Vlog #96: Elie Orgel On Writing Unique Robust Content That Ranks Well In Google (Part Two)

No Comments »

Elie Orgel

In part two of my interview with Elie Orgel (you can see part one here) we talked about how to get content and data that Google has not indexed yet. A lot of governmental web sites and portals do provide data exports and weird charting solutions that Google has not indexed. You just take that data and mash it up in a useful way.

Then when it comes to content, he can use this data to come up with long-form content. He often looks at Google search to find what ranks on that page for a query, breaks it down into topics and not only covers the first five topics but covers more of them so he can be the best piece of content on the keyword. In short, provide the most comprehensive piece of content on the topic out there. He said this is especially the case with law, he said a lot of people want to DIY law, do it yourself law. Identify content that people would find value in that has not been written about yet.

We then briefly talked about what is hot in the law firm he is working on now, including expungement. Of course, I brought that back into SEO by talking about online reputation management.

He then ended it on how to do well with SEO for law firms. In short, focus on a niche and be an expert in that niche and then move on.

You can learn more about Elie Orgel on LinkedIn or ElieOrgel.com.

You can subscribe to our YouTube channel by clicking here so you don’t miss the next vlog where I interviews. I do have a nice lineup of interviews scheduled with SEOs and SEMS, many of which you don’t want to miss – and I promise to continue to make these vlogs better over time. If you want to be interviewed, please fill out this form with your details.

Forum discussion at YouTube.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

Google: Why It May Appear Your JavaScript Page Is Not Fully Rendered Before Indexed

No Comments »

Google Java

Mark Williams-Cook posted the results of an SEO Twitter poll that said most believe Google does not fully render a JavaScript page/document prior to ranking. In fact, the results showed that almost 70% of SEOs felt those pages were not always rendered prior to Google indexing them.

The issue is, Google has said that it almost 100% of the time will render a JavaScript document prior to indexing. So why such a discrepancy between what Google says and what SEOs see?

Martin Splitt of Google said it seems to be around that it is hard for SEOs to tell the status of an indexing state in Google Search. He said there “no obvious indication of the rendering state on one hand and the fact that things happen in parallel make it even more difficult to judge this externally.” He added there are also “canonicalization surprises and indexing decisions and ranking making it hard to judge.”

John Mueller of Google jumped in also to say “imo this falls into the category of things folks don’t have data about, but where outliers stand out. Also, anything “almost always” is super-hard to evaluate. Given the split though, I think things are on the right path, and folks have learned a ton more about JS SEO.”

Here are those tweets:

Here is an example they spoke about:

Interesting responses – what do you all think?

Forum discussion at Twitter.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

Moderna claims 94% efficacy for COVID-19 vaccine, will ask FDA for emergency use authorization today

No Comments »

Drugmaker Moderna has completed its initial efficacy analysis of its COVID-19 vaccine from the drug’s Phase 3 clinical study, and determined that it was 94.1% effective in preventing people from contracting COVID-19 across 196 confirmed cases from among 30,000 participants in the study. Moderna also found that it was 100% effective in preventing severe cases (such as those that would require hospitalization) and says it hasn’t found any significant safety concerns during the trial. On the basis of these results, the company will file an application for emergency use authorization (EUA) with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Monday.

Seeking an EUA is the next step towards actually beginning to distribute and administer Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, and if granted the authorization, it will be able to provide it to high-risk individuals in settings where it could help prevent more deaths, such as with front-line healthcare workers, ahead of receiving a full and final regulatory approval from the U.S. healthcare monitoring agency. Moderna will also seek conditional approval from the European Medicines Agency, which will enable similar use ing the EU.

Moderna’s vaccine is an mRNA vaccine, which provides genetic instructions to a person’s body that prompts them to create their own powerful antibodies to block the receptor sites that allows COVID-19 to infect a patient. It’s a relatively new therapeutic approach for human use, but has the potential to provide potentially even more resistance to COVID-19 than do natural antibodies, and without the risk associated with introducing any actual virus, active or otherwise, to an inoculated individual in order to prompt their immune response.

In mid-November, Moderna announced that its COVID-19 vaccine showed 94.5% efficacy in its preliminary results. This final analysis of that same data hews very close to the original, which is promising news for anyone hoping for an effective solution to be available soon. This data has yet to be peer reviewed, though Moderna says that it will now be submitting data from the Phase 3 study to a scientific publication specifically for that purpose.

