Like most SEOs I have been delving into reading about the Google documentation leak. I have a slightly different opinion and take on it than most seem to be having. Here are some observations I have made; 1) It's from a deprecated code base (still very interesting - but old and not used) 2) It's not actually from their ranking algorithm, it is an API used internally 3) We already knew most of the things that are in there 4) There is a lot of public information that confirms some of the things in here 5) You have to question the timing - Google needed a distraction 6) This looks a lot like the Yandex leak to me - which I did not buy was real 7) I don't believe you would have a variable for good clicks and bad clicks, you would have a value for a variable called clicks which the valuer would indicate good or bad 8) Good production code documentation would specify ranges and values - I see none of that here 9) Google doesn't use DA (Domain Authority) - DA is an analog to PR (Page Rank) which was Google's stand-out differentiator - I am not sure why so much attention is being paid to these nuances. 10) This SEO is not buying it! I remain open-minded, these are my initial observations and opinions. Would love to discuss more. #SEO #Google #Leak #API #Code
that's kind of what I was thinking - is it really a leak? I can't see anything new there that we didn't know already from either the european trial and...experience. I guess let's not get distracted from keeping exposing AI Overviews for what it is, something that actually follows none of those ranking factors🧐🤥
this looks like a definition list, perhaps?
Number three is really all we need to say here. People are spending a lot of time talking about things we already know.
I agree see my repost.
Does seems like its a dstraction from something, especially after Search regarding AI...
All that so you can rank after Reddit!
Very interesting take, Trevor!
Love your points here. Happy to see the alternative view on this and glad I'm not the only one questioning some of this information. I definitely agree on the deprecation mention - it's not clear what is deprecated or how it connects on the whole... we have these documents with no context beyond their internal discussion. There's no way for us to connect the dots and see what's going on as a system. Everything else inexplicitly stated is left to interpretation. From a technical standpoint that's a lot. However number 4... I agree the timing is strange. I don't think Google needs any more distractions though. I think the opposite. There are many disgruntled ex employees.. and even more under significant tension. I think it is the opposite case here.
I have been reading the raw dump and they are all dated 2019 and there is literally nothing you can gather from 90% of the pages -- I so agree.
E-commerce SEO - #seo #ecommerce #webshop
2moI think it was and is important to test and verify what works well for a website and what does not. No matter what Google says or does not say or lies about. For example: Reading about that there is a sandbox - what can you do about it? How will this imact or change you SEO strategy? Knowing about usage of click data and user behaviour - what does this make you do different now? Will any of this matter at all when SGE and AI overviews dominate the SERP? Anyways. Lets focus on the things we can influence. We cannot influence if Google uses Authority Scores or bashes small personal sites. But we can build a website users enjoy using and visiting. A website that loads fast and makes products easy to find and gives helpful information to help the user make his/ her descision. One has to bear in mind that Google's number one interest and goal is to show ads to users and make them click these ads. This is the main income source of any search engine. To achive that goal search engines need ads matching the users intent and search request as well as good (helpful) organic search results to build trust to make the user return and use the search engine again and again.