just had this thought a few seconds ago, that half a year ago or so, I read about social media mentions (e.g. tweets?) possibly already being a ranking factor or becoming (an important) one in Google.
I think I read that on "stuntdubl"'s blog or on SEOmoz or something... (Im not really sure where to be honest)
Is there any truth/evidence for this?
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's basically just a link, too.. just wondering if it's the case already or not really!
Subscribe to HRA Now!
SEO Class in Chicago, IL
Learn How To Optimize Your Website on July 26, 2013
Looking for personalized in-depth SEO training among your peers?
High Rankings is offering a 1-day customized SEO training class in Chicago. Class size is limited so please sign-up now if you want in!
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE!
www.CustomReportSharing.com
From the folks who brought you High Rankings!
More SEO Content
International SEM | Social Media | Search Friendly Design | SEO | Paid Search / PPC | Seminars | Forum Threads | Q&A | Copywriting | Keyword Research | Web Analytics / Conversions | Blogging | Dynamic Sites | Linking | SEO Services | Site Architecture | Search Engine Spam | Wrap-ups | Business Issues | HRA Questions | Online Courses
Tweets & Social Media Mentions = Ranking Factor?
Started by
PatrickGer
, Jul 27 2010 03:53 AM
4 replies to this topic
#2
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,326 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 27 July 2010 - 07:47 AM
QUOTE
Is there any truth/evidence for this?
Sure. It's becoming a popular form of online marketing which would be foolish for Google to ignore.
It's not "just the link" since the links are typically nofollowed.
It's more the perceived authority of the tweeter, the number of retweets something might receive, that sort of thing. The Caffeine update was in a big part made to do a better job of quickly indexing real time stuff like social media mentions.
#3
PatrickGer
-
- Active Members
-
- 285 posts
HR 5
Posted 27 July 2010 - 12:30 PM
thanks...interesting I must say!
It'd be foolish for Google to ignore, but I assume when such new signals arise (that they can use in their algo), they still test them in their algo first and then come to the conculsion "helps" or "helps not", right? Do such new signals normally always help re-fine their algo...or does stuff sometimes turn out not to be useful (engouh to become an *important* factor)? And have we any way of knowing?
I once wondered: Why does Google look at only "amount of link authority" not "rate at which new link authority is acquired (divided by how much exposure/link authority the site already has..knowing that the "rich get richer")". I mentioned this somewhere else (web analytics blog), where someone agreed that this would be a much better signal of quality...but I'd assume the engineers at Google know this better (and why they're not using it), probably having tested it, right?
In other words, it remains yet to be seen if twitter,etc. signals turn out to be a (somewhat) important ranking factor?
It'd be foolish for Google to ignore, but I assume when such new signals arise (that they can use in their algo), they still test them in their algo first and then come to the conculsion "helps" or "helps not", right? Do such new signals normally always help re-fine their algo...or does stuff sometimes turn out not to be useful (engouh to become an *important* factor)? And have we any way of knowing?
I once wondered: Why does Google look at only "amount of link authority" not "rate at which new link authority is acquired (divided by how much exposure/link authority the site already has..knowing that the "rich get richer")". I mentioned this somewhere else (web analytics blog), where someone agreed that this would be a much better signal of quality...but I'd assume the engineers at Google know this better (and why they're not using it), probably having tested it, right?
In other words, it remains yet to be seen if twitter,etc. signals turn out to be a (somewhat) important ranking factor?
QUOTE(Jill @ Jul 27 2010, 02:47 PM) 
Sure. It's becoming a popular form of online marketing which would be foolish for Google to ignore.
It's not "just the link" since the links are typically nofollowed.
It's more the perceived authority of the tweeter, the number of retweets something might receive, that sort of thing. The Caffeine update was in a big part made to do a better job of quickly indexing real time stuff like social media mentions.
It's not "just the link" since the links are typically nofollowed.
It's more the perceived authority of the tweeter, the number of retweets something might receive, that sort of thing. The Caffeine update was in a big part made to do a better job of quickly indexing real time stuff like social media mentions.
#4
Jill
-
- Admin
-
- 32,326 posts
High Rankings Advisor
Posted 27 July 2010 - 03:01 PM
QUOTE
In other words, it remains yet to be seen if twitter,etc. signals turn out to be a (somewhat) important ranking factor?
I would say it's a factor just like the hundreds of other things that are a factor. And it's going to be search query dependent most likely. If the query is one that deserves freshness, social media mentions could likely come into play.
#5
PatrickGer
-
- Active Members
-
- 285 posts
HR 5
Posted 28 July 2010 - 03:19 AM
QUOTE(Jill @ Jul 27 2010, 10:01 PM)
I would say it's a factor just like the hundreds of other things that are a factor. And it's going to be search query dependent most likely. If the query is one that deserves freshness, social media mentions could likely come into play.
I guess well see what the future holds for this..
thanks for your replies, (once again).
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
