Google Says Word Count Not a Quality Factor
Google’s John Mueller answered if it’s helpful to add more words to a web page to help it rank better. The idea was that if a page wasn’t ranking, adding more relevant content will help.
Will Adding Relevant Content Help Rankings?
The person asking the question wanted Mueller’s opinion as to the efficacy of improving a web page by adding additional content that was relevant.
The person asking the question was unclear about what they meant by “relevant content,” which can mean different things. It boils down to whether the content is relevant to keywords or if the content is relevant to user intent or if the content is relevant to people.
There are a multitude of ways content can be relevant, with some versions of “relevance” being, in my opinion, more useful for ranking purposes than others.
Here’s the question:
“Let’s say I want to improve content on a page. I add as much relevant content as I can for the users.
Does this mean that when I add relevant text to the page, Google automatically assumes that the page is better?
Does it work out like that? Is more text better in the eyes of Google?”
The person asking the question related that those in charge are insisting that improving rankings is “as simple” as adding more text.
Updating Content is Not a Simple Process
John Mueller began by stating that updating content is more nuanced than adding more content:
“It’s definitely not quite as simple as that.”
Is Content Quality Linked to Word Count?
There is a common perception that quality articles are comprehensive. Because quality articles are comprehensive it follows that those articles are inherently longer.
How can an article be both comprehensive and not on the long side, right?
I see this quite often. Quality is often equated to comprehensiveness, which means a higher word count.
Google’s Mueller continued his answer by remarking on the idea of word count in the context of quality and ranking factors.
Mueller explained:
“From our point of view the number of words on a page is not a quality factor, not a ranking factor.
So just blindly adding more and more text to a page doesn’t make it better.”
Mueller next put the idea of content within the example of a book versus a brochure and what the user feels is useful to them.
He said:
“It’s a bit like if you want to present something to a client who’s walking in, you can give them a one or two page brochure or you can give them a giant book of information.
And in some cases people will want a book with a lot of information. And in other cases people want something short and sweet.
And that’s similar to search.
If you have the information that you need for indexing for …kind of making it so that users and Googlebot understands what this page us about, what you’re trying to achieve with it uh… in a short version then fine, keep a short version, you don’t need to make it longer.
Just blindly adding text to a page doesn’t make it better.”
What About Thin Content?
Some people may say that thin content is an example of content that Google won’t rank because it’s too short.
But that’s not the case.
Thin content is commonly thought of as content that is short. A more precise definition is content that lacks usefulness. Factors that define thin content include more than how many words are on a page.
Improving Articles for Better Rankings
Improving an article to hopefully improve the rankings can be somewhat complicated. First, you have to assess what the web page is about and if that web page fulfills the mission of communicating the information a site visitor wants.
Sometimes an article fails because it’s not about what users mean when they search with a particular query. What people mean when they search for something can change.
The reasons why content stops ranking can sometimes be teased out by identifying if the traffic gradually slowed down or if there was a definite date when the traffic dried up. These are data points that must be considered before drawing up a strategy of what to do to help an article rank better.
As John Mueller said, “…blindly adding text to a page doesn’t make it better.”
There has to be an explainable purpose to the content rewrite.
Citation
Watch John Mueller answer question about content quality and rankings at about the 20 minute mark:
Google Warns About Misuse of Its Indexing API
Google has updated its Indexing API documentation with a clear warning about spam detection and the possible consequences of misuse.
Warning Against API Misuse The new message in the guide says:
“All submissions through the Indexing API are checked for spam. Any misuse, like using multiple accounts or going over the usage limits, could lead to access being taken away.”
This warning is aimed at people trying to abuse the system by exceeding the API’s limits or breaking Google’s rules.
What Is the Indexing API? The Indexing API allows websites to tell Google when job posting or livestream video pages are added or removed. It helps websites with fast-changing content get their pages crawled and indexed quickly.
But it seems some users have been trying to abuse this by using multiple accounts to get more access.
Impact of the Update Google is now closely watching how people use the Indexing API. If someone breaks the rules, they might lose access to the tool, which could make it harder for them to keep their search results updated for time-sensitive content.
How To Stay Compliant To use the Indexing API properly, follow these rules:
- Don’t go over the usage limits, and if you need more, ask Google instead of using multiple accounts.
- Use the API only for job postings or livestream videos, and make sure your data is correct.
- Follow all of Google’s API guidelines and spam policies.
- Use sitemaps along with the API, not as a replacement.
Remember, the Indexing API isn’t a shortcut to faster indexing. Follow the rules to keep your access.
