This morning many SEO brothers are interested in “Update will start rolling out next week…” by Mr. Go talking about “updating useful content”.
Feeling about this update, I have a few summary and analysis ideas below (based on the content given by Google, I just clarified the meaning for some of you)
The problem Mr. Google is facing recently, as I see it:
- Go seems to be “losing control” in the rankings (especially lately there’s been a glitch, the AI isn’t as smart as we thought, so the guys who did the real thing got screwed, the guys scratched the cards or lied back. promotion)
- Due to the loss of content verification because of spin, scratching, AI content, determining copyright, … (status of copying the original post, but the original article flew to the top, but the copied article went up…)
- User traffic is manipulating many inaccurate suggestions, the time on site is also wrong (so based on time on site and bounce rate is no longer accurate to evaluate)
- What is the original value of the content? What does Google base its evaluation on?
- On what basis to rate that content as useful? Useful to whom?
Google is saying what they want, they update to want to direct people to follow and to filter garbage and many other things, and whether Google can do exactly as they say or not (which I guess is 50/50 luck for you). hey, bad luck to him)
Summary of what Google wants (also hope Google does soon):
More and more new content is being put on the internet’s huge database, and Google lives on that data, so they always want it to be added and filled instead of old content being fried over and over again. many years in a row.
Even if you, or your business has a little reputation and customer base in the Offline environment, but when building a website and the way you deploy online content, will old / new customers? Do you feel valued and satisfied?
And how do you demonstrate the achievements of offline online? (are awards, social contributions, specialized activities through events, … you do Entity Social but forget “Entity Offline”)
You open a website about construction, but then the content on that website shows that the writer is really knowledgeable about the field of construction industry? What evidence is there to show that?
You open an industrial cleaning company, you build a beautiful website, but is all the content on it focused on the right areas of your service?
Or do you hire a CTV to write content based on topics that are not relevant, or are related but are just topics to catch views, follow trends but the traffic will not bring any revenue. ?
After accessing the article on your website, whether it has enough expertise, information, knowledge, … to help your customers stop searching (that: Ah.. here it is, I found it…)
Or do users have to return to the search bar to find and click on other results?
This is an important thing that many of you probably haven’t really noticed: if someone goes to Google to search for air conditioning repair services, then they click on your website and a call is made, they stop searching. (so do many others) -> ok you have real value.
On the contrary, they click on your website but continue to go to the toolbar and search again (may compare prices with products/services elsewhere or are not satisfied with the content they just visited) but of course objectively speaking. : the content you provide is not really satisfying.
Your website has content review features, or can somehow demonstrate user satisfaction with the content in it.
Satisfied they will bookmark it, re-share it somewhere, or they are willing to copy the whole article or cite a blockquote and credit the source (sometimes a copy is also a good thing).
The useful and “original” value can be for example in some specific content that is easy to evaluate: An article sharing how to fix a website error with something ABC, because the author himself made the mistake, tinkered with it. editable and re-shared → then the user found it, read it carefully and followed it and also fixed the error (ok, this should be done)
BUT then: the original post was copied by hundreds of other people (without crediting the source) or shuffled it → I certainly don’t want these types of content to exist (not counting the people who wrote that topic but the new way of doing it) update, or otherwise,…)
But wait: original and useful are different on both sides, if the original post has less useful value for the user, the re-cooked post is still TOP higher than usual.
(I also often push TOP like this, get the old content of the website that is TOP but the instructions are sketchy, I will do it myself and take screenshots with more detailed and useful instructions for users, and my TOP is higher than the original post)
Useful content: It is something that brings value to readers/watches/listens,… but the value of each person is different “people like cod fish braised with star fruit, someone likes fish braised with melon” (as well as a group of people). A lot of brothers see girls that are revealing and bending and want to curse, but many of them just go to the group all day to follow and watch them).
So useful or not useful it also depends on the context, age, gender, geographical area, user habits, time, …
Google “probably” wants to: smash auto-generated content, scrape hundreds of topics about a certain website.
But unfortunately Google’s AI is not smart enough to exclude that content? so you guys still scratch TOP and make dozens of Adsense money
What’s more funny is that sometimes AI-generated content is approved by Google’s own AI, these two AIs are “dumb” and “matched in mind” are moved.
Google doesn’t want to see some kind of web of general information that lacks expertise and creativity, bringing unbiased information to users (toplists, reviews, … no one can rate it. Honest prices, all PR disguised or plow links, plow Aff, … I tried to buy a recording microphone but read dozens of reviews and couldn’t believe him)
And does Go not want those types to exist? I want the same (write everything, scratch it but have no knowledge of what I write)
But: wanting is one thing, but whether Mr. Go can do it or not is another
“Avoid creating content for search engines” – Sounds ridiculous (SEO doesn’t create content and search engine optimization is for whom?)
However, properly understood, this depends on the topic, depending on the field in which you are implementing content. “Content creation” is a phrase that has been mentioned a lot in recent years: from top, Facebook, Youtube,…, something like:
- There are sites that should only write by topic without keyword research (because if you are interested in keywords that are searched a lot on Google, it means that the topic is old, the content is old, everyone already knows it,. . and at the TOP 10 someone else is already sitting there), the keyword research tools are just statistics of what is available, not new.
- But write things that no one has searched or searched very little, who will find them? Who will read it? It’s actually a fact: low and extremely low volume keys are often high converting keys, and because customers search / conversely, keys with high volume are not search potential customers.
- There are sites / topics they will create new content on their own that has never been on Google, even don’t care about search intern because it is 100% new.
For example, if HD and HHA are not involved in Europe, why did anyone search for related terms before? And when there is a keyword, high search volume, it has already happened, is old, … written is also a view sentence, following a short-term trend
- If we assume that all content is written based on keyword research: difficulty, trends, volume, …. then it turns out that this world is only encapsulated in that much content (A finished writing, users). go to search -> create search volume, C researches keywords to produce the same content as what A wrote, … vicious loop)
- If you have a website that can’t be creative, you need to prioritize other factors (stories, poems, legal documents, …..) or there are articles in the form of: process, method, … creativity is only in in the addition or new image + the owner (eg: cleaning process of the air conditioner, the process is basically the same but the words are not as important as the picture you take + the key is local)
- Every time Google updates, no matter what the update is, for me, I still just hope Google can do what it says but… very difficult, very difficult.
- Humans with eyes and ears are still wrong, then the AI does everything right (or maybe it’s intentionally wrong) so many harsh truths, contrary, heartwarming, … still cling to brothers who do “SEO” clean” for many years
- Google “probably” never lets any one ranking factor be right forever, or their statements, or their updates are absolutely true as they say: they are capitalists not only on the internet but also in real life: they always create “distraction” to distract the market for profit, in the end, whether we continue to “disobey” or “follow” what Google says sure to be “rewarded” or “penalized”
A couple of lines of summary + analysis + feeling, but I still apply the MKN formula throughout how many times Google has updated it.
Link post: https://www.facebook.com/groups/nghienseo/posts/1018207468849256/