In the final interview installment of The SMX Diaries, Rand spends some quality time with Google's own Matt Cutts and learns all the magic behind the buttons, levers, switches and knobs that make the the interweb work.
This was a long one, so we've broken it into two parts. Also, although I planned to offer this and all of the other SMX Diaries interviews on YouTube, their 10 minute max time limit is prohibiting it. If, next week, I somehow have the time to recut them to fit in that time constraint, I will. Barring that, apologies to those folks who are YouTube dependent.
I hope you've all enjoyed these video interviews. No Whiteboard Friday this week, but we'll be back next week with more video action for you.
Part I:
Part II:
I just want to make sure I have this straight: Rand asks his readers what they would ask the search engines, if they could. And then he delivers on that - and gets Matt Cutts to provide answers.
And people are complainingabout the lighting?
Clearly, I don't understand this industry. :)
We are an incredibly demanding lot, and have every right to be. I think readers have high expectations for SEOmoz, and if they didn't, it would mean we're not doing a good job.
BTW - Sorry I stole the shower first this morning, hope I didn't make you late to work :)
Oh gosh ... I didn't mean to have such a big deal made about the lighting - was just some constructive criticism ... along with my positive comment about your choice of music for the leads-ins.
First, obviously great job getting the MattMan (obligatory genuflection at utterance of HIS name!) on video - sorry I didn't say this explicitely in my first comment. And yes, it was pretty obvious you weren't in a controlled studio as evidenced by the interuptions in this video and others - you do what you can do. Just thought that since these video's are a big part of your blog (and something that SEOmoz is known for - good brand building BTW!) that it's a shame they are a bit dark as they are a great way to personalize the folks that one reads about online, but rarely sees.
P.S. WRT stealing the first shower Rand: but did you use up all of the hot water ... ;-)
You totally hogged the shower, and you suck for it.
Oh, wait. I just realized we have two showers. I'm a dingus.
The lighting didn't bother me so much on this one. Good interview.
omg the music is so horrible!
is that from boogie nights?
Sebastian -
Diggler was pipin' that tune (while John Reilly was bustin' out some killer moves) during a studio session in Boogie Nights, but it first appeared in the cinematic masterpiece that is Transformers the Movie.
P.S. Please Matt Cutts, don't hurt em'
While "You've Got The Touch" may be recognizable as the song Mark Wahlberg and John C. Riley were recording in "Boogie Nights," true aficionados will recognize this as the original Stan Bush version from "Transformers: The Movie." Yes, the original animated one from 1986.
Funny ... I heard the music, and I just assumed that Rand was watching bits of the original movie to prepare for this summer's Transformers film. Which, if you think about, is kind of a crazy assumption on my part.
But hey, a kid once proposed to me in college based on my Transformers and G.I. Joe knowledge.
Thank god I'm not the only one who thinks of that as the Transformers: The Movie theme.
Don't forget the other Stan Bush masterpiece from Transformers: The Movie, "Dare".
I still get a bit choked up when I think about Hot Rod opening the Matrix of Leadership. I'm pretty sure that makes me a total dork.
Hot Rod: The Matrix. Galvatron: It will do you no good Autobot. It cannot be opened. Hot Rod: Not by a Decepticon...
Best line in the movie? Unicron: "Very well. Proceed on your way to oblivion."
All I can remember is "Dare to be Stupid" by Weird Al. And a breakdancing Bumble Bee.
Thanks for posting this, Rand and Scott! People who are interested in web page churn, linkrot, etc. might enjoy this paper:
https://informationr.net/ir/9-2/paper174.html
Thanks for the link, Matt, that's pretty nifty (if a tad dated). I liked the charts, but I'd love to see them redo the stud. I have a feeling that "Web 2.0" and blogging have had a significant impact on these findings:
Love Matt's $6,000,000 Man impression. Actually, this Google, so I suppose it's more like the $160,000,000,000 Man.
I find it fascinating that Googlers actually worry about the opportunity cost of two software engineers. I led a team of four programmers in an environment where I had to fight tooth and nail to get people to see the cost of putting two of them (half our staff) on low-priority projects.
Its HAmmer Time!
