Last updated on
Brandon Saltalamacchia, a publisher, interviewed Google’s SearchLiaison, who expressed optimism that reputable sites affected by Google’s algorithms could experience a recovery in their traffic levels soon. However, insights from this interview and a recent Google podcast suggest underlying concerns that could explain why Google appears apathetic towards publishers with each update.
Google has a dedicated team tasked with advising site owners on how to succeed on their platform, indicating that Googlers themselves are not indifferent to publishers and creatives. Google offers extensive feedback to publishers, notably through Google Search Console. However, where Google is perceived as indifferent to publishers is in the core functionality of its search engine.
Google’s algorithms are designed with a primary focus on delivering a positive user experience and are internally assessed against this criterion. This perspective leads Google to believe that its algorithms are functioning correctly. Conversely, many website publishers feel that Google’s ranking algorithms are falling short. This article aims to explore the reasons behind this disconnect.
Brandon Saltalamacchia’s interview comes amidst a backdrop where many websites have seen a decline in traffic following Google’s recent algorithm updates. While Google asserts that its algorithms effectively serve users, website publishers consistently disagree. Over the past month, Google has acknowledged these concerns and stated they are actively seeking ways to improve.
This situation highlights a significant disparity between how Google evaluates the effectiveness of its algorithms and how website publishers perceive their impact in practical terms. It might surprise most people to discover that this disparity originates from Google’s mission to make information “universally accessible and useful,” which contrasts sharply with the metrics used to test algorithms—metrics that prioritize user experience but overlook publisher experience entirely.
Here are some of the grievances regarding Google’s algorithms:
Google’s algorithm decisions are ostensibly aimed at enhancing user satisfaction. However, the issue lies in the exclusion of website publishers from this equation. Consider this: Google’s Search Quality Raters Guidelines make no mention of assessing whether big brands dominate search results—this aspect is entirely overlooked.
Website publishers are not even an afterthought in Google’s processes—they are not considered during the creation, testing, or rollout of ranking algorithms.
Gary Illyes recently shared his perspective in a Search Off The Record discussion, highlighting Google’s prioritization of user experience. According to Illyes, Google believes that a positive search experience for users ultimately benefits publishers as well.
When discussing whether Google would publicly acknowledge issues with its search functionality, Illyes emphasized that Google’s Search Relations team focuses primarily on enhancing the search experience for users, rather than addressing concerns specific to publishers who may be adversely affected.
John Mueller sought clarification, asking whether the team’s focus is on what site owners perceive or what users experience. Illyes clarified that from Google’s perspective, the team is dedicated to Search Relations, not specifically Site Owners Relations, indicating a clear emphasis on optimizing the search experience for users.
Google’s primary focus on satisfying search users often translates into perceived indifference toward publishers. When delving into Google’s patents and research papers related to information retrieval, it becomes evident that success metrics consistently revolve around user satisfaction, with little regard for the impact on site publishers. This persistent oversight is why Google Search is often seen as indifferent to the concerns of publishers—they have never been integrated into Google’s framework for assessing search satisfaction.
This dynamic is something that both publishers and Google may not have fully grasped yet.
In a later episode of the Search Off The Record podcast, Google employees discuss how updates are evaluated based on Google’s perception of their effectiveness, rather than reacting to complaints from a relatively small number of publishers who may feel that Google Search is malfunctioning.
John Mueller highlighted this issue:
“Sometimes we receive feedback after major ranking updates, like core updates, where people say, ‘Oh, everything is broken.'”
Gary Illyes responded skeptically at the 12:06 minute mark:
“Do we? We get feedback like that?”
Mueller confirmed:
“Well, yeah.”
He then empathized:
“I feel bad for them. I understand that. I think these are situations where we would examine specific examples and conclude, ‘Oh, some sites are dissatisfied with this, but overall, we believe we’re doing the right thing from our perspective.'”
Gary agreed:
“Right.”
John sought clarification:
“And then we wouldn’t perceive it as an issue, right?”
Gary affirmed that Google wouldn’t see it as problematic if legitimate publishers lose traffic when the algorithm is deemed effective overall.
“Yeah.”
This perceived nonchalant attitude is precisely what concerns website publisher Brandon Saltalamacchia, as discussed in a recent blog post with SearchLiaison.
SearchLiaison raised numerous inquiries about how Google could improve its support for content creators, which is noteworthy given Google’s historical emphasis on user experience, sometimes at the expense of considering the impact on businesses with an online presence.
This proactive stance from SearchLiaison is encouraging but not entirely surprising, considering that unlike many Googlers, SearchLiaison (also known as Danny Sullivan) has extensive experience as a publisher and understands the challenges from our perspective.
It will be intriguing to see if SearchLiaison’s advocacy for publishers resonates deeply within Google, leading to a broader recognition that the Search Ecosystem encompasses more than just Google’s users—it also includes website publishers. Algorithm updates should not only prioritize user impact but also consider how they affect publishers.
Arguably the most significant revelation from the interview is that SearchLiaison indicated potential forthcoming changes in the next few months aimed at benefiting publishers who have suffered ranking losses due to recent updates.
Brandon summarized:
“One key takeaway from my discussion with Danny is his advice to persevere, maintain our current efforts, and his optimism that those of us dedicated to building excellent websites may see signs of recovery in the months ahead.”
However, despite these assurances from Danny, Brandon remained skeptical:
“I got the impression that changes won’t happen swiftly or in the near future.”
Original news from SearchEngineJournal
