Showing posts with label Search Engine Land. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Search Engine Land. Show all posts

Saturday, March 28, 2015

Goodbye Blekko: Search Engine Joins IBM’s Watson Team

blekko-ibm-800


Add Blekko to the list of startup search engines that has come and now gone.


A message on the Blekko home page, shown above, says that “The blekko technology and team have joined IBM Watson!” The page redirects to a post on IBM’s Smarter Planet blog, where things get a bit confusing. Blekko’s home page message gives the impression of a complete acquisition, but IBM’s post mentions the acquisition of “certain technology.”



In our work to enhance the performance of cognitive computing systems, we’re constantly exploring new ways to identify, understand and make use of information from both public and private sources. Toward this end, we are excited about the acquisition of certain technology from Blekko, Inc, which closed this afternoon. This will provide access to additional content that can be infused in Watson-based products and services delivered by IBM and its partners.



We’ve reached out to Blekko CEO Rich Skrenta (who tweeted the news) for clarification on what IBM is acquiring, and we’ll update this if we learn more.


Blekko came out of stealth in 2008 with Skrenta promising to create a search engine with “algorithmic editorial differentiation” compared to Google. Its public search engine finally opened in 2010, launching with what the site called “slashtags” — a personalization and filtering tool that gave users control over the sites they saw in Blekko’s search results.


In 2011, Blekko went on the offensive against Google over spam, launching a “spam clock” website at spamclock.com that counted up the one million spammy web pages that Blekko claimed were being published online every hour. This was just as the debate on content farms and Google was really heating up, and in early 2011 Blekko even announced that it was banning content farms from its index. About three weeks later, Google announced the Panda algorithm update, its own effort to combat spam in search results — by no means a response to Blekko’s announcement, but certainly indirect validation that Blekko, and others who had been complaining about the amount of spam in Google’s search index, were on to something.


Blekko has remained out of the news for almost two years, though, with some of its last mentions being a search app for tablets and a joint funding round/layoffs.


(Tip via VentureBeat.)


The post Goodbye Blekko: Search Engine Joins IBM’s Watson Team appeared first on Search Engine Land.






from Search Engine Land http://ift.tt/1IFyj4x

Friday, March 27, 2015

Saturday, January 3, 2015

Yahoo Search Still Offline After Bing Went Down Earlier Today

yahoo-down


Yahoo’s dedicated search site at http://ift.tt/KLkCYO remains offline at the moment, a couple hours after Bing suffered and recovered from a similar outage.


As I type this, Yahoo’s search service is loading intermittently — but even if the service does load, it can’t execute a search request. In other cases, visitors are getting the “Yahoo will be right back…” message seen above.


Yahoo gets its search results from Bing, which was also down at the same time earlier today, but has since come back online. According to some of the tweets from those who noticed, both Bing and Yahoo were down simultaneously starting around 2:30 pm ET.












Tom Warren of The Verge also noticed that Siri and Microsoft’s Outlook search functions were down. Based on my own testing, Siri is back now and completing web searches like normal.


Microsoft shared a generic statement with TechCrunch:



“This morning Microsoft experienced a brief, isolated services outage which has now been resolved. Our apologies for any inconvenience.”



We’ve asked for additional details about the Bing outage, but that statement is likely what Microsoft will tell us, too. Yahoo’s PR team hasn’t replied to our requests for information.


Postscript: Five minutes after publishing, Yahoo gave us this statement:



“We are aware that Yahoo search is unavailable to users. Our engineers are working to restore the service at the earliest.”



The post Yahoo Search Still Offline After Bing Went Down Earlier Today appeared first on Search Engine Land.






from Search Engine Land http://ift.tt/1wLjYv7

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

2014 Trending Topics Highlighted In Google’s New Year’s Eve Logo

Google new years eve doodle 1220


Google’s ushering out 2014 with a doodle featuring the year’s most popular trending topics.


The New Year’s Eve logo includes animation to spotlight the World Cup, the Philae robotic lander, ALS Ice Bucket Challenge and Flappy Bird, along with a sharing icon to post the logo on social media pages or send via email.