Thanks SEOmoz for the videos. I feel like I was almost at SMX.
Hey Doctor.....you were there in spirit!
Good job Scott and Rand,
Like Identity said, I'll take good content over lighting any day! Now if you were interviewing Angelina Jolie I say light that set up at all cost! Sorry Matt! :-)I love these video interviews; they are much more engaging then reading a Q&A. Not to mention as a viewer you feel more connected to you and Matt. You get to see real personality and goodwill. I found the history of the backlink and not having enough resources to handle it quite interesting... I also learned it’s a sample set Google shows, I always wonder how they picked those links to show it never made since to me, but now it does.
Thanks again for keeping us informed and fostering those relationship with the SE's this information or gap building is helping us all gain more insight into the world of SEO/SEM!
Oh for heaven's sake, are you here to learn, or here to idolize Matt Cutts and Rand? Who cares about the lighting!
Great interview Rand. As a former communications major I was impressed with your interview skills and how you moved the interview along in such a conversational manner.
Especially interesting was Part 2 at around the six minute mark where you talk with Matt about the reciprocal linking penalty against real estate sites and the thread going on at Real Estate Webmasters about this.
This is the first time I've heard anyone at Google acknowledge this was directed at real estate sites and that it had to do with reciprocal linking. Over at Real Estate Webmasters there has been a lot of talk and debate on what has actually occurred. Dozens of sites have been affected and people’s livelihoods have been destroyed because of it. The real estate site owners affected are not professional SEO’s. In most cases they were doing what virtually every other real estate site ranking well was doing – trading links. Many even hired SEO companies to help them rank better – and these SEO’s in turn traded links on their behalf. The intent of the real estate site owners was to try and improve their sites rankings. Just like everyone else who owns a website does.
This penalty looks to have occurred in two parts – first Advanced Access sites were penalized and then about 2 weeks later sites that were affiliated (or formerly affiliated) with Real Estate Webmasters were hit.
Greg Boser, Jay Griffin, and Morgan Carey have been giving advice on what to do to get your site back so that it can rank again. Their advice has been to remove the reciprocal linking state pages, use Google Webmaster central to have the offending pages removed from the Google index, and then file a reinclusion request outlining to Google what you did wrong and why you won’t do it again. According to Greg Boser if Google accepts your explanation your site will be allowed back into Google in 30 days or a little less.
The real estate sites associated with Real Estate Webmasters were penalized on May 9. It’s now been 32 days and only two sites have had the penalty lifted. Interestingly enough these two sites took no where near 30 days to get back. It only took them around 2 weeks. These two sites still have reciprocal linking on their sites just not inside of state pages. Meanwhile all the rest of the sites that were penalized have no idea what is happening and if/when their sites will actually be allowed back in the index again.
Especially frustrating is the vast number of sites that were not penalized who were engaging in the same reciprocal linking practices. Some of these unaffected sites removed their state pages, others did not. Yet there they are, at the very top of the rankings. Look in some of the markets where sites were hit: Atlanta, Fort Lauderdale, Las Vegas, Chicago, San Diego and Destin to name a few. It’s easy enough to find sites engaging in the same practices who were not penalized.
If Matt Cutts or someone from Google would please comment upon this it would make a lot of people who were affected sleep a lot easier at night. These are real people with children, families, bills, and responsibilities whose sole source of income was basically destroyed in one day. I find it hard to believe that the intent of Google was to hurt people in this way. More likely this was meant as a wake up call to the entire real estate industry to stop reciprocal linking with state pages. Unfortunately only a few dozen sites were singled out to be made an example of.
Matt and Google: you message has been received loud and clear! Now please let those us of who have cleaned up our sites know if we can expect our sites to come back and if so when.
Fang - I'm planning to write a blog entry on this topic tomorrow or Tuesday and hopefully, we'll hear a bit more from Matt & crew as well. There's a lot of material to cover around this topic.
Ahh, great explanation of why google chooses to sample the backlink operator. Reading about it in forum posts people made Google out to seem a bit evil/covert, but it makes good sense that they want to prevent over SEO analysis and scrapers.
Google Webmaster Central tools are great, though!
