If you’ve spent any time in search, you’ve probably heard the name Barry Schwartz (aka RustyBrick). Barry is the founder of Search Engine Roundtable, News Editor for Search Engine Land, and a driving force in the hunt to understand the Google algorithm.
I was formally introduced to Barry while I was building the MozCast project, and he’s been very generous in helping me to understand the methods we use to track algorithm updates. Many people don’t realize that it’s a manual and often painstaking process. A very, very small number of people (like Barry, Danny Sullivan, and Ted Ulle) actively monitor “chatter” – webmasters talking about changes on forums like Webmaster World – and try to interpret whether that chatter indicates an event. When they’re reasonably sure something important has happened, they report it and try to get Google to answer the million-dollar question: “Was there an algorithm update?” Barry is one of the few people who has been able to consistently get Google to answer that question.
Given our mutual interest in the algorithm, Barry and I thought it might be fun (and hopefully informative) to do something a little different. So, we interviewed each other, round-robin style. I got to lead things off…
Dr. Pete:
(Q) How did you find yourself becoming a liaison between the search community and Google? Not many people have a direct line to Matt Cutts, and I'm guessing you didn't set out to be the messenger for algorithm updates.
Barry:
(A) I think it just happened naturally. It started when I started covering the search industry in 2003. I just began reporting what I saw the search community talking about. I assumed a lot of that was misinformation that the search engines wanted to correct, so they started reaching out. I wasn't a fan of asking for information early (i.e. during news embargos or pre-release). I liked to find the information through leaks and small tests the search engines would run. But as I started at Search Engine Watch with Danny, now Search Engine Land, it became more official.
(Q) You know, there are many times I honestly wish I didn't have that connection. I like the grassroots approach of the old days. A lot of what you do is analyze data patterns to detect changes without having an official connection to Google. I bet it is incredibly satisfying when the data is right. I feel that way when I break updates before they are official. How do you feel?
Dr. Pete:
(A) To be completely honest, I'm having a lot of fun right now. Data science in our industry is still pretty new, and it's wide open. For me, it's like being one of the first people to land on a new continent, and I'm discovering things about the algorithm every day. Since I'm not getting my information from Google representatives, some people seem to paint me as anti-Google, but that's a pretty simplistic view. To me, you and I are both looking at the same problem from different angles, and the direct line to Google is a critical piece of the puzzle.
(Q) I am starting to see that darker side, though - my post about the EMD update is at 243 comments and counting, and many people are angry. I've worked with a lot of SMBs who have been ruined by algo updates, and I get their anger, but I don't get the "shoot the messenger" mentality. Why do you think people are so quick to lash out against people like you and Danny Sullivan?
Barry:
(A) They are quick to lash out because they need to. Imagine, you have a site that is making a modest living, and you are paying your bills for the past several years through your e-commerce store. Then one day Google decides to update their algorithm and your site drops off and your sales drop 90%. That is huge and I could totally understand that they need an outlet to yell at someone.
They scramble, search for things to see what changed and stumble upon your article, my article, Danny's article or whomever. They see us quoting Google, they see us explaining in a calm way what happened and why Google thinks it is a good thing. They can't yell at Google. They can't comment on the Google blogs. So they comment on our sites.
I've been threatened, yelled at, cursed at and called names. Over the years, you learn to grow thick skin. Honestly, I am surprised there has never been a documented incident of someone actually getting hurt. I am surprised Matt Cutts can walk around at a conference without a bodyguard. Some might think that is ridiculous, but honestly, I see things from the inside and it is nasty out there.
(Q) How are you dealing with it? Do you remember the first time you had one of these incidents?
Dr. Pete:
(A) I go back and forth, I admit. As someone who used to work with SMBs and has seen businesses fall apart and lives ruined, I sincerely sympathize. Some people just put too much in the Google basket or rested on early wins for too long and didn't really do anything wrong, and I feel for them. On the other hand, I see the daily barrage of complaints from sites that are nothing but scraped content and have profited for years off of other people's work, and I get angry at their outrage after making thousands of dollars contributing little or nothing.
On my good days, I try to remember to have empathy, both for the business owners and for Google. I'm beginning to realize just how difficult the search problem is - for every winner there's inevitably a loser. At the same time, I recognize that every "loser" isn't just a number on a rank-tracking site - it's a real person with real skin in the game. So, like you, I try not to take it personally. I think you raise an excellent point - people lash out at the messengers because those are the only points of contact they have.
