Google's Panda Update is a search filter launched in February 2011 aimed at stopping websites with poor quality content from reaching the top search results of Google. Every time to time, Panda is patched. When this happens, previously hit sites can escape if the right changes have been made. Panda may also capture previously escaped locations. Refreshment may also mean "false positives"
Google Panda 4.2 Is here; Slowly Rolling Out After Waiting Google says it started a Panda update this weekend, but it will take months to roll out completely.
Google is asking Search Engine Land this weekend to put out a new Google Panda.
Many of you may not have realized this roll out happens incredibly slowly. In reality, Google says it may take months to complete the update. While the Panda algorithm is still site-wide, it ensures that some of the web pages may not see a change immediately.
The last time we've had a Google official tells Search Engine Land that this weekend it's pushing out a Google Panda update.
The last time we had an official refresh from Panda was nearly 10 months ago: on September 25, 2014, Panda 4.1 happened. That was the 28th update, but as we saw small fluctuations in October 2014, I'd agree with this the 29th or 30th update.
To my knowledge, this weekend, very few webmasters reported a Google update. That's how it should be, as this update from Panda is very slowly rolling out.
New opportunities for some, new sanctions for others
The roll out ensures that anyone who has been penalized in the last patch by Panda will have a chance to emerge if they make the right improvements. And if you've been affected by Panda, you're sadly not going to immediately see the full impact, but you should slowly see improvements in your organic rankings over time.
This is not how many of the previous Panda changes have been carried out, where you would normally see a large increase or decrease in your Google traffic sooner.
For the record, here is the list of confirmed Panda Changes, some of the major changes being named with their AKA names (also known as):
With "Panda" algorithm change, Google Forecloses on Content Farms
Google announced in January that it would take action against web farms with "shallow" and "low-quality" material obtaining top listings. Now the company is delivering this content, announcing a change to its built ranking algorithm. Current Technology Impacts 12% The current algorithm — Google's "recipe" on how to: -
Current Shift Affect 12% U.S. Results
The new algorithm — Google's "recipe" for ranking web pages— went live yesterday, I was told by the company in today's interview.
Google periodically updates the algorithm, but most changes are so small that few are aware of it. It's special. Google says the change affects 12 percent of its search results in the U.S. (11.8 percent is the unbounded figure), a much higher impact on performance than most of its algorithm improvements. The move is only having an impact in the U.S. It may be rolled out in the future worldwide.
Although Google has been under intense pressure over the past month to move against content farms, I was told by the company that since last January this policy has been in the works.
Officially, not targeted at farms with content
Officially, the algorithm switch is not said by Google to target content farms. When I asked, the company specifically refused to confirm that. Nonetheless, Matt Cuts — who leads the spam combat team from Google — told me, "I think people will get the sense of the types of sites we're thinking about." Okay, there are two forms of "users" sites that have been mentioned in a way that Google noticed: "Officially, Google doesn't suggest the algorithm switch addresses content farms.
When I asked, the company specifically refused to confirm that. Nevertheless, Matt Cuts — who leads the spam fighting team at Google — told me, "I think people will get the sense of the types of sites we're thinking about." Indeed, there are two types of "users" sites that Google has talked about: "scraper" sites and "information farms." Both of them were listed in a January 21 blog post: we're reviewing multiple changes that should help drive. We will continue to explore ways to reduce spam, including new ways in which users can provide more direct input on spamming and low-quality pages.
While "simple web spam" has diminished over time, focus has turned to "data farms," which are sites with material that is shallow and low quality.
I boded the main parts that I'm going to discuss first.
The "change of scraper"
Approximately a week after Google's message, Cutts announced that an algorithm update targeting "scraper" sites had gone live: this was a fairly targeted launch: slightly over 2 percent of queries somehow alter, but less than half a percent of search results shift enough that somebody might actually notice. The net effect is that searchers are more likely than a page that scraped and copied the content of the original site to see the sites that wrote the original material.
Sites that are commonly known as "scraper" sites do not have original content but instead pull content from other sources. Others do this by legitimate means, such as using permission-based RSS links. Others may use fair use rules to aggregate small amounts of content. Others actually use automated means to "scrape" or copy material from other pages— hence the nickname of "scraper."
In short, Google said it adopted sites that in January had low levels of original content and released a week ago.
Also Read: Social Media Optimization
By the way, major algorithm improvements are sometimes named by Google, as in the case of the Vince update. They are often called by Webmaster World, where such updates are closely watched by a group of advertisers, as happened with the Mayday Update last year.
Nobody gave it any sort of name that stuck in the scraper update. So, I call it the "Scraper Update" myself, helping to differentiate it from the "Farmer Update" Google announced today.
Report to the farmer? I'm offering this switch this name again, so there's a fast way to talk about it. Google declined to give it a public name, nor do I see any provided in a Webmaster World thread beginning to note the algorithm switch as it was rolled out yesterday, before the official announcement by Google.
Yet "Farmer Update" does actually target farm material
Postscript: Internally, when I wrote this original story, Google told me it was called the "Panda" update, but they didn't want it on-the-record. About a week ago, in a Wired interview, they announced the internal title. Throughout the remainder of this article, "Farmer" is used, although the name has changed to "Panda" to help reduce potential confusion.
How can I know if Google expressly refused to acknowledge that the Farmer Update targets web farms?
I'm reading through the sheets. Google had said it was going after them before.
Since Google originally called content farms a target, you've had some of the companies that get branded with that word push back that they're not like that. Most notable was Richard Rosenblatt, CEO of Demand Media, who previously told All Things D about the algorithm changes planned by Google to target content farms: it is not in any way directed at us.
I recognize that some people might be confused because of the stupid "information farm" mark with which we have been branded. I don't know who invented it and who branded us with it, but it's not us... we're all tagged with "content farm." For our authors it's just disrespectful. We don't want our authors to feel like they're part of a content farm.
I suppose it's all down to what your "content farm" concept is. Content farms are places with "shallow and lows quality content" from Google's earlier blog post. Rosenberg is right in that respect that Demand Media products such as How are not actually content farms because they have some deep and high quality content. Obviously, they also have some material of shallow and low quality.
The material is what the switch in algorithm follows. Google wouldn't confirm that it's targeting content farms, but Cutts said it's going after content that's small and shallow. And since content farms produce a lot of that — together with good quality content — they are targeted here. If they have a lot of good content and that good content is responsible for most of their traffic and revenue, they're going to be all right. They should be interested in not.