Google Search Quality Team - Commission Based Reviews
-
I have been busy this past week writing articles for various sources about the recent update on Google. A number of people contacted me about the analysis I was doing and the report.
Some were members of the Google Search Quality Team.
I knew manual reports were done before - but after the documents they showed me regarding the reports they do and the compensation for doing the reports - I am left in a state of being pretty shocked.
May be I have been naive for all these years but I didn't realize that;
-
Google outsourced the review and reconsideration requests to individual reviewers for a compensation
-
Google's position in terms of checking qualification and experience of these "reviewers" was very insufficient at best,
The three contacts I spoke to who had done reports had very little training or experience. I went through the GSQT REVIEWERS PDF (a very long and thorough document) that I was sent - with them.
We went together through some sites I wanted them to review and their comments that came back were quite astounding to say the least and would have made many of you Mozzers laugh.
Obviously I don't want to post said document online here....
BUT, I wanted to know if:
a) any Mozzers had ever been part of such a group - the GSQT
b) had any dealings with them - in terms of having your website reviewed and known about it.
I knew about this group way back - like in 2005 or 2006 or sometime around then - I was told at time it was stopped and Google had stopped paying these sub contractor reviewers.
Please don't get me wrong here... totally on board with manual reviews...
I would just prefer them done by a trained team that possibly worked for either a professional company that maintain high quality review testing and standards - or for that matter GOOGLE employees that were trained. I just am a little unsure of them being done by individual subbies that get paid for the amount they do. What if that subbie has got some skin in the game for a particular keyword?
What if their knowledge about certain aspects isn't up to par or not tested on a regular basis. This space is always changing and as you guys ./ girls on this forum know - it can change pretty quick.
I just would want all websites to be judged fairly and equally by a group trained EQUALLY and to the same standards. I don't care if this is a G team or not - I just want it to be a team that is trained equally and trained continuously as opposed to paying outside people based on numbers of reviews done.
When the livelihood of a small business is the balance I don't want a commission hungry toe rag with one years experience being the gate keeper for me or any of our clients.
Carlos
-
-
Just for clarification - the outsource individuals I had heard about back in 2004-2006 were in the EWOQ team.
FYI: http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/006791.html
I had thought that outsourcing the reviewing had stopped though many years ago and the manual reviewing was done internally by GOOGLE now.
The documents (PDFs and such) that I was sent tonight by these reviewers was dated 2012. They are very lengthy documents on what to look for and what to penalize for.
My conversations with said reviewers were quite amazing. Their lack of knowledge on what to look for and what constituted gaming the system (GH / BH as opposed to natural links etc) was at best laughable.
It just bothers me that a company that is one of the largest on this planet cannot have a team in house that is continually trained on reviewing and tested regularly.
Reviewing is important. It is necessary. It is critical for good search results.
All I ask that it is done equally, fairly and by a company that is tested regularly for quality standards themselves and not commission based individuals. [falls off soap box - but then watches the Mayweather fight again :)]
Carlos
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Any sites out there that are better than freelancer and more local based and not international
Hey guys i am looking for someone local or in the us to handle my social media clients. ie: posts, blogging, tweets . Any sites where i can posts jobs better than freelancer. Also anyone know of sites that you can find bloggers to blog for your clients sites. ( more content writers , to take directions ) Thanks guys BizDetox
Industry News | | BizDetox0 -
Huge website Search Quality Team problem
One of my clients, have a huge problem. His page which generate traffic over 3 milion unique users per month (GA) has been penalized in January / filtered by Google, reason is simple: incoming links from low quality pages... We try everything from reconsideration request to meeting Google Europe employees (But not directly with search quality team), reconsideration requests (over 10) in 6 month are bounced off we got automatic reply like "This website have still problem, read Google Webmasters FAQ etc." We contacted manually with webmasters which have websites with incoming link to us, some pepole delete with no problem, rest don't take any action to remove our links from webistes...A few days ago we use disavow tool links where we add all links which can be ignored by Google, so.. we make new recosideration data with specific information and yesterday we got the same reply like as beginning of the year.. Like this: "There are still some inorganic links to your site" What we can do? We lost a money, our client lost money, lost position, lost users... Anyone have any idea to contact with Google excluding reconsideration request form and forum?
