4 ms·
There's another element, trusting the data. Often that may require some web scale data, like Pagerank but also any other authority/trust metric where you can s
by ricardo81 2y ago
There's another element, trusting the data.
Often that may require some web scale data, like Pagerank but also any other authority/trust metric where you can say "this data is probably quality data".
A rather basic example, published/last modified dates. It's well known in SEO circles at least in the recent past that changing them is useful to rank in Google, because Google prefers fresh content. Unless you're Google or have a less than trivial way of measuring page changes, the data may be less than trustworthy.
- lxgr 2y agoNot even Google seems to be making use of that capability, if they even have it in the first place. I'm regularly annoyed by results claiming to be from this year, only to find that it's a years-old article with fake metadata.
- account42 2y agoYeah, dates in Google results have become all but useless. It's just another meaningless knob for SEOtards to abuse.
- ricardo81 2y agoThey are quite good at near content duplicate detection so I imagine it's within their capabilities. Whether they care about recency, maybe not as long as the user metrics say the page is useful. Maybe a fallacy about content recency. You don't see many geocities style sites nowadays, even though there's many older sites with quality (and original) content. Maybe mobile friendliness plays into that though.