(Q) Every angry webmaster has some theory about how Google is just giving favors to big brands or trying to make us click on more ads, and yet there are real people at Google working full-time for a team dedicated to search quality. So, let's ask a hard question. Do you think Google cares about search quality? I have my own opinions, but I'd like to hear your take.
Barry:
(A) Yes, I think they really do care about search quality. I think it runs through Matt Cutts’ veins. I think Google won't hire people to the search quality team if they don't. People do burn out and they leave, but the core people who manage search at Google care deeply about search quality.
(Q) I guess you disagree?
Dr. Pete:
(A) No, not at all. I didn't want to bias your answer :) I actually agree – I think Google's idea of "quality" may often not sync with our own individual ideas, but I absolutely believe they care about search quality. Here's the thing: people always say that Google only cares about advertising, but then they run off and assume this means sacrificing organic search for paid ads. Organic search is the portal to paid ads. If people lose enough confidence in search results, they'll stop going to Google, and the ad revenue will dry up. I can't speak to any one person's motivation, but there's a multi-billion dollar incentive for Google to care about search quality.
(Q) Of course, the trick is that Google serves search visitors, not webmasters. How do you think that being SEOs and website owners blinds us to Google's broader mission? Are we the ones who have forgotten about search quality, or are we just stuck between two competing perspectives?
Barry:
(A) Well, since everything I publish to the web is better than anything else already published on the web and anything that will be published to the web in the future, all my content should be ranked number one in Google. There are two things here:
- Owner bias, i.e. my content is mine and thus the best.
- We understand search and think we know what search quality is. But you and I don't study it in the same way Google does.
We need to step into their shoes and outside of ours.
(Q) …but that is where you differ. You see the data – not as much data as Google, but you see more than a site owner whose single site tanked in Google.
Don't you think what Google felt was quality two years ago is different from what they would say it is today?
Dr. Pete:
(A) It's tricky. As humans, I think we have a decent gauge of quality and Google's quality raters play into that, but ultimately they have to translate quality into algorithmic signals, and that's where it gets tough. Google is a coder culture, and they want elegant, algorithmic solutions, not to flag domains and manually penalize people. That's just not scalable. So, I don't think their definition of quality has changed so much as their ability to translate quality into something a computer can quantify and evaluate has.
There's also the arms race, and this is where we SEOs share some blame. After the EMD update, some people posted that Matt was being inconsistent, because he said a couple of years back that exact-match domains were a quality signal. I don't think Matt was inconsistent at all - in the past, EMDs often were a legitimate signal of relevance. Then, EMDs got spammed to death, and now they aren't as relevant. So, Google had to adjust.
(Q) I'm sure we'll be accused in the comments of being both Google apologists and Google haters, so let's mix it up and swing back the other way. What's one thing you think Google got wrong in 2012 (could be an algo update, a policy statement, a new feature, etc.)?
Barry:
(A) Got wrong is a tough statement. Much of what they do is trial and error. I like that. I dislike what they are doing to Google shopping making it purely a paid inclusion thing. But who am I to say they did something wrong. Let them test it and learn from those tests.
(Q) Isn't that how all data guys like to do things?
Dr. Pete:
(A) You may be surprised to hear it, but the one thing I think they may be doing wrong lately is testing too much. Google has mountains of data and can find statistical significance for even the slightest differences. So, they roll out 7-result SERPs and determine that the faster page load improves some metric (let's say bounce rate) by 0.4% (I'm making that up), and that's significant across the millions of visitors they test it on. What if it negatively impacts something they aren't measuring, though? What if 0.4% is statistically significant but doesn't practically matter? I wonder if data is starting to overwhelm common sense, and if maybe a data-driven culture can go too far. Obviously, these are tough questions, and I'm not seeing what they're seeing, but I think you can definitely overdo even a good thing.
(Q) You've spent a lot of time watching and trying to interpret what Google is doing. Given what you know, what's the biggest change you expect Google to make in the next year? I know this is pure speculation (I doubt even Google has it charted out), but I'm sure our readers would find your point of view interesting.
Barry:
(A) On the algorithm penalty side, I think over the next year, we will see Google probably target yet another usability factor in their algorithm. We had Panda and the page layout algorithm, we also had page speed. I'd look at an additional usability factor to be targeted with a Google update.
In the ranking algorithm side, I'd think we would see more social (Google+) come into play not just in personalized search but in weighting certain pages – if not in 2014, then for sure by 2015.
I'll throw in my two cents - I think we've only seen the tip of the iceberg with Knowledge Graph. There's a lot of code and data behind what may look like a toy to some people, and we're seeing the real beginning of the semantic web. I expect it to have huge organic search implications in the next couple of years.
