently we looked at comments made by CEO Paul Edmondson, comparing Hubpages to YouTube, as he pondered why YouTube didn’t get hit. He posted some direct questions to Google, which evidently, they’ve mostly ignored.

    Edmondson is back at it with a guest post at TechCrunch. Here’s a snippet of what he had to say in that:

    HubPages has seen a negative impact from this change, but so far YouTube has not (Search Metrics Winners). One presumes Google isn’t treating its own affiliated sites differently than any other site, but YouTube’s open publishing environment makes low-quality content as prevalent as on any other moderated open publishing platform. Google shows over 13 million indexed videos on YouTube for lose weight (known spammy area) and over 10 million for forex (another spammy area). Apparently, Google’s Panda update has been punitive only to platforms other than Google’s.

    We certainly support and encourage changes to algorithms to provide the public with access to the best search results. We appreciate that open publishing platforms with a wide range of content quality also have a responsibility to moderate their content appropriately. While we understand the need for ordering search results, we also think it is a mistake to broadly impact an entire domain negatively where the content has been contributed by individual people. Bear in mind that a lot of the content on open publishing platforms like HubPages and YouTube is great, and it is exactly what people are searching for on the Web.

    We have reached out to Google seeking feedback and guidance about what elements of an open platform are being penalized by Panda. There has been little response to our inquiries, from questions about site architecture posted on the official Google forums, to personal emails sent to Matt Cutts, the head of web spam at Google.

    YouTube vs HubPages Post-Panda
    Image credit: Edmondson's article on TechCrunch

    He even goes on to play the competition card, at a time when Google has come under plenty of scrutiny for competitive practices (an FTC probe is reported to be in the works), saying, “We are concerned that Google is targeting platforms other than its own and stifling competition by reducing viable platform choices simply by diminishing platforms’ ability to rank pages. Google is not being transparent about their new standards, which prevents platforms like ours from having access to a level playing field with Google’s own services.”

    A couple weeks ago, we asked, “Should YouTube have gained visibility from the Panda update?” Beyond Edmondson’s points, further fuel for the question was provided when YouTube released a stat in an unrelated blog post, indicating that 30% of YouTube videos make up 99% of views. Also worth noting is the fact that Demand Media is the biggest supplier of videos to YouTube. DM’s eHow lost 20 of its search referrals as a result of Panda.

    It’s also interesting to note Edmondson’s lack of communication from Google, considering a Googler even went so far as to write a guest post on writing better articles for AdSense on the HubPages blog, prior to phase 2 of the Panda rollout.

  • Google Panda Update Victim HubPages Posts Quality Standards in Recovery Effort

    We’ve covered HubPages a number of times since Google’s Panda update originally launched, as they were one of the victims that lost significant search visibility as a result. Since the update, the site has been making various adjustments to its editorial policy and certain features.

    Interestingly enough, a Googler actually posted a guest post to the HubPages blog before the Panda update rolled out globally, providing tips for HubPages writers to put out better content for AdSense. Since the global roll out, HubPages announced changes like the removal of a “news capsule” feature, and tightening up its policy on affiliate links.

    Now, HubPages has released an overview of its recently added standards. These include:

    • First Capsule Standards:  We no longer allow the use of Amazon, eBay, News, RSS, Comment, or Link capsules as first full-width capsules
    • Word-to-Product Ratios: For every Amazon or eBay product featured in a Hub, there must be at least 50 words of original text
    • Pixelated Images: Pixelated (grainy) images are no longer allowed on Hubs (and keep in mind, watermarked images were never permitted)
    • Affiliate Links: We no longer allow Hubs to link (directly or through redirects) to affiliate or commerce sites which are prohibited under the HubPages rules (e.g. Clickbank and sites that sell eBooks, promote dubious offers, contain a lead capture form, redirect users to unwanted websites, or contain pop-ups, pop-unders, or other features that interfere with sight navigation)
    • Over-Saturated Topics: If you publish a Hub on a topic that is overly saturated on HubPages.com (e.g. MLM, 6 pack abs, forex, acai berry, etc.), your Hub will be held to a higher editorial standard, and you will not be permitted to include links to affiliate offers (though you are still welcome to include links to trustworthy sites such as major news sites or Wikipedia)
    • Duplicated Content: While we used to allow some duplicated content (e.g. if it also existed on your blog and so long as you did not link back to the source), it is now required that all content published on HubPages be unique to the site

    HubPages says it will send emails to authors letting them know which “Hubs” require revision, and they’ll have two weeks to amend them. Otherwise, they’ll be unpublished. However, they can be resubmitted for publication later and will be reviewed again.

    They’ve also added automatic alerts, letting users know when they’re at risk of violating one of their guidelines.

    Earlier this week, we looked at how Demand Media’s eHows is taking content quality more seriously, based on a job posting paying $17-20 per article (up from $10-15) with strict qualifications requiring a degree in business, finance, or law, and “extensive experience in business writing.”

  • Should YouTube Have Gained Visibility From the Panda Update?

