MediaVision Blog : Search Engine Marketing

Many SEO practitioners have advanced hand-in-hand with Search’s evolution. They remember fondly the old days of acquiring easy rankings. Through a series of trial and error, these SEO kings (my bosses, among them) have constantly re-adapted to changes in search engines’ algorithms. They have achieved notoriety through a system of collecting evidence, implementing changes to small sections or sites according to a hypothesis, and watching the results like hawks in the proceeding months. Many have kept their eyes glued to the changes in Search’s algorithms over the years.

But for those new to the game, what the hell were those changes?

To begin with, Search’s algorithms are the basic sorting mechanisms for content. Aside from sounding cool, they are a set of complex equations that take into account secret factors (possibly more than 200 elements for Google) and use them to sort through myriad web content. Clever SEOs can infer these factors through continual testing. The ranking process is based on query dependant factors, or the sorting that needs to take place after a query has been inserted into the search bar. These could include matching pages to keywords or taking into account the searcher’s location. Query independent factors consider pre-determined information (PageRank, for example) that lessens the actual work that goes into each search.

Rand uses an incredibly simple example of an algorithm to determine a page’s rank:
Rank = Number of Terms * Number of Links to Page * Number of Trusted Links

Now to the meaty stuff: the changes in algorithm in the past few years have kept SEOs on their toes, but most of all, they’re focussed on eliminating spam and manipulation. They included,
1.)Google emphasised ranking for authority links, rather than on the sheer quantity of links. In addition to this, they spearheaded a crackdown on reciprocal linking, which affected many industries that relied on link farms. As the blog revolution picked up speed, the NoFollow tag was introduced to ensure that top bloggers weren’t propelling spam via their comment boxes.

2.) They created an algorithm that weighs the relative strength of the domain and all the content on it, as opposed to evaluating the strength of individual pages under a domain. In this way, the subject of siloing, or theming comes into play (simply, webmasters emphasise content that supports the overall theme of the website best, by placing it in strategic positions).

3.) The early startups liked to award their loyal employees with stocks, which over time, turned into megabucks. Similarly, Google adapted its algorithms to analyse link growth on a temporal basis, as well as to sandbox newer websites. In other words, they awarded better rankings to older domains. This helped with facile dotcom and spam sites, but hampered SEOing new brands and companies.

4.) In the halcyon old days of SEO, it is said that analysts could duplicate anchor text many times and score the jackpot. Nowadays anchor text patterns are a chief way for Google to identify sneaky spammers.

Reputable SEOs currently wouldn’t consider offering their clients “quick-fix, number one ranking, instant results or your money back” solutions. But in the older days of SEO (and by this I mean, 6 years ago), the algorithms weren’t as sophisticated as they are now. The real experts keep watch over changes constantly, and adapt with them.