Industry News | | thenaturat0 -
Anyone else know much about the Google Pirate penalty?
The Google 'Pirate' (no official name) seems to have gone largely undiscussed since it was launched last - Fri 10th August http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/an-update-to-our-search-algorithms.html. The idea of it is to ensure those 'Pirating' content or abusing trademarks e.g. fake ugg boot sites and file sharing sites do not appear higher in the search results than the genuine websites. Google is using DMCA take down requests for labeling sites as Pirate and demote their rankings, Im amazed not even seomoz has covered the subject yet as far as I can see, yet it is a hugely important new update, albeit affecting a relatively small number of sites now, and in some cases (at least one I know first hand) seemingly without justification (the example I know is not a file sharing, fake goods, trademark abusive site at all.) Google updating its search algorithm based on DMCA take down requests seems a bit strong - these are takedown requests, not legal proof that a site is infringing a trademark. A real weapon for negative SEO? Anyone else had experience of the pirate update or know much more about it? Outside Danny Sullivan I dont see many SEO folk covering it. Heres my own insights into it and what ive learned about what (only innocently) affected sites should do to appeal http://www.andy-maclean.net/the-google-pirate-dmca-guidance/
Industry News | | AndyMacLean0 -
Why is Bing Showing Insurance Ads For Link Building Searches?
I keep seeing multiple (2-3 per search) car insurance ads when I search for "link building" on Bing. I made a blog post that shows a screenshot and has more details. I'm not aware of any retargeting or other targeting options Bing offers that would show nonrelevant ads on a search like this. Or is there such a feature that I don't know about? My best theories are that it is a bug, or that Bing is testing something new. Any ideas?
Industry News | | AdamThompson1 -
Google Keyword Tool Showing Conflicting Data
Google Adwords Keyword Tool is showing different data for the same keywords. Broad Match Local Search Volume is 2400 apiece logged in from my main account. Local Search Volume 3600 and 1900 logged in from a different account. Can anybody explain this? I have screenshot of both.
Industry News | | Choice0 -
Google driving me Nuts - How do you combine 2 accounts?
I know this must be driving a lot of other people mad as I see loads of people who now have 2 registered accounts at google plus due to their seemingly terrible ability to merge or connect accounts. We have a work email address set up through google, then I have a personal Gmail address. In Google Plus now I have 2 profiles - even though I have not signed up to google plus with my work email, I cannot add this email to my Google + account set up on personal email as it just tells me to log into that account taking me to a page to set up a profile for that account. Has anyone managed to solve this problem - it is happening to everyone in the company, driving us all nuts and our IT guys have no idea how to solve it. Were trying to use G+ for the purposes of SEO & Marketing, but if they make it this cumbersome for people to use, then they are going to die a quick death - after a few weeks of use and noticing the huge number of dead accounts, only live accounts being SEO/Internet Marketing related, and huge number of duplicate accounts, I think their user figures are hugely suspect! Rant over - anyone know how to merge accounts?
Industry News | | James770 -
Hello, Actually I have bit of doubt. If I create Google plus business page. Will it helpful or effects for my website ranking?
If I create Google plus business page. Will it helpful or effects for my website ranking?
Industry News | | jaybinary0 -
Has there been any feedback from Google regarding their mass mail blunder?
I received a mail yesterday from a Joseph Middleswart from Google welcoming me to the beta trial for real time analytics. But my enjoyment at finally being able to see what's happening with real time data on my site was tempered by the 100+ spam mails I received immediatly after from some of the 200 odd people he'd included in the bulk mailing. Coming less than a week after Google tells us it's withholding keyword data from GA in order to protect the privacy of logged in users, I'm absolutely dumfounded at their incompetence. How can they show such a flagrant disregard for my privacy in introducing a new service while dressing up a restriction on another service as a security / privacy matter? Did anyone else fall victim to this incompetence?
Industry News | | 2Stroke0