    Should YouTube Have Gained Visibility From the Panda Update?

    Google’s global roll-out (in English) of the Panda update seemed to leave some of Google’s own properties on the winners list, along with a handful of video sites. YouTube, which falls into both categories was a clear winner, based on the data we’ve seen from SearchMetrics.

    Should YouTube be getting more search visibility in Google? Tell us what you think.

    HubPages, one of the content sites negatively impacted by the update is asking why YouTube did so well, and HubPages got hit, while they both have similar models in terms of user-generated content, each with its fair share of lesser-quality content.

    It’s a fair question.

    HubPages CEO Paul Edmondson posted the following questions/declarations in a Google Webmaster Central forum thread:

    • What are the best practices for open publishing platforms due to the recent Panda update? In particular, where high quality content on a domain has been negatively impacted on average as much as any other content? Is it a question of content moderation, site architecture, both or something else?

      While we believe the democratization of publishing and earning potential is an important part of the progress of the Web, we want to avoid a situation where a portion of content negatively impacts the rankings of high quality content. It appears HubPages has been impacted by this while YouTube has not, despite HubPages having a more strict content policy. In Google’s view, what is the recommended moderation standard that open publishing platforms should enforce?

    • Open publishing platforms tend to use one of two domain models. WordPress, Tumblr, Blogger organize mainly by subdomain, while HubPages and YouTube organize all the content under a single domain. Is there a recommendation on the best practice for open platforms regarding architecture?
    • In an effort to give Google clues, HubPages’ internal linking structure promotes the best content. For example, we program the “related articles” suggestions with content that we think users will find useful, and we submit sitemaps with a set priority so Google knows the most important content. We also understand the challenges of fighting off spam, spun articles and various forms of attacks; we believe we do the industry’s best job of fighting spam in an open publishing environment where every individual can have a voice.

    Interestingly enough, Google has already even gone so far as to write a guest post for HubPages’ blog, providing tips on how to make content better for AdSense.

    So far, Google hasn’t responded to Edmondson’s forum post.

    Google did, however, drop an interesting stat in an unrelated post on the YouTube blog: 30% of all YouTube videos make up 99% of views. Here’s the quote from YouTube’s James Zern: “Given the massive size of our catalog – nearly 6 years of video is uploaded to YouTube every day – this is quite the undertaking,” he said of transcoding videos into the WebM format.. “So far we’ve already transcoded videos that make up 99% of views on the site or nearly 30% of all videos into WebM. We’re focusing first on the most viewed videos on the site, and we’ve made great progress here through our cloud-based video processing infrastructure that maximizes the efficiency of processing and transcoding without stopping.”

    Another interesting point of note is that Demand Media (which operates eHow, which escaped the wrath of the initial U.S. Panda update, but was hit in the most recent version) is the biggest supplier of video to YouTube. eHow videos on YouTube still often appear in Google search results.

    HubPages announced some new changes to its editorial policy, to crack down on affiliate links in articles. They’ve also decided to eliminate a news box, which ironically was originally designed to make pages contain more relevant information. A HubPages writer going by Ellen B. shared some interesting information in the comments on one of our articles, discussing the site’s content policies and impact of the Panda update. She writes:

    Some years ago I attempted to take my notes from a college art history seminar I had taught as a graduate student — my own notes, my own lectures — and convert them into Hubs so I could earn a little adsense money from them. The only link I had was to my own travel diary of a trip I took to Greece, as a photo credit to demonstrate proof that my photos were my own (and, yes, some visitors might be interested in my trip to Greece, where I nattered a lot about Greek art).

    They were wildly successful on Hubpages, but eventually every single one got shut down as overly promotional. I was selling NO PRODUCTS on them.

    Meanwhile, I wrote similar informational, educational articles on Squidoo, and some of them earn $30+ a month. There are more ads, which I honestly don’t like, but I can’t knock the traffic and take-home pay. My Squidoo pages include links to many more educational resources and sites I’d recommend to students studying Greek art.

    The Panda update knocked Hubpages traffic below Squidoo’s. This honestly surprised me. But one thing I wonder is whether they’re shooting themselves in the foot. As far as I can tell, you can barely link out to anything… even before this latest policy was put in place. Linking to sound, informational, un-spammy, and above all RELEVANT content which is related to your topic provides value and content. Hubpages won’t let its users do that. Squidoo does. There’s also Squidoo’s long-time aggressive internal system of banning, deleting, and taking down spammy topics and duplicate content, but I think Hubpages has similar policies… or does it?

    I’m unsure why Hubpages got hammered harder than Squidoo. It’s a good idea not to keep all eggs in one basket anyway, so learning and posting on both is surely a good idea. Also, it’s good that the two sites operate differently, so you’ll never get burned on both. Yet I fear Hubpages may be learning some of the wrong lessons from all this.

    Dana, another WebProNews reader, writes:

    I write for Hubpages, and my traffic has not recovered yet either. I had a huge drop initially, and then my best hubs have slowly risen to about 3/4ths of what they used to be.