Thanks to Barry, not only for the interview, but for being so generous with his time and information over the past few months, not to mention for his contributions to the industry in general. On behalf of both of us - try not to shoot the messenger.
I'd also like to announce, for those who haven't heard, that November 1st marked my first official day working full-time with SEOmoz. I'll be expanding my role with the marketing and data science teams and putting more time into "big content" and projects like MozCast. I'd like to thank the community especially for your support over the past 5 years, and I look forward to spending more time together.
I agreed with most of the answers from both guys but problem arise when small stores are closing due to algorithm update and Google release their own store. Problem arises when someone tries to compete with Google to break their monopoly with different aspects but they jumped into the same battlefield to hit them hard.
Google Places faceoff with yelp
Online stores faceoff with Google store
Facebook faceoff with Google+
Let you guys decide who wins!
All of them beat the competitor in SERPs and they claim that their products are performing well due to quality. I think if their products are performing well in SERPS because they own search engine.
I am ready to get thumbs down from the community and I respect both of your opinion but I really frustrated with Google changes. All of the business that ruined not doing any bad practice but collateral damage ruined the life.
I don’t have access to Matt Cutts so I am trying to put my frustration here. Its human nature.
I hope we've presented a balanced perspective here, and sometimes that means a little tough love for business owners. I tend to agree on Google's entries into e-commerce, though, and I think Barry's written about that as well. It's one thing to be a portal to sites and information, but when they start pulling more and more information from that site to power their own projects, they become the kind of low-quality scrapers and thin affiliates they openly discredit. It's easy to say "People want that information fast!" but it's also self-serving. I think they're going to have to find a balance, and it won't be easy.
I agreed Sir but you are trying to keep both Google and angry mob satisfied at the same time and this would be not easy either. Google put their eggs on every basket to nail down there competitor using the power of search engine.
Google algorithms mostly hit hard to small business or start up with a low budget. I am not blaming Google on making search stronger but when they start other business they should play on a same ground without any support of their own Search Engine.
Google getting into a business and not utilizing the most powerful element they have, their search engine, would just be bad business. I tend to agree with Dr Pete about their entries into e-commerce activities and finding a balance between being a business serving multiple markets (search and shopping). But, it is just not smart business for them to shy away from taking advantage of what they have because they want to make it fair for the little guys.
There will never be a scenario where everyone is happy but I feel like they are trying to deliver a quality product and balance the fact that they serve everyone else's business up as well. It surely will never be an easy task
I like Dr.Pete's one point most that people coming on Google because of Organic search result. If they come then there is chance of click on ads.
The updates like Penguin is also frustrating. It is known technique to build links with anchor text to rank higher for years. If someone doing it honestly for say 7 years then definitely his website should have many links with same anchor text. If Google penalize those today then it is totally unfair. There are few spammers, but to overcome those Google also being crude with honest one.
I want to remind one post of Barry when Google had penalized seroundtable for passing link juice. Barry has challenged openly and didn't remove. Even today links are there. But those small businesses can't do anything.
Definitely people like Barry and Danny are respectable for whole industry. The people shouldn't abuse them is not good at all. But It is possibly high level of frustration loosing 90% of business in morning suddenly.
Great interview. I, like many, really appreciate the work Barry does to identify what has rolled out in the algo.
Also, my sincere condolences to Barry and family for their loss.
Super interesting post from 2 people I respect (excited to see Dr. Pete at BlueglassX in Tampa next month). I can only imagine the hate that each of you guys receive regarding the algo you have no control over. But, there are many of us who appreciate your hard work looking into a very complex algorithm.
I agree with both of you that Google cares about search quality. While SEO is my job, I am a constant Google user in my daily life and I really do feel that they give me the results that I want when utilizing search. This industry is about being able to listen to smart people like you guys, use experience, and adapt to the industry.
Thanks guys for the article and all the hard work!
Guys, what a great interview! Very balanced. Realistic opinions. Kudos!
You're both active on Google+. Would be great for you to have a Hangout on Air together and talk about this live and possibly get some questions from the audience.
P.S.
Dr. Pete - congratulations once more! You're irreplaceable for this community.
Hi Max,
I agree, this would be an awesome hangout! I'd love to be a part of it :)
A Hangout would be great. Continuing the round table discussion once a month may provide small businesses with the insight they need so they won't have to rant because they've been addressing the issues all along. Great idea Max.
