5 ms·

Not at all. They are using their dominance to surface websites which provide a faster (and therefore better) experience to users. AMP happens to facilitate that

Not at all. They are using their dominance to surface websites which provide a faster (and therefore better) experience to users. AMP happens to facilitate that, but if you're able to create a website that loads just as fast without AMP, it will probably rank just as high. I have yet to see proof that any AMP itself (beyond the benefits) is used as a factor to rank results. Sadly, the reality is that the majority don't want to make the effort.

43920 8y ago
> I have yet to see proof that any AMP itself (beyond the benefits) is used as a factor to rank results. For news articles at least, the only way to be shown at the top of the search results is to write your page using AMP: https://searchengineland.com/googles-amp-carousel-working-seo-insights-kanye-west-266412 https://searchengineland.com/googles-amp-carousel-working-se.... Edit: from Google's own documentation (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/mark-up-content https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/mark-up-con...): "The Top stories carousel requires that your content be published in AMP".
- ehsankia 8y ago
  That's from 2016. A lot has changed since. Try doing a search. There are plenty of non-AMP both at the top and in the carousel.
  - tyingq 8y ago
    Just searched for "Trump". Every single carousel entry was an AMP page. So then I tried "Isis", "confirmation hearing", and "Angela Merkle". Same thing, 100% AMP in the carousel. This is on an Android phone, using Chrome, with a US ip.
    - Ivoirians 8y ago
      How does that show AMP is required, and not just that almost every major media site has chosen to serve AMP pages? I legitimately can't find a large media site that doesn't use AMP, so your observation is essentially meaningless. You're looking for a news site that doesn't use AMP (already extremely rare), makes their pages as fast as AMP pages, and is blocked from appearing in the carousel.
      - tyingq 8y ago
        It is a response to the claim that "There are plenty of non-AMP both at the top and in the carousel". News outlets use AMP because they get pushed out of the carousel if they don't. You have the cause/effect backwards.
        theevilsharpie 8y ago
        > News outlets use AMP because they get pushed out of the carousel if they don't. You have the cause/effect backwards. Looking at my Google News feed, I see articles from The New York Times and NPR listed prominently in the carousel, and yet neither use AMP.
        tyingq 8y ago
        >The New York Times and NPR listed prominently in the carousel, and yet neither use AMP. Edit: NYT does use AMP: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/politics/north-korea-sony-hack-wannacry-indictment.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/p...
        theevilsharpie 8y ago
        It's possible that the article I was looking at was a non-AMP link. At least, it didn't have the lightning bolt symbol next to it.
coldtea 8y ago
>I have yet to see proof that any AMP itself (beyond the benefits) is used as a factor to rank results The "benefits" shouldn't be used as a factor to rank results either. I want the best page content-wise for my search. Not the fastest to load with irrelevant results. Besides what kind of "proof" do you expect to see? All their rankings are hidden behind several layers of secrecy, and it's not like Google will come out and say it by themselves. Web search is a public resource at this point, and Google is percentage-wise a monopoly on it, so we should dispense with opaque algorithms and behind the scenes manipulations. It's bad for society and bad for democracy. They should be forced to be able to explain any ranking, and give their algorithm at any point in time.

43920 8y ago

> I have yet to see proof that any AMP itself (beyond the benefits) is used as a factor to rank results. For news articles at least, the only way to be shown at the top of the search results is to write your page using AMP: https://searchengineland.com/googles-amp-carousel-working-seo-insights-kanye-west-266412 https://searchengineland.com/googles-amp-carousel-working-se.... Edit: from Google's own documentation (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/mark-up-content https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/mark-up-con...): "The Top stories carousel requires that your content be published in AMP".

ehsankia 8y ago
That's from 2016. A lot has changed since. Try doing a search. There are plenty of non-AMP both at the top and in the carousel.
- tyingq 8y ago
  Just searched for "Trump". Every single carousel entry was an AMP page. So then I tried "Isis", "confirmation hearing", and "Angela Merkle". Same thing, 100% AMP in the carousel. This is on an Android phone, using Chrome, with a US ip.
  - Ivoirians 8y ago
    How does that show AMP is required, and not just that almost every major media site has chosen to serve AMP pages? I legitimately can't find a large media site that doesn't use AMP, so your observation is essentially meaningless. You're looking for a news site that doesn't use AMP (already extremely rare), makes their pages as fast as AMP pages, and is blocked from appearing in the carousel.
    - tyingq 8y ago
      It is a response to the claim that "There are plenty of non-AMP both at the top and in the carousel". News outlets use AMP because they get pushed out of the carousel if they don't. You have the cause/effect backwards.
      - theevilsharpie 8y ago
        > News outlets use AMP because they get pushed out of the carousel if they don't. You have the cause/effect backwards. Looking at my Google News feed, I see articles from The New York Times and NPR listed prominently in the carousel, and yet neither use AMP.
        tyingq 8y ago
        >The New York Times and NPR listed prominently in the carousel, and yet neither use AMP. Edit: NYT does use AMP: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/politics/north-korea-sony-hack-wannacry-indictment.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/p...
        theevilsharpie 8y ago
        It's possible that the article I was looking at was a non-AMP link. At least, it didn't have the lightning bolt symbol next to it.

coldtea 8y ago

>I have yet to see proof that any AMP itself (beyond the benefits) is used as a factor to rank results The "benefits" shouldn't be used as a factor to rank results either. I want the best page content-wise for my search. Not the fastest to load with irrelevant results. Besides what kind of "proof" do you expect to see? All their rankings are hidden behind several layers of secrecy, and it's not like Google will come out and say it by themselves. Web search is a public resource at this point, and Google is percentage-wise a monopoly on it, so we should dispense with opaque algorithms and behind the scenes manipulations. It's bad for society and bad for democracy. They should be forced to be able to explain any ranking, and give their algorithm at any point in time.