Connect with us

SERP website previews – Google’s test crew is at it again

Published

on

Google Apocalypse: SEO is dead

Many users across the Interwebz started noticing a new trend in their Google seach engine results pages (SERPs) today. Is it a sign of things to come or the next bi-monthly Google apocalypse?

Today with no fanfare or official announcement, Google users in the US and elsewhere began to notice some changes to their normal SERPs. For me personally, it only seems to occur when using Google’s Chrome browser. I’m not able to replicate it in Firefox which makes me wonder if it’s related to Google Gears in some way?

Google has integrated a website preview into the SERPs where, if active, when you hover over an individual result it is highlighted in blue and if you click the blue area, Google will load a preview of the result’s website, with appropriate content highlighted and summarized for the user.

Moopheus

Is this, dare I ask, the end of SEO?

Pssht. Hardly. Does this mean your on-page content and presentation is going to be more important than ever? Probably so. If the user can view your website and relevant copy without ever having to leave Google, then your content is going to have to be strong, compelling and presented in an attractive manner to convert that searcher to click over to your website.

Not much is known at this point on how long this “feature” will remain, whether users will be able to disable it or not.

A couple of interesting observations

If you look at the image below, you’ll notice the website preview that is highlighted has a broken video in the preview. After visiting the page, that video is using a Flash video player. Looks like Google is still having trouble with Flash.

You’ll also notice the preview covers up the paid ads on the right sidebar. Are Adwords advertisers going to have a problem with that? As someone who uses Adwords, I do.

What experiences have you had with this new Google experiment? Tell us about it in the comments.

Cap & Trade

Marty Martin is an accomplished SEM/SEO anti-consultant with a broad range of experience working for a wide variety of clientele including colleges and universities, regional and state tourism, government and business.

An advocate for business, Marty works hard to share accurate information in a world suddenly overrun with “social media consultants.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
19 Comments

19 Comments

  1. George O'Neill

    October 6, 2010 at 4:53 pm

    Google has always maintained the best SEO is writing great content!

  2. Lani Rosales

    October 7, 2010 at 9:57 am

    What this implies to me is that aesthetics ARE important, not just words. Love it!

    • Marty Martin

      October 7, 2010 at 10:01 am

      It definitely adds a certain level of persuasion through design, etc. into the conversion process. Whereas before a user could’ve been persuaded to click through to your site by just the SERP snippet, now (assuming this sticks around and is widely adapted by users), the user can preview your site before leaving Google. Maybe your site isn’t attractive so they don’t click through? Maybe seeing the keyphrase they searched for in its context on page makes them click through…or not. Lots of interesting possibilities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business News

Think LuLaRoe is a pyramid scheme? Founders say your opinion’s uneducated

(BUSINESS NEWS) LuLaRoe Founders fight back against allegations saying that they’re a disruptive business model, not a pyramid scheme, and anyone that disagrees is uneducated…

Published

on

lularoe

Clothing company LuLaRoe insists that they are not a “pyramid scheme” despite recent class-action lawsuits claiming that the company lured retailers into buying thousands of dollars’ worth of unsellable merchandise.

LuLaRoe uses “multi-level marketing” to sell their products, meaning that the company sells merchandise to “consultants” – most of them women working from home who resell the merchandise to their neighbors and friends at home parties. The idea is that moms who want to stay home with the kids will have an independent way of making an income.

Last month, two class-action lawsuit were filed against LuLaRoe, claiming that the company makes the vast majority of its profits off of women who sign up to be consultants, rather than from sales to the end-users.

Plaintiffs say they have lost thousands of dollars because LuLaRoe aggressively pushes consultants to buy up to $20,000 worth of merchandise that can’t sell, either because the markets is flooded, or because the products are poor – one suit claiming that the fabrics tear like “wet toilet paper.”

“The vast majority of consultants sitting at the bottom of defendants’ pyramid were and remain destined for failure and unable to turn any profit,” says one suit. “Some resulted in financial ruin due to pressure to max out credit cards and to take loans to purchase inventory.”

The suits further claim that when women have tried to get out of the business, LuLaRoe has refused to take back and refund unsold merchandise, while also telling former consultants that they can no longer sell the products. Thus, consultants are stuck with thousands of dollars of merchandise that they can’t sell sitting in their garages and basements.

Deanne and Mark Stidham, founders of LuLaRose, tell CBS that it isn’t a pyramid scheme and that anyone who thinks so has an “uneducated opinion.”

Says Deanne Stidham, “You get the product, you put it before people, and you sell it, and you have money, and that’s the simplicity of this business and that’s as easy as it can be.”

The Stidhams implied that jealous retailers were encouraging plaintiffs to sue because the LuLaRoe model has been “disruptive in the marketplace.”

Continue Reading

Tech News

Social media giants are trying to operate without human controls but are failing

(TECH NEWS) Artificial intelligence (AI) is taking over in fascinating ways, but this big experiment of replacing human tasks is failing. Good news / bad news.

