Statements on the topic of ranking in general
Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2025 9:50 am
Regarding point 1, Google writes the following:
These algorithms are geared toward ensuring the usefulness of our services, as measured by user testing, not fostering the ideological viewpoints of the individuals that build or audit them.
Here, Google emphasizes that the ranking algorithms are intended to ensure usefulness for the user. These are determined through user tests without regard to the ideological views of the creators and reviewers. This may be an indication that the algorithmic evaluation of user signals could be used. You can read more about the topic of user signals in my article Are user signals & user behavior a ranking factor/ranking signal?
Over the course of the past two decades, we have invested in systems that can reduce ‘spammy’ behaviors at scale, and we complement those with human reviews.
Here, Google highlights that they have done a lot over the last 20 years to combat spam content on a large scale and support this with human reviews. This could mean quality raters, employees of Google's web spam team or external experts.
However, there are clear cases of intent to manipulate or deceive users. For instance, a news website that alleges it contains “Reporting from Bordeaux, France” but whose account activity indicates that it is operated out of New Jersey in the U.S. is likely not being transparent with users about its operations or what they can trust it to know firsthand.
Here Google gives an example of how the credibility of content can be checked. A source that claims to provide first-hand information, but is actually only second or third hand. This is about the issue of transparency.
It is pointed out here that Google takes the context and expectations of the user into account when ranking.
Google Search aims to make information from the web available to all our users. That’s why we do not remove content from results in Google Search, except in very limited circumstances. These include legal removals, violations of our webmaster guidelines, or a request from the webmaster responsible for the page.
The statement here is that Google does not remove any content from the index unless there are legal violations, violations of the Webmaster Guidelines or instructions from the author or website operator themselves.
They use algorithms, not humans, to determine the ranking of the content they show to users. No individual at Google ever makes determinations about the position of an individual webpage link on a Google Search or Google News results page… Our algorithms are geared toward ensuring the usefulness of our services, as measured by user testing, not fostering the ideological viewpoints of the individuals who build or audit them.
Here is further confirmation that no individual is responsible for scoring content for ranking in Google Search and Google News.
Because Google News does not attempt to be a comprehensive reflection of the web, but instead to focus on journalistic accounts of current events, it has more restrictive content policies than Google turkey phone number data Search. Google News explicitly prohibits content that incites, promotes, or glorifies violence, harassment, or dangerous activities. Similarly, Google News does not allow sites or accounts that impersonate any person or organization, that misrepresent or conceal their ownership or primary purpose, or that engage in coordinated activity to mislead users.
Regarding Google News, Google writes that stricter rules are applied here than in Google Search, since Google News does not represent a reflection of the entire Internet, but primarily refers to current events.
For instance, ranking in Google News is built on the basis of Google Search ranking and they share the same defenses against “spam” (attempts at gaming our ranking systems).
An exciting statement. The ranking of content in Google search appears to be based on the same principles as the classic Google search. At least when it comes to fighting spam.
Our algorithms can detect the majority of spam and demote or remove it automatically. The remaining spam is tackled manually by our spam removal team, which reviews pages (often based on user feedback) and flags them if they violate the Webmaster Guidelines. In 2017, we took action on 90,000 user reports of search spam and algorithmically detected many more times that number.
Here, Google explains very confidently that most spam is automatically detected and removed. Spam not detected by the algorithms is removed by the Search Quality Team. Detection is done via flags that are assigned based on user feedback or violations of the Webmaster Guidelines. In 2017, around 90,000 user feedbacks on search spam were processed. Algorithmically, this figure is many times higher.
These algorithms are geared toward ensuring the usefulness of our services, as measured by user testing, not fostering the ideological viewpoints of the individuals that build or audit them.
Here, Google emphasizes that the ranking algorithms are intended to ensure usefulness for the user. These are determined through user tests without regard to the ideological views of the creators and reviewers. This may be an indication that the algorithmic evaluation of user signals could be used. You can read more about the topic of user signals in my article Are user signals & user behavior a ranking factor/ranking signal?
Over the course of the past two decades, we have invested in systems that can reduce ‘spammy’ behaviors at scale, and we complement those with human reviews.
Here, Google highlights that they have done a lot over the last 20 years to combat spam content on a large scale and support this with human reviews. This could mean quality raters, employees of Google's web spam team or external experts.
However, there are clear cases of intent to manipulate or deceive users. For instance, a news website that alleges it contains “Reporting from Bordeaux, France” but whose account activity indicates that it is operated out of New Jersey in the U.S. is likely not being transparent with users about its operations or what they can trust it to know firsthand.
Here Google gives an example of how the credibility of content can be checked. A source that claims to provide first-hand information, but is actually only second or third hand. This is about the issue of transparency.
It is pointed out here that Google takes the context and expectations of the user into account when ranking.
Google Search aims to make information from the web available to all our users. That’s why we do not remove content from results in Google Search, except in very limited circumstances. These include legal removals, violations of our webmaster guidelines, or a request from the webmaster responsible for the page.
The statement here is that Google does not remove any content from the index unless there are legal violations, violations of the Webmaster Guidelines or instructions from the author or website operator themselves.
They use algorithms, not humans, to determine the ranking of the content they show to users. No individual at Google ever makes determinations about the position of an individual webpage link on a Google Search or Google News results page… Our algorithms are geared toward ensuring the usefulness of our services, as measured by user testing, not fostering the ideological viewpoints of the individuals who build or audit them.
Here is further confirmation that no individual is responsible for scoring content for ranking in Google Search and Google News.
Because Google News does not attempt to be a comprehensive reflection of the web, but instead to focus on journalistic accounts of current events, it has more restrictive content policies than Google turkey phone number data Search. Google News explicitly prohibits content that incites, promotes, or glorifies violence, harassment, or dangerous activities. Similarly, Google News does not allow sites or accounts that impersonate any person or organization, that misrepresent or conceal their ownership or primary purpose, or that engage in coordinated activity to mislead users.
Regarding Google News, Google writes that stricter rules are applied here than in Google Search, since Google News does not represent a reflection of the entire Internet, but primarily refers to current events.
For instance, ranking in Google News is built on the basis of Google Search ranking and they share the same defenses against “spam” (attempts at gaming our ranking systems).
An exciting statement. The ranking of content in Google search appears to be based on the same principles as the classic Google search. At least when it comes to fighting spam.
Our algorithms can detect the majority of spam and demote or remove it automatically. The remaining spam is tackled manually by our spam removal team, which reviews pages (often based on user feedback) and flags them if they violate the Webmaster Guidelines. In 2017, we took action on 90,000 user reports of search spam and algorithmically detected many more times that number.
Here, Google explains very confidently that most spam is automatically detected and removed. Spam not detected by the algorithms is removed by the Search Quality Team. Detection is done via flags that are assigned based on user feedback or violations of the Webmaster Guidelines. In 2017, around 90,000 user feedbacks on search spam were processed. Algorithmically, this figure is many times higher.