    I am very pleased with Hubpages’ strategies to make Hubpages a higher quality site, as there are many many serious writers there.

    As we speculated regarding eHow, it’s entirely possible that Google’s domain-blocking feature has contributed to HubPages’ search visibility woes. When Google announced the most recent roll-out of Panda, it also announced some tweaks to the U.S. algorithm, that it said impacted about 2% of queries, including the addition of domain-blocking as a ranking signal in “high confidence” situations. With eHow, it seemed likely that the site would be among the top-blocked sites, simply because it is generally one of the first named in discussions about “content farms”. Something similar may have happened with HubPages. The site was initially impacted by the U.S. Panda update, so if enough people blocked the domain from their results, Google could’ve considered it a “high confidence” situation. Again, just speculation.

    It’s hard to imagine how many people may have blocked YouTube from their search results, but given that it’s the most popular video site on the web, and the fact that Google owns it, it’s not so hard to imagine Google keeping YouTube out of the “high confidence situation” category, even if there is a large amount of less than stellar-quality videos on the site.

    For Earth Day on Friday, Google used a doodle with two pandas in it for its logo.

    We’d be interested to hear your thoughts about YouTube with regards to search quality. Should YouTube have gained from the Panda update? Comment here.

  • Google Panda Update Victim HubPages Tweaks Approach to Boost Search Visibility

    HubPages, one of the big victims of Google’s Panda update announced that it is making some changes aimed at getting back in Google’s good graces to bring its content back up to a better level of search visibility.

    “Enhancing readers’ experience on the site will improve our visibility with searchers, and reward those Hubbers who spend the time and energy to publish truly remarkable Hubs,” writes HubPages’ Jason Menayan. “We are about to implement a few more changes to improve the overall experience of our site, aimed at removing content that offers dubious value to the HubPages community of writers and readers.”

    Of course this is not the first time HubPages has addressed content quality for its users. In fact, shortly before this most recent roll-out of Panda (the global/English language one), a Google staffer actually wrote a guest post on the HubPages blog, giving users tips on how to make their content better for AdSense. Then the site got hit by Panda again.

    Now, HubPages is removing its “News Capsule” feature.

    The feature, originally deemed a way to make hubs (HubPages articles) more relevant, has now been determined to add little value to users and the page. Menayan says the links it generated often were only distantly related to the topic.

    The News Capsule from HubPages on Vimeo.

    They’re also tightening up on affiliate links. With the exceptions of Amazon and eBay, they will no longer be allowed in HubPages articles if they point to sites that sell eBooks, promote dubious offers (like watching TV online for free), contain a lead capture form, contain pop-ups, pop-unders or other features that interfere with site navigation, or redirect users to unwanted sites.

    “Redirects themselves are innocuous, but we will be able to track the full path of redirected links, and if any of the redirects pass through or to a prohibited link, then that redirected link will also be prohibited,” says Menayan. “So, if a bit.ly link passes through a clickbank link (a prohibited affiliate link), for example, then that specific bit.ly link on that Hub will be not allowed.”

    In addition, all affiliate links are being disallowed in certain topic areas that are becoming “saturated with low-quality Hubs published by affiliate marketers”.

    This is in reference to topics like acai berries, forex, and six-pack abs, though articles about these topics will still be allowed – just not with affiliate links.

    Finally, HubPages will send out automatic alerts to authors if their hubs don’t comply with the new guidelines.

    Earlier this week, HubPages CEO Paul Edmondson raised an interesting point about the Panda update and its impact on HubPages vs. its impact on Googles’ own YouTube (that would be the opposite impact – YouTube was a clear winner, as were several other video content sites).

    “It appears HubPages has been impacted by this while YouTube has not, despite HubPages having a more strict content policy,” he wrote.

    YouTube itself then dropped an interesting stat in an unrelated blog post of its own, saying only 30% of All YouTube Videos Make Up 99% of Views.

    Another interesting point of note is that eHow (The Demand Media-run content site, which escaped the wrath of the initial U.S. Panda update, but was hit in the most recent version) is the biggest supplier of video to YouTube.

  • 30% of All YouTube Videos Make Up 99% of Views

    YouTube announced today that it is transcoding all new videos into the WebM format, as well as other supported formats, which include MPEG4, 3GPP, MOV, AVI, MPEGPS, WMV, and FLV.

    In the announcement, they say they are working to transcode the rest of the YouTube catalog.

    “Given the massive size of our catalog – nearly 6 years of video is uploaded to YouTube every day – this is quite the undertaking,” says software engineer James Zern. “So far we’ve already transcoded videos that make up 99% of views on the site or nearly 30% of all videos into WebM. We’re focusing first on the most viewed videos on the site, and we’ve made great progress here through our cloud-based video processing infrastructure that maximizes the efficiency of processing and transcoding without stopping.”

    While clearly the transcoding videos is the real news here, I find that stat Zern dropped somewhat interesting. 30% of all videos account for 99% of views. Not all that surprising, but interesting still.