Published

on

ai robot not human

Let me tell you a story. In fact, let me tell you several.

A village in Macedonia had a small economic boom during the 2016 election, plagiarizing and stitching together pro-Trump messages on social media, then publishing the results as “news” in order to profit from Google ad revenue.

Back during the “Keep Calm and…” T-shirt fad, a shirt company went through a thoroughly justified PR apocalypse for selling products labeled “Keep Calm and Hit Her” and “Keep Calm and Rape a Lot.”

The 17th most popular website on Earth occasionally likes to tell women over 30 to freeze their ova.

So! That’s a parade of fail. What’s it got in common, beyond making any reasonable reader consider moving to an Amish community and trying to forget even the word “Internet”?

People. More accurately, their absence.

Veles, Macedonia churned out profitable nonsense about Trump slapping a protester (that didn’t happen) or getting the blessing of the Pope (Pope says nope) because Google ads are programmatic. There’s no QA component, no human eyes reviewing content and asking “is this worth advertising on?” or for that matter “is this blatantly false?”

Likewise the Evil T-Shirt Crisis. The company generated slogans by dropping memes into an algorithm, then throwing the result on Amazon. That ended… poorly.

We, and every other tech and business network in the digital cosmos, have written in depth about all the dang robots taking our jobs. Usually our primary concern is the economic fallout. We’re a business news organization. It’s our job to warn you about that stuff.

But there’s another problem, and it’s a huge problem, especially as media consumption in general continues to rise, and more and more of that media is moderated by algorithms rather than people.

Robots aren’t just taking our jobs. They suck at our jobs. Algorithms may play go, but they aren’t ready to make value judgments yet. A quick Google will yield a dozen more examples of AI failures just as repulsive and/or hilarious as the ones on my list. And the real punchline for all of that?

It’s good news.

For once, the robot apocalypse is cutting us puny humans a break. It’s creating jobs almost as fast as it’s gobbling them up, because at this point, it is excruciatingly clear that robots aren’t ready to produce work people can actually see. They’re not even ready to put ads on work people see, not without causing a PR catastrophe every other month.

AI isn’t a better widget. It also isn’t an employee that doesn’t want benefits or take long lunches.

It’s a product in permanent beta, desperately trying to catch up to the constantly changing nuance of human interaction. It doesn’t work without homo sapiens holding its robot hand.

Let’s call it Salter’s Law: For every application of AI to customer-facing work, you will need to hire at least one human for damage control when the AI screws up.

Continue Reading

Tech News

New stats behind mobile addiction and how people are coping

(SOCIAL MEDIA) Addiction to our screens is now accepted, and while younger generations are glued more tightly to them, many people are finding ways to fight back.

Published

on

tech addiction dependence influencer

I’d probably get this article done faster if I wasn’t checking my phone every couple of sentences. Even if I’m not expecting a message and know that everyone I was talking to is currently busy, it’s likely I’ll still neurotically check my phone every few minutes just in case.

Turns out I’m not alone in my mobile addiction.

A study from Deloitte of 2,000 U.S. internet users aged 18 to 75 found most people check their smartphone roughly 47 times a day.

Younger users nearly double this stat, checking their devices around 86 times a day, up from 82 times reported in the 2016 study.

The study also assessed which activities drove users to check their smartphones. Patterns of use compared to the previous year remain relatively unchanged except for self-reports of checking the phone while driving, which has fortunately decreased.

More than nine out of every ten respondents confess they use their phone while shopping or “spending leisure time.” Over eight out of ten reported checking on phones while watching TV, eating in a restaurant, and even while talking to family and friends.

When watching a show that’s longer than eleven minutes, I put my phone on the opposite side of the room if I want any hope of paying attention. I know if I keep my phone next to me, I’ll miss crucial chunks of episodes. This is a partial attempt to manage the addiction.

Likewise, around 47 percent of respondents said they’re trying to limit their usage, and are actively taking steps to reduce time spent on their phones. Some people report success by simply keeping their phones out of sight, turning it off during meals, or while spending time with friends.

A third of those surveyed turn off audio notifications, while around a quarter even went as far as putting some apps the chopping block. Another quarter could only part with their phones at bed time, turning their devices off at night.

Having a smartphone is fun (an addiction), but you don’t want to end up being that sad woman in the “Selfie” episode of High Maintenance only interacting with your phone.

Sometimes it can be much healthier to just put your phone away for a while. This can be a few hours of no phone time, or if you cans swing it, a few days of “business only” phone time.

Let people know if you’re going radio silent for a significant amount of time though, because otherwise your mom will think you’re dead if you stop responding to texts. Now please excuse me while I fail to follow my own advice and continue the technology loop of checking my Snaps, texts, and Instagram feed.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

The
American Genius
News neatly in your inbox

Join thousands of AG fans and SUBSCRIBE to get business and tech news updates, breaking stories, and MORE!

Emerging Stories