Moderna’s vaccine candidate is part of the U.S’s Operation Warp Speed program to expedite the development, production and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine, initiated earlier this year as a response to the unprecedented global pandemic. Other vaccines, including one created by Pfizer working with partner BioNTech, as well as an Oxford University/AstraZeneca-developed candidate, are also far along in their Phase 3 testing and readying for emergency approval and use. Pfizer has already applied with the FDA for its own EUA, while the Oxford vaccine likely won’t be taking that step in the U.S. until it completes another round of final testing after discovering an error in the dosage of its first trial – which led to surprising efficacy results.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

Yes, Anchor Text Is A Google Ranking Factor

No Comments »

I am a bit surprised I am writing this but yes, anchor text is a signal Google uses for ranking purposes. Yes, Google can ignore spammy links that try to manipulate rankings but normal anchor text does help Google rank a page for what the anchor text says about the page. Hence giving Google more context about the page.

It is why Google can rank pages that do not have that content on the page. Like why Adobe Reader for years and years ranked for the words [click here] in search. Adobe Reader’s landing page did not have the words “click here” on them but everyone who had PDF documents on their site had a link to view this PDF, click here to download Adobe Reader. That was the old days but yes, anchor text can help a web page rank for a specific set of keywords – if you it is natural.

John Mueller of Google said in that Friday video (thanks Glenn Gabe for sending this to me) at the 19:55 mark that anchor text does impact rankings. This was in response to Google having keyword rich anchor text for some of its properties. John said he will pass it along to the web spam team because “when it comes to these kind of links, what we try to look at is the specific anchor text there.” He said if someone is trying to abuse it, it can be “more problematic” and should be reported.

Here is what he said:

In general, when it comes to these kind of links, what we try to look at is the specific anchor text there.

So if it’s something where, when we look at it, it looks like, oh, it’s promoting this website in a way that it uses very keyword-rich anchor text, then that would be more problematic. If it’s essentially just linking to the URL or if it’s using the business name as something that is linking to the website name, then usually that’s
less of an issue.

So from my point of view, if this were any random website, I wouldn’t really say much there. But since it is a Google property, I will pass it onto the Web Spam Team just to double check to see that they’re OK with this.
I don’t know what will happen there with the Web Spam Team. It’s very possible that we already ignore these specific links, because these are the kind of links that are very easy for our systems to pick up and say, well, we can just ignore those.

But it is always awkward to get these reports that Google properties aren’t doing things perfectly.

The back and forth on this topic starts at 19:23, here is the video embed:

So yes, anchor text of a hyperlink is a ranking signal for Google. Yes, this is not new.

Forum discussion at Twitter.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

Be a digital marketing winner with these 3 powerful video storytelling strategies

No Comments »

Video storytelling should be an integral part of any online marketing strategy. By following these three fundamentals, brands can build the foundation for a strong video campaign.

The post Be a digital marketing winner with these 3 powerful video storytelling strategies appeared first on…

Please visit Marketing Land for the full article.

November 30th 2020 video

Google Search Podcast Carousel Updated With Larger Graphics

No Comments »

A couple of weeks ago Google started to test a new design for displaying podcasts in Google Search. The new design adds larger images and longer descriptions of the podcast episode.

Here are screen shots from Mordy Oberstein on Twitter and Jason Barnard on Twitter:

New design:

click for full size

Old design:

click for full size

This has not been fully rolled out yet, it seems to be still be in testing mode. I can replicate the new design in some browsers but not all and not at all times.

Here is another screen shot:

Forum discussion at Twitter.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

Apple on the hook for €10M in Italy, accused of misleading users about iPhone water resistance

No Comments »

Apple’s marketing of iPhones as ‘water resistant’ without clarifying the limits of the feature and also having a warranty that excludes cover for damage by liquids has got the company into hot water in Italy.

The Italian competition authority (AGCM) has informed the tech giant of an intent to fine it €10 million for commercial practices related to the marketing and warranty of a number of iPhone models since October 2017, starting with the iPhone 8 through to the iPhone 11, following an investigation into consumer complaints related to its promotion of water resistance and subsequent refusal to cover the cost of repairs caused by water damage.

In a document setting out the AGCM’s decision dated towards the end of October — which was made public today (via Reuters) — the regulator concludes Apple violated the country’s consumer code twice because of what it characterizes as “misleading” and “aggressive” commercial practices.

Its investigation found Apple’s iPhone marketing tricked consumers into believing the devices were impermeable to water, rather than merely water resistant — with the limitations of the feature not given enough prominence in ads. While a disclaimer stating that Apple’s warranty excludes damage by liquids was deemed an aggressive attempt to circumvent consumer rights obligations — given its heavy promotion of the devices as water resistant.

Apple places a liquid contact indicator inside iPhones, which changes from white or silver to red on contact with liquid, and checking the indicator is a standard step undertaken by its repair staff.