We’re celebrating the last day of the year with an animated recap of some of this year’s top trending searches.

Google doodle new year's eve 2014


Clicking the animated logo launches a results page that lists Google’s top five most popular trending topics of the year, with a link to “Explore 2014 Trending Topics.”


Here’s a quick list of Google’s top five 2014 trending topics, but you can read more about Google’s Year in Review here: Google’s 2014 Top Trending Searches – The World Mourns Robin Williams, Asks About Ebola & Looks For Walmart.


Google’s Top 2014 Trending Topics



  1. Robin Williams

  2. World Cup

  3. Ebola

  4. Malaysia Airlines

  5. Flappy Bird


The post 2014 Trending Topics Highlighted In Google’s New Year’s Eve Logo appeared first on Search Engine Land.






from Search Engine Land http://ift.tt/1vt5cbX

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

Google Releases AdWords Quality Score Primer Aimed At Dispelling Misconceptions

adwords-quality-score-featured


There has always been a healthy amount of debate over the importance of Quality Score as an indicator of Google AdWords success and the amount of focus that should be devoted to it. Today, Google issued a whitepaper called “Settling the (Quality) Score” to help advertisers use Quality Score to guide optimizations. Will it settle the debate? Maybe not, in fact it may just spark more conversation, but if you’re involved in paid search at all, you’ll want to check it out.


Google describes Quality Score being like a “warning light in a car’s engine” as opposed to being a “detailed metric that should be the focus of account management”. In other words, it’s a signal not a KPI. It’s a mash-up of expected click-throuh rate, ad relevance and landing page experience, but, as we know, the score we’re shown isn’t the actual score given at any moment during an auction. The score we see represents overall performance in the auctions.


The section that will likely garner the most attention is titled “Six Things That Matter (and Don’t) When it Comes to Quality”, on page nine of the ten page paper. It’s aimed at addressing some misconceptions about Quality Score. Among them: Device? It matters. Account structure? It doesn’t matter. That said, moving a keyword to an ad group with different ad copy can affect that keyword’s quality score because the user experience may change.


Bottom line, Google says, “chasing the number” shouldn’t be the focus of your efforts, but what’s best for your users. The full paper is available for download here.






from Search Engine Land http://ift.tt/1pftFVb

The 10 Worst Link Building Assumptions

Over the past few years, one of the biggest problems I’ve faced is educating clients about search marketing — about what’s reasonable to expect and what isn’t in the world of link building.


It can be difficult, especially in the winning-the-business stage, to admit that you can’t turn lead into gold, but being honest and clear with clients to set appropriate expectations can set you up for success in the longer term. If they’re the right client, they’ll be smart enough to understand.


When we started the company, we stayed quiet and let the clients dictate what we did for the most part, mainly because we didn’t yet have our footing. We’ve always discussed risk with our clients, but we didn’t advocate for all the things that make our jobs easier and make links work better for them.


Since then, we’ve gotten better about speaking up and advocating for everything from technical changes to better content. However, we still have a way to go, as we’re still facing some severely problematic assumptions about link building.


I’ll list them for you here, and you can share this list with your co-workers, bosses or clients. If you, or anyone you know, is operating under one of these dangerous assumptions, it’s past time to get educated.


42


1. I Can Tell You How Many Links It Will Take To Rank.


I can certainly guess (42, always), but that’s only after spending a lot of time doing analysis and research.


My problem with this assumption is that it sets the whole relationship up for failure from the beginning. I can’t predict algorithmic shifts or what your competitors are doing (or what you’re doing without telling me), so it’s irresponsible for me to pretend that I can, just to get your business.


2. I Can Tell You How Long It Will Take To Make You Rank.


I’ve seen some sites rank for whatever terms they want after we’ve been building links for a few weeks, and I’ve seen some that take months. That depends on a variety of factors so, again, it’s irresponsible to guess.


3. I Can Guarantee What Position You’ll Hit.


At least a dozen times over the years, potential clients have tried to figure out why I won’t guarantee certain rankings — because they’re spoken to several SEOs who will. (A guarantee like this is a warning sign of a questionable SEO.)