    I find that stat perhaps even more interesting, conisdering some points HubPages just brought up about YouTube, with regards to Google’s Panda update.

    “While we believe the democratization of publishing and earning potential is an important part of the progress of the Web, we want to avoid a situation where a portion of content negatively impacts the rankings of high quality content,” said HubPages CEO Paul Edmondson. “It appears HubPages has been impacted by this while YouTube has not, despite HubPages having a more strict content policy.”

    For context, HubPages was one of the top sites negatively impacted by the Panda update. Clearly, some people have indeed had negative experiences with HubPages content, but I believe there is some higher quality content in the mix – as there usually is with sites labeled “content farm”.

    He makes an interesting point about YouTube. The stat Zern drops, kind of backs up the point. Views aren’t necessarily equivalent to quality, but quality videos do tend to gain views. By nature, people want to share quality content with others. If only 30% of YouTube’s videos are making up almost all views, it would seem that there’s a lot of lesser quality content on there.

    It’s hard to say where this content places in any given search results page, but it’s something to think about.

    “Actually, HubPages is to articles what YouTube is to video,” Edmondson told WebProNews in a recent interview. “Like YouTube where enthusiasts post videos of their choice, our community write articles about whatever they wish and are passionate about. This covers a wide range of content from poetry to recipes, and pretty much everything in between. Writers choose what they write about, and they own their content. In return, they stand behind the content, build readership and interact within the HubPages community.”

    With the recent international roll-out of Panda, YouTube was among the top gainers (as were other competing video sites).

    More of our Panda coverage here.

  • Google Does Guest Post for Panda Victim HubPages

    Google Does Guest Post for Panda Victim HubPages

    HubPages was one of the big Panda victims from based on the often-cited Sistrix report. The company never denied this.

    “We are confident that over time the proven quality of our writers’ content will be attractive to users,” HubPages CEO Paul Edmondson told us soon after the Panda update was first launched in the U.S. “We have faith in Google’s ability to tune results post major updates and are optimistic that the cream will rise back to the top in the coming weeks, which has been our experience with past updates.”

    With that, it’s interesting that Google has taken to the HubPages blog to tell HubPage writers how to make better content for AdSense.

    Specifically, Thomas Tran, a Googler since 2008, who works “mainly in AdSense newbies education,” talked about “how to drive quality traffic” to “hubs” (HubPages articles), so they can increase their AdSense ads click-through-rates and earn more money.

    Google has been talking about more open communication with webmasters, but it’s interesting that they’re going so far as to write guest posts on publishers’ blogs aimed at helping writers have more success. I wonder if they’ll write for eHow, Suite101, or other sites that churn out content for AdSense dollars.

    Tran’s four basic tips to writers are:

    1. Write authentic, non-scripted, easy-to-read and structured content.

    2. Get inspiration from Google AdWords Keyword tool and the Top Search Queries from the Google Webmaster Tools.

    3. Use unique and accurate titles.

    4. Promote your hubs internally and externally.

    He elaborates on each of these points in the post.

    Based on Compete’s data, it looks like HubPages was on a steady increase in traffic from month-to-month, until February, when Panda hit. Edmondson told us some content went up, and some went down. When asked if articles are written specifically for search, he said, “It’s up to our writers. We let them choose what they wish to write within our editorial policies. We offer tools and education for our users to become better online writers – this includes – among a vast array of things – best practices for search.”

    “SEO has to be an important part of any publisher’s traffic sources,” he added. “We make SEO tools available to our writers, its up to them whether they want to use it or not. We are very sensitive around not abusing search engine practices and will take down articles that are obviously trying to game the system.” More on our conversation with Edmondson and with a HubPages writer here.

    HubPages then posted a message to users, regarding the update, conveying a continued quest to boost quality:

    As we continue to adjust our way through the most recent Google algorithm changes, we are actively reviewing how we can improve the HubPages experience and make adjustments to improve the site and experience. As mentioned in previous posts, we have already made some changes, primarily focused at weeding out lower quality content that adds little to no value to the site and community and to optimize the advertising layouts. In the upcoming weeks, I expect to announce further changes we will implement aimed at improving sitewide experience and quality of Hubs. We have various methods for measuring “quality” including HubScore, community ratings and feedback, link quality, etc.

    I appreciate everyone’s patience as we devise and implement our next course of action. The most important effect of the next wave of changes will be to our writers who will benefit from a rise in the overall quality of content published on HubPages and the removal of lower quality content that tends to decrease traffic and visitors’ experience to the site. I see a lot of great discussions in the forums and am encouraged to see so many active members of the community that are just as concerned and motivated to improve the site as we are.

    More on ranking in Google now that the Panda update has gone global.

  • Google Panda Update: Lack of Consistency on Quality?

    We’ve been talking with a lot of people who have had their sites impacted negatively by Google’s recent “Panda” algorithm update. Our thinking is that the more sides of the story we hear, the more webmasters and content producers will be able to learn from it. With that, we had a conversation with Paul Edmondson, CEO of HubPages, which made the list of the hardest-hit sites.