It's happening next week: https://plus.google.com/events/cvnbsrklifa0sdemjbakc76eifo
Thank you, guys. I probably wouldn't go forward with with the idea so fast without your comments :)
Barry is a boss.
Dr. Pete,
Congrats on the new role. The fact that you will now be focusing on data scientist projects full time is an excellent harbinger of things to come. Can't wait to see what you pull out of your hat!
Nice job guys, I think it's important to clear the air here. Our field gets so competitive that people forget that they are probably on the same path, and part of an evolving information age.
"some people seem to paint me as anti-Google, but that's a pretty simplistic view. To me, you and I are both looking at the same problem from different angles, and the direct line to Google is a critical piece of the puzzle."
Yeah it's all about a generation that just says "spoon feed me" make it simple and what Google has verified or some useless test has proven with correlation as the proof... heaven forbid you be the guy tryin' to figure it out on your own reading between the lines of rhetoric from Google and "notable industry publications"! Good on ya!
Hello...I just sign-up on this community blog... Am here first time and read very useful interview... And definitely i must agree with Pete, when he said one word :):"It's Tricky"... :). Yes, he it's right. I love reading this interview. I learn one tricky tip...:)Thank you Pete...Mark
[link drop removed]
Dr. Pete, Congrats on the new role. Great interview. Dr. Pete with Barry.
This is a great interview. I am always interested in the inner workings of Google's Algorithms even though they seem at most times like mystical beasts. Hopefully, from rigorous testing, we'll all be able to get some insights into them so we can better do our jobs as SEOs.
Great idea for this collaborative interview. It's not easy to present a balanced view on a topic that is so emotional. I see Barry take a lot of heat on SERoundtable, and have often marveled at how he seems to let it roll off his back. I know Pete has taken some on occasion, as well. As was said, when folks are hurt/angry/scared, they'll lash out at whatever target is handy.
An interactive version of this type, such as the Hangout that was suggested, would be fantastic, although a different platform, where more than 8 people could sit in, even if in a passive mode, would be better, IMO. Regardless, I think you both stated some important points that need to be considered.
By the way, I agree completely with your prediction, Barry:
"I think we've only seen the tip of the iceberg with Knowledge Graph. There's a lot of code and data behind what may look like a toy to some people, and we're seeing the real beginning of the semantic web."
Knowledge Graph is anything but a toy, I think... Most of the chatter about semantic search capability seems to indicate that a lot of people are (a) unaware of how far it has already progressed; (b) of the opinion that it's an impossible dream. It's a very large iceberg, and I think we're all going to see evidence, relatively soon, of just what we can expect from it.
Congrats to you and to Rand, Pete, for your new role. Always a pleasure to see more science injected into a field that's far too ruled by emotion and gut calls.
I love the phrase "I wonder if the data is beginning to overwhelm common sense". I think on the really big search terms they get it right, but on the smaller more obscure stuff they tend to go for some vaguely related result from an authority site rather than a small expert site.
Great interview.
Hi Dr. Pete,
This is a rare privilege to read a great interview. Barry really contributed a lot to the SEO world. Well, SEO is in its infancy stage so a lot of data analysers like him are greatly needed in this industry. His information is priceless. Again, thanks a lot for posting this interview.
Congrats on the new job Dr. Pete!
I'm glad you'll have more time to dedicate to MozCast. I find it has great potential, although I would love the ability to click on previous days and see the reasoning behind the temperatures as well as links to other blog posts that back up why there was so much volatility on that day.
Thanx to you for share the information with us.
Two of my all time favorite SEO guys! Thanks!
For people who don't know : following Barry on twitter is incomparably much effecient to be informed of all Google related news than the best RSS feeds collection.
=> @rustybrick
Great interview. Dr. Pete and Barry both great resources to follow to stay up to snuff in search. Congrats to Dr. Pete on the full time gig.
Owner bias for publishers is a big perception issue, myself included. Never shoot the guide with the map telling you how to navigate the land mines (i.e. algo updates). Make no mistake, Google is focused on search quality as quality in the organic SERPs = Market share = revenue.
The biggest mistake by Google IMHO is getting spread too thin with Motorola , Glasses, Chrome book, etc. which distract from, search, their core competency. Google+ is connected to search signals so is not so much a distraction as an enabler. Distractions that don't support enhanced search quality have taken their toll on Google in terms of earnings. The other big mistake is competing on an unfair playing field by injecting themselves between publishers/e-tailers and their customers. This is where business have a legitimate gripe in my opinion.