Perhaps I’d be more likely to consider this if I had full control of the online market environment; but even then, I think it’s crazy to guarantee a specific spot.


4. If Something Makes Me Rank In The Short Term But Is Risky, It’s Still Worth The Risk.


I guess that’s true if you like to churn and burn sites or rely on PPC. However, the many ways to rank quickly are the kind of methods that can easily come back to haunt you.


Obviously, my idea of risk and your idea of risk may be very different, but throwing 30 exact match anchor text links at a page just because you say that moved the page up three positions in the SERPs is just a bad idea.


5. Once We Get To Where We Want To Be, We Can Stop Doing Everything We’ve Been Doing And Let It Ride.


We’ve dealt with a few clients that stopped using our services when they were doing well. Then, when things started to go south again, they wanted to start back up again.


Even if you feel like resting, your competitors are probably still moving forward so, at some point, you’ll start to fall behind.


6. I Don’t Have The Knowledge To Be Able To Look At Your Backlinks And Figure Out All The Bad Things You’ve Done And Are Still Doing.


This isn’t usually a big problem with my contract clients, but it’s been an issue with some short-term consulting gigs.


It makes me feel like anything good that we do will get cancelled out by all the spam links that keep being built intentionally in an effort to rank well quickly.


magnify


7. You Won’t Have Problems If You Follow Google’s (Current) Guidelines.


Just because you follow their guidelines doesn’t mean that you won’t become a casualty of an algorithmic update, an accident, or simple poor rankings.


There are loads of people doing things the right way and their rankings are abysmal. That’s one reason that sites are so driven to take on massive risks. Following Google’s guidelines doesn’t guarantee online success, ever.


8. You Can’t Be Penalized (Whether Manually Or By An Algorithm Update) For All The Bad Stuff In Your Profile Even If It Was Done A Decade ago Or You Didn’t Know About It.


You don’t just get grandfathered into Google’s good graces because you’re an innocent or uneducated victim. They really don’t care.


Matt Cutts, Google's Head of Webspam, Explains

Matt Cutts, Google’s Head of Webspam, Explains



9. Any Free Link Is A Good Link.


I used to believe this, wholeheartedly. Now? I’ve seen some vicious penalties on sites that never bought a single link, never did outreach to get links, and basically just got screwed by having linkable sites.


10. I Can Do This Well Without Your Input.


I can do it, yes, but I don’t know your product or service like you do, and having an inside perspective means that the work I do is much better.


Having you paying attention and catching my mistakes is particularly awesome because, again, I don’t know your business like you do and I might make an incorrect assumption.


What’s the solution to this? Continued advocacy and education, or is there something more? I’d love to hear what client assumptions you face, as well as how you handle them.






from Search Engine Land http://ift.tt/1lmUSlo

Google’s Knowledge Graph Is Showing Step By Step Instructions: Here Are Some Examples

google-data-knowledge-brain-featuredEarlier this year, Google began offering much more detailed answers in the top knowledge graph box. Shortly after that was introduced, Google also began expanding those answers into a bulleted list format. We’ve been seeing these bulleted lists, especially in “how-to” like queries for months now and here are some interesting examples.


google-how-to-reset-iphone


In the example above, notice how the first result is not being used for the answer here. Google is making an effort to give the publisher a nice big link but the truth is, the user really has no need to click through to the publisher’s site to get the answer. Which goes back to the major concern over the knowledge graph and publisher’s traffic.


make-french-toast-steps-google


Above is another example, now with 6 steps, a description and a link to the publisher’s site. Again, the first organic result is not being used for the answer here.


google-more-steps-knowledge


In this final example, we have Google only listing 3 steps but adding a note that there are “3 more items” in the list and they should click through to the publishers site to read more. A publisher would likely prefer this over listing all their content on the page, but a searcher probably would not want to have to click through to get the full answer.


We’ve asked Google for more details about how these work and how publishers may control them? We have yet to hear back.






from Search Engine Land http://ift.tt/1maivZM