    Have you gained additional insight into the Panda Update as time has progressed? Share in the comments.

    HubPages, which launched in 2006 as a social content community for writers to write “magazine-like articles”,  pays 60% from the ad impressions to the writers. You may find how-to articles, not unlike those you would find at eHow, but also in a variety of other styles. Authors on HubPages publish nearly 3,000 “Hubs” a day, over 7,000 comments and thousands of questions and answers and forum posts, according to Edmondson. Last year, there were over 13,000 total incremental pieces of content a day, he said.

    When directly asked if HubPages is a content farm, Edmondson told us, “Actually, HubPages is to articles what YouTube is to video. Like YouTube where enthusiasts post videos of their choice, our community write articles about whatever they wish and are passionate about. This covers a wide range of content from poetry to recipes, and pretty much everything in between. Writers choose what they write about, and they own their content.  In return, they stand behind the content, build readership and interact within the HubPages community.”

    Paul Edmondson of HubPages Talks QualityOn where HubPages stands out compared to sites from Demand Media, Associated Content, and others, Edmondson said, “First, we think authors rule! We align our interests with our authors – and this is key to our long-term success. At HubPages, authors choose what they write about and they own the content they write.  We also share impressions with the author for as long as the content is published on HubPages.  Our incentives are aligned with the authors’ needs. At its core, HubPages is a passionate community of writers. The value that is created goes well beyond the revenue opportunity,” he said. “To have a truly healthy ecosystem, writers need social interaction, feedback and praise.  To this end, HubPages has offered the ability to fan authors – which turned out to be commonly known as ‘follow’ in 2006.  Some authors have thousands of followers for everything they publish.  We also developed an accolade system to give back positive feedback and encouragement.  When these items are combined, HubPages is revealed to be a very unique collection of people, with authentic voices, sharing their knowledge with the world.”

    When asked how frequently HubPages articles rank among the top results for searches in Google,   Edmondson said,  “Some of our content ranks very high, and some isn’t in the index at all. We don’t have the data to answer this question for every piece of content and the potential search terms that a Hub could rank for in the search results.”

    When asked if articles are written specifically for search, he said, “It’s up to our writers. We let them choose what they wish to write within our editorial policies. We offer tools and education for our users to become better online writers – this includes – among a vast array of things – best practices for search.”

    “SEO has to be an important part of any publisher’s traffic sources,” he said. “We make SEO tools available to our writers, its up to them whether they want to use it or not. We are very sensitive around not abusing search engine practices and will take down articles that are obviously trying to game the system.”

    We had a separate conversation with a HubPages writer, who for this article will just go by the name Chuck. He is a college economics instructor. Chuck tells us,  “HubPages is a very good site for earning money.  This has been both my experience as well as that of other writers on the site who have published Hubs on their earnings experience.”

    Chuck says the freedom to write on whatever topics a writer wants to write about is one of the main things that makes HubPage attractive. “This not only allows writers, including me, to focus on topics that interest or excite us but also gives us freedom to explore new areas of writing.  I find that this freedom offers me an opportunity to challenge myself as well as the opportunity to broaden the range of my writing.  It also lets me test the money making potential of other areas outside my immediate area of interest and expertise.”

    Chuck says the HubPages team is constantly updating the site by regularly giving writers new tools to work with. “These changes and updates also include continual updating of the look and feel of the site which keeps it fresh and new-looking for visitors,” he says. “HubPages has an excellent training area on the site which enables both new and existing users to learn how to use the various tools as well as allowing all of us to keep our skills current in other business aspects of the site.”

    “The Professionalism and quality of the site attracts good writers which in turn attracts increasing numbers of viewers which benefits all of us,” he continues. “The HubPages team puts a strong emphasis on marketing which not only continually brings in new viewers and writers, but also enables the team to keep writers informed about current reading tastes and habits of visitors.”

    “HubPages is also a good social networking site,” he adds. “ It offers the opportunity to meet and interact with others from around the world both through exchanges on Hubs as well as in the Forums.  In addition to learning from the writings of others and comments left on my Hubs and those of others that I read, I have met and been in direct contact with a few people both Hubbers and visitors which have resulted in some mutually beneficial exchanges of information.  These exchanges have included my receiving some photographs from fellow Hubber Ralph Deeds which I was able to use on 2 of my Hubs.  On my Hub about Mathew Juan I was contacted by a visitor who not only provided me with additional information for my research but I was also able to provide him with some information which he used to update his website.  I received a nice email from a local artist whose work I wrote about on my Hub about Public Art who requested permission to use my photos in his advertising.  I have had other, similar exchanges, on of which I am still following up on and which might lead to some paid writing assignments.”

    Chuck says he’s never written for Demand Media, Associated Content, or Suite101 (all of which have seen some impact from the Panda update – some more than others). “However, I have done some writing for TheInfomine.com, MyGeoInfo.com, Xomba.com and SheToldMe.com,” Chuck says. “ Most of my writing on all of these have consisted of articles related to Hubs I have written (but not copies) with links back to my related Hub article. I have collected a few dollars in Google Adsense money from these but am reconsidering keeping my AdSense code on them as I believe it was Jimmy The Jock in his piece on Success Stories who said that he found he made more Adsense earnings by not having ads on outside sites as more of the readers then tended to go to his Hubs rather than wandering off to an ad on the other site.  His experience showed him that bringing the people to HubPages generated more ad clicks.”