This Week in Search News: Simple and Easy-to-Read Update
Here’s what happened in the world of Google and search engines this week:
1. Google’s June 2024 Spam Update
Google finished rolling out its June 2024 spam update over a period of seven days. This update aims to reduce spammy content in search results.
2. Changes to Google Search Interface
Google has removed the continuous scroll feature for search results. Instead, it’s back to the old system of pages.
3. New Features and Tests
- Link Cards: Google is testing link cards at the top of AI-generated overviews.
- Health Overviews: There are more AI-generated health overviews showing up in search results.
- Local Panels: Google is testing AI overviews in local information panels.
4. Search Rankings and Quality
- Improving Rankings: Google said it can improve its search ranking system but will only do so on a large scale.
- Measuring Quality: Google’s Elizabeth Tucker shared how they measure search quality.
5. Advice for Content Creators
- Brand Names in Reviews: Google advises not to avoid mentioning brand names in review content.
- Fixing 404 Pages: Google explained when it’s important to fix 404 error pages.
6. New Search Features in Google Chrome
Google Chrome for mobile devices has added several new search features to enhance user experience.
7. New Tests and Features in Google Search
- Credit Card Widget: Google is testing a new widget for credit card information in search results.
- Sliding Search Results: When making a new search query, the results might slide to the right.
8. Bing’s New Feature
Bing is now using AI to write “People Also Ask” questions in search results.
9. Local Search Ranking Factors
Menu items and popular times might be factors that influence local search rankings on Google.
10. Google Ads Updates
- Query Matching and Brand Controls: Google Ads updated its query matching and brand controls, and advertisers are happy with these changes.
- Lead Credits: Google will automate lead credits for Local Service Ads. Google says this is a good change, but some advertisers are worried.
- tROAS Insights Box: Google Ads is testing a new insights box for tROAS (Target Return on Ad Spend) in Performance Max and Standard Shopping campaigns.
- WordPress Tag Code: There is a new conversion code for Google Ads on WordPress sites.
These updates highlight how Google and other search engines are continuously evolving to improve user experience and provide better advertising tools.
AI
Exploring the Evolution of Language Translation: A Comparative Analysis of AI Chatbots and Google Translate
According to an article on PCMag, while Google Translate makes translating sentences into over 100 languages easy, regular users acknowledge that there’s still room for improvement.
In theory, large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT are expected to bring about a new era in language translation. These models consume vast amounts of text-based training data and real-time feedback from users worldwide, enabling them to quickly learn to generate coherent, human-like sentences in a wide range of languages.
However, despite the anticipation that ChatGPT would revolutionize translation, previous experiences have shown that such expectations are often inaccurate, posing challenges for translation accuracy. To put these claims to the test, PCMag conducted a blind test, asking fluent speakers of eight non-English languages to evaluate the translation results from various AI services.
The test compared ChatGPT (both the free and paid versions) to Google Translate, as well as to other competing chatbots such as Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini. The evaluation involved comparing the translation quality for two test paragraphs across different languages, including Polish, French, Korean, Spanish, Arabic, Tagalog, and Amharic.
In the first test conducted in June 2023, participants consistently favored AI chatbots over Google Translate. ChatGPT, Google Bard (now Gemini), and Microsoft Bing outperformed Google Translate, with ChatGPT receiving the highest praise. ChatGPT demonstrated superior performance in converting colloquialisms, while Google Translate often provided literal translations that lacked cultural nuance.
For instance, ChatGPT accurately translated colloquial expressions like “blow off steam,” whereas Google Translate produced more literal translations that failed to resonate across cultures. Participants appreciated ChatGPT’s ability to maintain consistent levels of formality and its consideration of gender options in translations.
The success of AI chatbots like ChatGPT can be attributed to reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF), which allows these models to learn from human preferences and produce culturally appropriate translations, particularly for non-native speakers. However, it’s essential to note that while AI chatbots outperformed Google Translate, they still had limitations and occasional inaccuracies.
In a subsequent test, PCMag evaluated different versions of ChatGPT, including the free and paid versions, as well as language-specific AI agents from OpenAI’s GPTStore. The paid version of ChatGPT, known as ChatGPT Plus, consistently delivered the best translations across various languages. However, Google Translate also showed improvement, performing surprisingly well compared to previous tests.
Overall, while ChatGPT Plus emerged as the preferred choice for translation, Google Translate demonstrated notable improvement, challenging the notion that AI chatbots are always superior to traditional translation tools.
Source: https://www.pcmag.com/articles/google-translate-vs-chatgpt-which-is-the-best-language-translator