Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Rss Feeds And Google Rankings
Posted 26 August 2005 - 04:10 PM
I put this in the wrong place before.
Two related questions,
First, is there a hierarchy in results on Google? Would it be paid rankings first, RSS feeds second and natural results third? Would that be common among Yahoo! and MSN as well?
Second, has anyone heard if RSS feeds can be used to boost rankings for competitive keywords?
I'm just spitballing here, but I hope someone knows the answers.
Posted 26 August 2005 - 04:32 PM
As to your question, I'm not sure I understand what you want to know.
What do you mean by "hierarchy of results"?
Paid listings in Google are completely separate from the organic (natural, unpaid) listings. They're listed in separate sections of the results pages, and Google are quite firm that neither one has influence on the other. There is no "hierarchy" that includes both paid and natural listings, to my knowledge.
The natural listings are presented in order from "most relevant" to "least relevant", the determination of what constitutes "relevant" being made by Google's algorithm. There are quite a few factors (the number I hear bandied about most often is somewhere in the neighborhood of 100) that figure in to this algorithm.
I'm really not sure what you're asking about RSS feeds versus natural results. If a site with an RSS feed shows up in the unpaid listings, it is a natural result. AFAIK, sites that offer an RSS feed don't automatically rank higher in the SERPs than sites that don't offer one.
Posted 26 August 2005 - 04:46 PM
I didn't make myself clear earlier. Paid results appear first in Google, don't they? The blue boxes at the top are paid rankings, right? People pay to get their sites first for various key words and the natural ranking appear just below.
Maybe I don't understand how RSS feeds work. Is the RSS feed considered one site to be ranked by a search engine or is it multiple sites?
Posted 27 August 2005 - 04:06 AM
Google does not have paid rankings at all.
Posted 29 August 2005 - 11:40 PM
Welcome here.I think you need to know about google algothim so u must go to google webmaster help section.In first step u need to collect the seo information as much u can.
There is no realtion of RSS and google SERP.Ye its true that it will be helpful for natural results.
Posted 30 August 2005 - 09:03 AM
RSS feeds are used by content sites to create content. One RSS feed may be picked up by thousands of Web sites. If those Web sites are indexed by search engines, their outbound links MAY help boost the link popularity of the sites included in the RSS feeds.
But don't count on that happening. While it appeared to work for a few months, there are indications that Google is on to that trick.
If you're looking for ways to increase your inbound linkage, I think the traditional approach still works best: puts lots of good, unique content on your site and people will find you. Yes, you need at least SOME inbound links to get crawled first. That is what free submission directories like DMOZ, JoeAnt, GoGuides, et. al. are good for.
Posted 30 August 2005 - 02:50 PM
The top 2 ads in Google are, as the others have said, the highest performing Adwords ads. These are the ads that get the highest clickthrough rate, in conjunction with what they're bidding for the keyword.
Secondly, you can most definitely use RSS feeds to increase your rankings. A typical method than many use, is to create a content rich webpage, and include related RSS news feeds on the page. So, in essence you'll:
1. Have more relevant content on your webpage
2. Will be linking out to relevant websites
By doing this, you'll not only be providing your visitors with more relevant information, but it may help you rank well for many "non-competitive" search phrases.
Posted 30 August 2005 - 05:10 PM
Thanks for your responses. You really helped me.
I wish I could be more forthcoming with details about the client I work for, but the industry and keywords are very competitive. I'm just seeing if this would work for the kind of content we have on our existing sites.
Let's say I put on RSS feed on my main page. I would have to create meaningful content to encourage visitors to pick it up. They could send that RSS feed to other people and we would build link popularity that way. Right?
Thanks again. Just trying to get my head around the subject.
Posted 30 August 2005 - 05:17 PM
My intention with this technology is to deliver better, more relevant content to people who already visit our site. It sounds like RSS would do that. Our site is already indexed and performs well on Google et al. Have you heard of RSS being used this way?
Posted 30 August 2005 - 06:16 PM
Posted 31 August 2005 - 01:51 PM
I wouldn't recommend that site at all, as it is just a typical "Buy my eBook" spam site.
If you are incorporating feeds from other services, that is fine. Just understand that you probably are not getting UNIQUE content. If you are sending data to other sites, hoping to draw in traffic, that is fine, too. Just understand that you are competing with many other sites attempting to do the same thing.
RSS (Rich Site Summary) technology was developed by Netscape as a means of allowing people to build customized "Start pages" for their browser (on the My.Netscape site). They introduced the concept of allowing people to submit their own RSS feeds to the My.Netscape Directory, so that other My.Netscape users could add those custom feeds to their Start pages.
Other services picked up the technology and began using it to allow people to build custom Web sites. Unfortunately (or fortunately), there was no revenue model to support the resources required for maintaining the infrastructure. After a few years, most of the service sites had shut down.
Then some genius who didn't care about history decided to redefine RSS as "Really Simple Syndication". Suddenly, everyone was interested in it -- although I suspect that the real impetus came from news Web sites and the software creators who built personal aggregators that people could download to their PCs.
In the form of Really Simple Syndication, RSS technology has actually breathed life into the old "Push Technology" concept, where content distributors were supposedly going to "push" content out across the Internet to end-users. No one calls it "Push Technology" any more because it didn't work the first time.
Today's RSS technology is basically yesterday's RSS technology combined with yesterday's Push philosophy.
The technology itself is stable and reliable, but its implementation and the rules governing that implementation, as well as the infrastructure required to maintain the whole concept, are all unstable. They will last as long as people earn money or hope to earn money from the concept.
Posted 31 August 2005 - 04:06 PM
To paraphrase the movie "Good Will Hunting", your answer 'blew my hair back'. That is the kind of response I was hoping for when I first posted this string.
The way I am proposing to use RSS is to create a lot of unique content and roll it out over time, so the content will be new and interesting to the end-user. That's my responsibility. I think the client I am proposing this to will look at it seriously because it would be something they can use for a year or so to really drive traffic to their sites and build the necessary 'cache' or relationship for long-term success.
I hope I can help you with some advice or a tip in the near future. To pay it forward as the saying goes.
Thanks for your help!
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users