    Last week, HubPages launched a new ad platform. “Changing the long-held equation between advertisers and individual online writers, HubPages is launching its HubPages Ad Program that will give its writers access to the premium ad rates that so far have been restricted to giant publishers,” Edmondson said.  “This offering is the first time that any online writer will be able to access significant advertising revenues, as available via premium advertising networks and direct sales, while retaining all rights to their own content.Individual writers have always been considered too small to be worth advertiser attention and the agency model wasn’t built to work with millions of content producers. While the democratization of content has occurred, the earning power has not been available until now.  HubPages is leveraging its size and scale as a top 50 site (Quantcast) to negotiate better ad money on behalf of our writers.”

    Edmondson addressed the Panda update on the HubPages blog recently, saying that they hadn’t seen it consistently drive traffic to better-quality Hubs. “On one hand, some of our best content has seen a drop in traffic; simultaneously, we have seen traffic rise on Hubs that are just as great,” he wrote. “We are taking this seriously — behind the scenes, we have been crunching data and focusing on making sure that we are doing everything right from our side. We have an editorial policy and internal system that rewards original useful content, and this aligns with what Google wants, too.”

    “We have several internal quality metrics that make up HubScore and we have deeply analyzed things like content length, view duration, Hub Hopper ratings, and HubScore,’ he added. “These elements have been compared to changes in Google referrals, and again, based on the way we rate content quality, the fluctuation so far looks random at this stage of the update. We believe that a change of this size will take a settling-in period. We have reached out to Google and will continue to study the update.”

    Like any other site that has user-generated content or a massive amount of articles, it stands to reason that there is a mix of both good and bad quality content on HubPages – not unlike YouTube. It’s how Google ranks the content in search results that ultimately matters to users of the search engine, which at this time accounts for the majority of Internet users. HubPages’ quality metrics are probably not identical to Google’s quality metrics, but it’s interesting that Endmondson thinks some of the site’s best content was negatively impacted. My guess is that HubPages is not alone in this.

    We’ve still seen examples in the wild, where Google continues to rank less authoritative content over more authoritative results. We’ve referred to the “level 4 brain cancer” example several times, which continues to show an eHow article as the top result over actual experts in the brain cancer field. In fact, one of our own articles is even showing up on the first page now (presumably from having referenced it a few times). While we’re flattered that Google would consider us enough of an authority on the subject, I think users would still prefer to see more useful advice from a medical standpoint.

    Another interesting side story to this whole Google search quality thing is that Google has a patent application out for essentially what Demand Media does – suggesting topics for people to write about based on search. Are we going to see Knol results “filling in the gaps”? More on that here.

    Many of the sites hit hardest by the Panda update are trying to find ways to become less dependent on Google. It’s wise not to be too dependent on any one traffic source anyway, but the Panda update has really driven this point home. HubPages has taken some time to improve its own internal search. As Mike Moran said in a recent article, this is a good way to keep from driving your visitors back to Google to find what they’re looking for.

    For additional insight:  Google “Panda” Algorithm Update – What’s Known & What’s Possible

    Thoughts on Google’s search quality post-Panda? Share in the comments.

  • Google Panda Update Still Encouraging Higher Quality

    We had a conversation recently with HubPages CEO Paul Edmondson about the Google Panda update and its affects no HubPages, as it was often reported to be one of the hardest-hit sites from the update.

    Edmondson had said in a recent blog post that they hadn’t seen it consistently drive traffic to better-quality Hubs. “On one hand, some of our best content has seen a drop in traffic; simultaneously, we have seen traffic rise on Hubs that are just as great,” he wrote. “We are taking this seriously — behind the scenes, we have been crunching data and focusing on making sure that we are doing everything right from our side. We have an editorial policy and internal system that rewards original useful content, and this aligns with what Google wants, too.”

    HubPages Continues to Work on Quality
    HubPages has posted a new message to users, regarding the update, conveying a continued quest to boost quality:

    As we continue to adjust our way through the most recent Google algorithm changes, we are actively reviewing how we can improve the HubPages experience and make adjustments to improve the site and experience. As mentioned in previous posts, we have already made some changes, primarily focused at weeding out lower quality content that adds little to no value to the site and community and to optimize the advertising layouts. In the upcoming weeks, I expect to announce further changes we will implement aimed at improving sitewide experience and quality of Hubs. We have various methods for measuring “quality” including HubScore, community ratings and feedback, link quality, etc.

    I appreciate everyone’s patience as we devise and implement our next course of action. The most important effect of the next wave of changes will be to our writers who will benefit from a rise in the overall quality of content published on HubPages and the removal of lower quality content that tends to decrease traffic and visitors’ experience to the site. I see a lot of great discussions in the forums and am encouraged to see so many active members of the community that are just as concerned and motivated to improve the site as we are.