I think Google+ and location based mobile advertising will be a big focus for Google growth going forward.
Very informative. Yes I have just started noticing the significance of google +, and can see this increase with importance.
Coincidentally, I started on this site after reading the EMD blog post, having just lost one of my domains because of that. I think the way to go are authority sites with lots of fresh content rather than small niche sites that EMD's encouraged.
Hi ,
Great interview , and all the success on your full-time role on SEOmoz !!!
Cheers
Awesome conversation guys!!! is it possible that google now target social media spam?
Love this! Great take aways... "We need to step into their shoes and outside of ours." Agreed "Give the people what they want and Google will give you to the people." Donnie Strompf
Pete and Berry, you guys are great and we've been following your posts on Google + for a few month now. As an SEO business we can say that you are not the only ones who get heat from business owners when rankings fall. In fact if you are an in-house SEO or an SEO Company who generated great results for your client, and Google makes a change that affects the site. The business owner will take swings at you, and may fire you.
As far as the penalties go I think Google has been more then fair, for Google since day one this has been a big experiment and they keep experimenting with inovations. Same way we do split testing to analyze what users like better, they are in the same boat.
Google also took the time to manually send out letters to people who have bad links and they take time to manually inspect why the site has been affected (This shows us how important the organic SERO is to Google). When you think about how many people have sent in reconsideration requests and how many made the changes that Google wanted, you realize that this must take allot of time/manpower/invested moneys. Also the sites that were punished are now being updated/enhanced/innovated resulting in better SERPs for the user.
Google is doing it right, as Danny Sullivan said a little while back: "Google will not lose their spot as the #1 search engine unless they completely mess up"
nice article and congrats on the new role.
Interesting interview and it certainly takes a braver man than I to be the interface between Google and the angry mob! Great to hear Dr. Pete is going to be on SEOMoz staff as well - always a good read!
Great Q & A session - great to get the thoughts and opinions.
Thanks Barry and Dr. Pete. Welcome to SEOMoz Barry, that's very cool! I like what you had to say about Google doing too much testing. While it's not exactly apples to apples, I once worked for a company that prided itself on being "data driven," The problem with people who get really good at Excel is that sometimes they don't know when to stop adding formulas and start using common sense. As a result, the company had piled formula upon formula upon formula, over a 4-5 year time span. The end results? Data that was crap. What was worse is that so many people had had their hand in the pie that they no longer even knew how they'd gotten to where they were at. They had no clue how they data was being analyzed, yet this screwed up data was driving every decision they made. Needless to say, they are now on the verge of bankruptcy. While that's an extreme example, I think your comment about Google's algorithm tweaks was really a great one. I think they definitely made mistakes in 2012. Who wants to see 8 results out of 10 all from the same domain? I've had several friends and family members switch their default SE to Bing because they no longer felt that Google was giving them good results. Yes, Google definitely has to care about search quality. But sometimes I wonder "search quality to whom?" Advertisers? Investers? Webmasters?....or people like my mom and dad? What do you think?
Thanks again for the great round-robin post. I gave it a big fat tweet :-)
Nice interview - I liked the round robin style once I got my head around what was going on :p
Great Interview. It's a so useful conversation for everyone.
Thanks for your post ;-)
Dr. Pete and Barry an Informative Conversions!
I got answered some of my questions indirectly through conversions. However i m still not clear with EMD update that how exactly that we can recover from it. If you people possible to do the same then please share your views. Apart from this conversions an incredible.
Thanks
Nice interview, I have been a fan of Barry's for a while, he always does put out a good spin on things and I highly advise people check out his weekly videos.
This was a very entertaining interview. I'm a fan of the simplicity of Barry's posts and his ability to go straight to the point on the SEO matters. It is good to know that excellent professionals like you, Barry, Danny, Randy, etc., are the face of all the Webmasters trying to survive with the bipolarity of Google.
I had just read the entire thing, and i only have one question.You all seem to congratulate Dr.Pete for something.
WHAT IS IT (and how did i miss it in the article)?Didn't he always work for Moz?
P.S - awesome interview.
He was not working full time before this is what I gathered from his wording. I think he has worked for Moz, but his role will now be expanding. That is what I got from it
Sorry, it's sometimes a bit confusing. I've run my own consultancy since 2006 and have contracted for SEOmoz for about 3 years now, initially 1/4-time and then 1/2-time. I am now a full-time contractor, still living/working out of Chicago.
Dr. Pete, the MozCast project is awesome and has inspired us to build similar tools for analyzing data. Glad to have you on board!