Content Is Not King, Google Is King For years the old adage "Content is King" held true for the web, but not any more. Google is now King of the web - dictating which content gets displayed - regardless of quality.
Why not search ClickBank's 10,000 Products:
 Please feel free to contact us. contact@bizwaremagic.com Notebook Computers Guide | Spyware Remover Guide | RSS/Blogging Guide | Optin E-mail Tool Kit | Best Marketing Software | Best Affiliate Programs | Basic Tool Kit | Best Free BizWare | Internet Marketing Links | Internet Fax | Corporate Business Gifts | SiteMap | Affiliate Directory | Internet Marketing Articles | Contact | Bizware Home | |||||||
One of the most common expressions that one hears from webmasters
and SEO experts - content is king. In other words, quality content
on the web will rise to the top and miraculously achieve visibility
in all the search engines.
In certain rare instances this may be the case, but for the most part,
in recent years, this statement is no longer valid. Things have really
changed on the world wide web.
Quality content is not king, Google is king.
Webmasters and online marketers should learn this hard truth, if
they want to compete on the web in the most lucrative keyword
markets. Google controls the flow of the most valuable keyword
traffic on the web and site owners have little or no say in what
content receives visibility in Google's listings.
These listings or Google's rankings are entirely at the whim of Google
- they can lower or raise your rankings at the drop of a hat. The long
series of Panda Updates proved that point to many affected webmasters
- many of them who believed they were unfairly penalized by Google.
In essence, Google controls 65% or more of the lucrative keyword
traffic on the web, this majority share has made Google top dog,
head boss or simply king of the web. Call it what you will, but
Google has the final say on what content gets displayed.
That fact needs to be repeated.
Regardless of quality, Google has the final word on what gets
displayed in its index and listings. Some experts even believe
Google is ditching SEO and Free organic results from their popular
online search site. Organic results are being displayed lower and
lower in the listings... in some cases below the fold for the many
important lucrative keywords.
All the while Google is supposedly penalizing webmasters and
marketers for placing links (especially affiliate links) above
the fold on their webpages. Google can benefit from these listings
above the fold but webmasters can not - otherwise their sites and
pages will be penalized by Google.
If you're wondering why all this is important, just this simple
rule alone regarding links being above or below the fold has
resulted in millions, if not billions, of dollars changing hands.
In other words, Google is directly controlling clicks/traffic that's
worth billions for the receiving companies and businesses which
get the click.
Naturally, since Adwords is Google's bread and butter, they would
like to see the majority of that traffic and business go to their
advertisers and clients. There's nothing wrong with this practice,
unless Google is unfairly manipulating the results to favor its own
interests?
That's why some believe Google is lessening the importance of SEO
and free organic results, if they can pull all their listings via data
from Google Analytics, Google Chrome Users, YouTube Stats, Google+...
they can have a completely "in-house" ranking system which no outside
body can dictate what gets ranked or displayed.
One which will also be harder to "game" than the present system,
which is ripe with link buying, SEO services, affiliate marketers...
gaming the rankings to get top spots. Truth be told, in very
competitive markets, there is nothing natural or free about
ranking high in organic results. They are all paid listings
for the most part.
Given all this corruption of search results, why shouldn't Google
develop its own ranking systems? If Google is not taking data or
information from the public domain, then the public should have
little or no say in what Google does with their own information.
Is this Google's path or roadmap for the future? Could it be a clever
way of fighting any "anti-trust" or "monopoly" issues?
Just look at the uproar over the recent introduction of "Google
Plus Your World" - with many webmasters and site owners saying
Google is guilty of too much "self-promotion" because only the
profiles and posts from its own social network Google+ are
displayed in personal search once the user is logged into their
Google account.
Twitter and Facebook profiles and posts are at a great disadvantage
because they're not displayed in the most prominent search engine
on the planet? Google says they are denied access to the data from
Twitter and Facebook, otherwise they would list it.
Again, since all this is done "in-house" and their own data,
Google can display it any way it wants, regardless of SEO
or organic search results. Is Google once again sacrificing
relevancy to further their own interests? The same thing
they're doing with placing their own ads above the fold and
other results much lower.
Like any company which gains a monopoly, there is a great
risk for misuse of that power. Google is not immune, many
say Google will settle for nothing less than total control
of the entire web - search, video and social. At the moment
there is nothing stopping them from achieving that goal,
especially if they use agressive tactics like the ones
described above.
Only thing about kings, they sometimes lose their heads.
Not very likely in this case because Google is going nowhere,
but unless they change their current direction of heavily
self-promoting their own products, Google could lose a lot of
respect among the general public. Once your good reputation
is gone, it is very hard to get it back... any old Panda could
tell you that.
...