    Demand Media’s eHow, which is sometimes compared to HubPages, just launched a redesign with what the company is calling a “curation layer,” which is essentially a feedback system, also aimed at improving quality.

    eHow Redesign from Demand Media

    Having such ways of monitoring quality and audience perception has to be in the best interest of both of these sites. It may be that how they handle the feedback and use it to improve content that helps them both in the long run – and that’s not just for Google’s algorithm, by the way, but for users who are gaining more control over the distribution of content, whether that be through social sharing, or through blocking domains in their own search results.

    Block Domains in Google Results

    If a user gets enough poor quality content from a single site when searching, Google has empowered them to be able to do something about it. This is one reason that any site might do well to do some evaluation of past content, and perhaps some house cleaning where necessary.

  • Google Algorithm Update Casualties Speak

    Google Algorithm Update Casualties Speak

    Last week, Google launched a major update to its algorithm, which was positioned as one that would go after content farms. While some sites that are often attached to that label were in fact hurt by the update, some other sites that aren’t generally considered content farms became casualties as well. 

    Was your site impacted by Google’s algorithm update? For better or worse? Let us know

    Now, it’s important to note that Google did not come out and use the phrase “content farm” when it announced the update, but the company used language similar to what it has used in the past when talking about content farms. In a nutshell, the algorithm was supposed to be aimed at reducing rankings for lower quality content. Those who found their rankings impacted negatively are not thrilled with having their content deemed as such, and some of the sites that were apparently devalued, do raise some eyebrows. 

    Take, for example, Cult of Mac. This is a tech blog that covers Apple news. It is often linked to by other sources, and frequently appears on Techmeme as a source. A lot of Apple enthusiasts visit the site on a regular basis for updates. Leander Kahney, the site’s editor and publisher, wrote a scathing post about Google’s update, proclaiming, “We’ve become a civilian casualty in the war against content farms…Why us? We have no idea. The changes Google has made to its system are secret. What makes it worse is that Google’s tinkering seems to have actually improved Demand Media’s page rank, while killing ours…We’re a blog, so we aggregate news stories like everyone else. But our posts are 100% original and we do a ton of original reporting…”

    “We can go toe-to-toe with any other tech news site out there,” he wrote. “We break a ton of stuff. Go take a look at MacRumors, which is very good at giving credit, and see how often we’re cited as the source of stories…Yes, we report other’s stories, just like Engadget, MacRumors, AppleInsider, Wired, Daring Fireball and everyone else. That’s the news business on the Web. It’s a flow, a conversation…The question is whether we add value — figure out what it means, if a rumor is credible, what the historical context is. We do that and we do it well. Plus we give clear credit where credit is due (unlike the original content stealers like Engadget and Mashable. Try to figure out what stories they ripped off from us).”  Note: those accusations appear to have been removed from the post. 

    Even PRNewswire, the press release distribution service was devalued by Google’s update. Kahney also defended that site, after a commenter on his post mentioned it. He said, “…and for your information, PR newswire isn’t a content farm either. It published press releases for thousands of companies. Crappy spam websites pull releases from its RSS feeds and republish it as pretend content — which may be why it was down ranked by Google.”

    Technorati got hit too. This site was once considered a darling among bloggers, and now apparently it’s been reduced to a low quality site clogging up the search results, based on Google’s doings. CEO Richard Jalichandra doesn’t appear to have acknowledged this:

    So Google changed its algo’s last week to redirect traffic away from content farms…….where did all the diverted traffic go?!less than a minute ago via Twitter for iPhone

    Other sites more often associated with the content farm label, though they’ll pretty much all do everything they can to distance themselves from it, were also hit by the update – sites like Associated Content (run by Yahoo), Suite101, HubPages, Mahalo, EzineArticles, and others. Reports have indicated that Demand Media’s eHow – the site most often associated with the label, was actually helped by the update.

    The notion that eHow was helped has been questioned. Erik Sherman at CBS looks at Compete data, and writes, “What seems to be a jump may be a normal increase, which raises the question of whether it would have been larger without the algorithm changes.” 

    However, if you do some searching in Google, you’ll probably notice that there is still a great deal of eHow content ranking well – and still under questionable circumstances (see “level 4 brain cancer” example discussed previously). 

    Still, Demand Media as a whole was not immune from the update. At least three of their sites were negatively impacted: Trails.com, Livestrong.com, and AnswerBag.com. After the update was announced,  Larry Fitzgibbon, Demand Media’s EVP of Media and Operations, said: “As might be expected, a content library as diverse as ours saw some content go up and some go down in Google search results. This is consistent with what Google discussed on their blog post. It’s impossible to speculate how these or any changes made by Google impact any online business in the long term – but at this point in time, we haven’t seen a material net impact on our Content & Media business.”