It seems as if Matt kept bringing the issue up of SEO's scraping backlinks, and that is why Google only offers a sub-section of backlinks. There are numerous other sites that provide very comprehensive information on a site's backlinks. The info is already out there, is it not?
Well, MSN turned off their backlinks (because they got scraped so hard, I think), and at least for a while Yahoo would only show you 50 at a time or so.
I believe we'll stick with the compromise of showing some (but not all) backlinks for every site, but that webmasters can get a pretty exhaustive list for their own site.
Rand, Matt... clearly you guys were having way too much fun!
Seriously though, this was good stuff. Hopefully this opening up and sharing of more and more information will continue.
Even the basic history and how and why behind things, while not necessarily actionable, at least further helps SEOs to talk intelligently to clients when they ask questions about PageRank, backlink detail, etc. Hopefully this furthers the working relationship between Google (and all SEs) and SEOs.
Everybody is worried about lighting.
I have the answer, a friend of mine Owen Stevens has invented a portable Florescent light system for video called Pampalite.
Owen is a Hollywood freelance cameraman and director of photography.
Anyway - Thanks for the videos and keep up the good work, I always enjoy your on camera persona.
No I didn't have anything with the building of the site.
Portable fluorescents have been around for ages, it's just recently that other companies have started trying to compete with KinoFlo, the long time champ. These sort of color-timed fluorescents are great but quite pricey.
The incandescents we already have aren't terribly bulky, but when it's just myself attempting to cart my laptop, the camera, a tripod and a very, very large cup of coffee, I'm not gonna haul a lighting duffel around too, especially since I would've had to set up and take down the lights for every seperate interview. It just wasn't practical in this scenario.
Don't believe his sneaky ways. He didn't tell us about the new Google webmaster guideline
SMX seems like it was a lot of fun, wish I could have gone. Intresting to find out about the orgins of the limited backlinks, never would have guessed. I honestly don't have much to say about the videos, I was entranced the whole time with how much Rand reminded me of Edward Norton from Fight Club. Maybe it was just the room or the lighting (no complaints here, it's the audio we really care about) but I just could get over it. I kept waiting for him to bust out with a, " I am Jack's complete lack of surprise."
the whole time with how much Rand reminded me of Edward Norton from Fight Club.
Um Matt - you might want to check the urine content of the pacific lobster bisque.
It's always nice to see these vids of Google staff - does a great job of humanising them. Nice to see Rand and Matt in relaxed conversation, and a genuine shame my sister-in-law decided to get married on the same date, so I had to miss SMX. :)
Brian - I've been emailing you but no reply! Shoot me an email when you get the chance, buddy :)
This was great, seriously. I feel like I really learned something. And, "Google", as a concept and a company, seems more human and less impersonal. Good job to both Rand & Matt!
Great stuff. Nice to actually see people. And I don't mean just in this diary. I feel like I learn something from every video even the 10 things I heart about you :D Keep it up, all you moz people.
I LIKE the lighting in this video.
Sorry to state the obvious, but as with several of the other videos, the lighting leaves quite a bit to be desired - maybe toss some lights into your videocam bag?
That's assuming this is a "white-hat" interview ... for black-hats, the lighting is quite diabolical looking - perfect! ;-)
BTW, another nice choice of music on the lead-in.
Dude, these were shot on the fly at the expo center. I wasn't about to haul lighting rigs with me. I know the lighting is bad, it was the only room we could find that was quiet...that is, until the session started blaring behind us.
Not the most "production friendly" environment, but we did what we could to make due.
Great job Great Scott!
Lighting important for Whiteboard Friday, not so important here. I'd trade good sound and great content for lighting any day!
Dude - just tell them it's noir.
"Cutts walked in, a thick sheaf of webmaster guidelines dangling at his side."
"I've got a problem with some link brokers," he said.
"We'd been through this Google Dance before. He'd play coy and I'd play dumb. Eventually though, I'd end up back in the sandbox...Cutts was a tough customer, but fair, and I liked that."
Great. Now I'm having Max Payne flashbacks.
they dropped the hammer on the lightbulbs. Rand & Matt are bright enough though.