The AGCM report cites examples of consumers who’s iPhone had taken a “short dive” in the sea being refused cover. Another complainant had been washing their device under the tap — which Apple deemed improper use.

A third reported that their one-month old iPhone XR stopped working after coming into contact with water. Apple told them they must buy a new device — albeit at a subsidized price.

While an iPhone XS user, with a one-year old handset who reported it had never come into contact with water was refused coverage by Apple support who said it had, complained to the regulator there’s no way for a consumer to prove their device was not immersed in water for more than the length of time and depth to which Apple’s small print specifies it has water resistance.

We’ve reached out to Apple for comment on the AGCM’s findings.

The tech giant has 60 days from the date it was notified of the regulator’s intent to fine to appeal the decision.

The size of the penalty is well under half of the operating profit the regulator says Apple’s Italian operation made in the year September 2018 to September 2019, when it note it recorded revenues on its sales and services of €58,652,628; and an operating profit of €26,918,658.

Two years ago Italy’s competition watchdog also fined Apple and Samsung around $15M for forcing updates on consumers that may slow or break their devices. While, this February, France fined Apple $27 million for capping the OS performance of iPhones with older batteries.

Apple has also faced much larger penalties from competition authorities elsewhere in Europe — including being notified of a $1.2BN fine by France’s competition authority in March this year, which accused the tech giant of operating a reseller cartel along with two wholesale distribution partners, Ingram Micro and Tech Data.

Apple also had to stump up as much as €500M in back taxes demanded by French authorities last year.

While some $15BN from Apple’s European HQ is sitting in an escrow account to cover a 2016 European Commission ‘State Aid’ charge that it illegally benefited from corporate tax arrangements in Ireland between 2003 and 2014.

In July Apple and Ireland won the first round of an appeal against the charge. But the Commission filed an appeal in September — meaning the case will go up to the CJEU, likely adding years more of legal wrangling.

EU lawmakers are continuing to work on pushing for global reform of digital taxation, while some Member States push on with their own digital taxes.

November 30th 2020 apple, iphone, Mobile

Google: Longer Anchor Text Is Not Better But May Provide More Context

No Comments »

On Friday, Google’s John Mueller was asked if longer or better anchor text is better. Anchor text are the words in the hyperlink, so the underlined blue link (in many cases). John said longer versus shorter anchor text is not better or worse, it just gives Google more or less context about the page it is linking to.

That is a bit obvious but I guess sometimes you want to make sure to link in a way that is good for users. So linking a paragraph of content might just be weird usability wise but maybe it gives Google more context. Is that going to be too much context for Google and Google might ignore a lot of it? Possibly?

Here was the question about this at the 16:46 mark:

Do you treat anchor text that contains many words differently in comparison to anchor text that contains two words only? I mean, do you assign more value to those two words when you compare it to anchor text that has, like, seven or eight words? For example, two-words anchor text like “cheap shoes,” and the seven-words anchor is “you can buy cheap shoes here.” Can you elaborate on that?

John responded at the 17:11 mark saying “I don’t think we do anything special for the length of the words in the anchor text.” He added that Google uses “this anchor text as a way to provide extra context for the individual pages.” “And sometimes if you have a longer anchor text, that gives us a little bit more information. Sometimes it’s kind of like just a collection of different keywords,” he added. Is there better or worse, he said “I wouldn’t see any of these as being better or worse.” It depends. 🙂

Here is what he said:

So I don’t think we do anything special for the length of the words in the anchor text, but rather, we use this anchor text as a way to provide extra context for the individual pages. And sometimes if you have a longer anchor text, that gives us a little bit more information. Sometimes it’s kind of like just a collection of different keywords. So from that point of view, I wouldn’t see any of these as being better or worse.

And it’s something where, like, especially for internal linking, you want to probably focus more on things like how can you make it clearer for your users that, when you click on this link, this is what they’ll find? Google does say that the words around your anchor text is secondary to the anchor text itself.

So that’s kind of the way that I would like data here. I wouldn’t say that shorter anchor text is better or shorter anchor text is worse. It’s just different context.

You can watch the whole Q&A here:

Anchor text has historically been used to help a page rank for the keywords it is targeting. So if I want this page to rank well for [long anchor text], I would link to this page from other pages with the words long anchor text (of course, internal anchor text versus external anchor text also comes into play). It is a ranking factor, which is why the person asked if long vs shorter anchor text matters, because sometimes it might be too long and the context is lost.

Forum discussion at YouTube Community.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

Vintage GoTo Beach Towel

No Comments »

GoTo Beach Towel

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized

20201130 ML Brief

No Comments »

The post 20201130 ML Brief appeared first on Marketing Land.

Please visit Marketing Land for the full article.

November 30th 2020 Uncategorized