    Pia Chatterjee of HubPages tells us, “On our end we think that its really too soon to tell, as after any large update, all the traffic undergoes pretty serious upheaval. All these numbers will be very different in about 7/10 days. What is worrying is that the update did not seem to do what it was supposed to, which was penalize poor content. The fact that e-how has remained untouched is proof of that!”

    “Our CEO, Paul Edmondson says:  We are confident that over time the proven quality of our writers’ content will be attractive to users. We have faith in Google’s ability to tune results post major updates and are optimistic that the cream will rise back to the top in the coming weeks, which has been our experience with past updates.”

    EzineArticles CEO Chris Knight wrote a blog post about how his site was affected, and what he is doing to try and get back up in the rankings.  "While we adamantly disagree with anyone who places the ‘Content Farm’ label on EzineArticles.com, we were not immune to this algorithm change," he wrote. "Traffic was down 11.5% on Thursday and over 35% on Friday. In our life-to-date, this is the single most significant reduction in market trust we’ve experienced from Google." 

    To try and get back into Google’s good graces, EzineArticles is doing things like reducing the number of article submissions accepted by over 10% – rejecting articles that "are not unique enough". It will no longer accept article submissions through a WordPress Plugin. They’re reducing the number of ads per page. They’re raising the minimum article word count to 400. They’re "raising the bar" on keyword density limits. They’re removing articles considered "thin and spammy", and will put greater focus on rejection of advertorial articles. Submitted articles are required to be exclusive to the submitter (but won’t be required to be unique to EzineArticles).  

    Knight also considered adding a Nofollow attribute to links in the article, as “icing in the cake to further prove to Matt Cutts and Google” that they’re not trying to “game Google” or let their authors do so. Interestingly enough, Knight decided to hold off on adding Nofollow after complaints from authors. 

    The first author to complain, in fact, even said, “Not sure what Pollyanna planet you’re from but let me assure you, EzineArticles does not exist ‘to provide information that is beneficial to the readers.’ EzineArticles is a business, not a government organization or charity. EzineArticles was created to make its owner(s) money. There’s nothing wrong with that, but don’t fool yourself into thinking they’re a bunch of do-gooders. By the same token, the majority of us who publish on EzineArticles don’t do so to benefit readers. We too are running businesses, and EzineArticles helps our own websites get traffic and ultimately sales." 

    Yeah, I think Google frowns upon that whole “we’re not writing to benefit readers” thing. 

    Another element of this whole algorithm update is that so far, it is only active in the U.S. Once Google expands it into other countries, the sites that have seen their traffic drop off so far may be in for an even bigger shock. 

    By the way, there are a lot more sites impacted than those discussed in this article.

    In an interview with On the Media, Google’s Matt Cutts was asked: “You have so much market share; you are so much the only game in town at this point that you can enforce these things unilaterally, without hearing or due process, putting the whole online world more or less at your mercy. Is there any process by which the people who are affected by algorithm changes and updates can make a case for themselves?”

    Cutts responded: 

    We have a webmaster forum where you can show up and ask questions, and Google employees keep an eye on that forum. And, in fact, if you’ve been hit with a, what we call a “manual action,” there’s something called a “reconsideration request,” which essentially is an appeal that says, ah, I’m sorry that I was hiding text or doing keyword stuffing and I’ve corrected the problem, could you review this?

    And over time, we’ve, I think, done more communication than any other search engine in terms of sending messages to people whose site has been hacked or who have issues and then trying to be open so that if people want to give us feedback, we listen to that.”

    Cutts later said, “Any change will have some losses, but hopefully a lot more wins than losses.”

    It does seem that Google may be willing to ackwowledge some errors in judgement on the matter, if this exchange between Cutts and Kahney is any indication:

    @lkahney the appropriate people at the Googleplex have heard that report, I’m sure. Feel free to snag me at SXSW if you see me though.less than a minute ago via web

    @mattcutts awesome. let’s hope someone saw it and fixes it. i’m counting on you guys. tx for message. made my dayless than a minute ago via TweetDeck

    I wonder how many more people will be trying to snag Cutts at SXSW. 

    Update: Since this article was written, Cult of Mac has seen its Google rankings return to normal. More on this here.

    Were there more wins than losses with this update? How’s the search quality looking to you? Tell us what you think

    Read more of our ongoing Panda coverage:

    Google Algorithm Update Fallout, eHow Response
    Google Panda Update Winners, Losers, and Future Considerations
    EzineArticles Hit By Google Panda Update Again
    Google Panda Update Hits Demand Media’s eHow This Time
    Google Panda Update Benefits Google Properties
    Ranking in Google Now That Panda Has Gone Global
    Google Panda Update Winners: Video, News, Blogs, and Porn
    Google Panda Update Victim Xomba Loses AdSense Ads Too
    Google Panda Update Officially Goes Global (In English)
    Google Panda Update Launched in More Countries
    Google Panda Update – Made for Big Brands?
    Google Does Guest Post for Panda Victim HubPages
    Examiner’s Approach to Content Quality Post Panda Update
    MerchantCircle Goes From Panda Victim to Blekko Curator
    More here.