Anyone managed to change 'At a glance:' in local search results
-
On Google's local search results, i.e when the 'Google places' data is displayed along with the map on the right hand side of the search results, there is also an element 'At a glance:'
The data that if being displayed is from some years ago and the client would if possible like it to reflect there current services, which they have been providing for some five years.According to Google support here - http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1344353 this cannot be changed, they say
'Can I edit a listing’s descriptive terms or suggest a new one?
No; the terms are not reviewed, curated, or edited. They come from an algorithm, and we do not help that algorithm figure it out. 'My question is has anyone successfully influenced this data and if so how.
-
You are very welcome. My pleasure to help!
-
Hi Miriam
Thank you for your comprehensive answer. I will look at the resources that you have provided and perhaps conduct some tests of my own.
Once again, thank you.
-
Hi CodingStuff,
Good question, and I empathize with frustration on this. The At A Glance feature often points up the most absurd snippets. You can report the issue through this form:
http://support.google.com/places/bin/static.py?hl=en&ts=1386120&page=ts.cs
....but, Google will apparently only consider changing it if it contains totally wrong information (like jewelry appearing on a restaurant listing) and even then, it's unlikely to see action happen on their part. So, this leaves us with trying to understand the cause/source of these snippet sentiments. Mike Blumenthal wrote a great post on this in 2011 when these first appeared:
http://blumenthals.com/blog/2011/08/30/google-places-descriptor-snippets/
In that post, he points to a Bill Slawski piece on a patent that appears to relate to this sentiment display:
http://www.seobythesea.com/2011/08/google-boost-search-rankings-category/
And here's a good discussion on this topic in Google's forum:
http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/business/wDRAXAl1gyA
The sources of the snippets have appeared to stem mainly from reviews, but also from links and website content. Usually, it's pretty easy to trace language in the snippets to things that have been said in reviews, at least in my experience. So, here we come to another hands-are-a-bit tied situation, because you aren't able to control what people say in their reviews. Even one bad review can end up tacking an awful sentiment to your profile in the At A Glance section.
I have never seen research done on how often Google internally refreshes At A Glance sentiments, but it stands to reason that the acquisition of a gentle but ongoing stream of positive reviews for the business would be the strongest action one can take to hope to see a change in the sentiments. Without seeing your actual profile, I have to speak broadly on this, but that would be my basic advice. You can make an effort to report the issue to Google and there is a slim chance you might get somewhere with that, but in most cases, you'll just have to work at getting reviews in hopes of seeing an eventual change to the snippets.
For good recent reading about the topic of getting Google-based reviews, here's another piece by Mike Blumenthal that you may find helpful:
http://blumenthals.com/blog/2012/09/24/asking-for-reviews-post-apocalypse/
I hope these resources help you feel up-to-speed on this sometimes frustrating topic. Good luck!
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
-
Changing sitemaps in console
Hi there, Does anyone have any experience submitting a completely new sitemap structure - including URLs - to google console? We've changed our sitemap plug in, so rather than /sitemap-index.xml, our main sitemap home is /sitemap.xml (as an example). Is it better to 410 the old ones or 301 redirect them to the new sitemaps? If 301, what do we do about sitemaps that don't completely correlate - what was divided into item1.xml, item2.xml is now by date so items-from-2015.xml, items-from-2016.xml and so on. On a related note, am I right in thinking that there's no longer a "delete/ remove sitemap" option on console? In which case, what happens to the old ones which will now 404? Thanks anyone for any insight you may have 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fubra0 -
How to optimise for voice search ?
Hello, Let's imagine I do a search for barcelona in the keyword tool. One the the words that comes back with high relevance is barcelona city. I am writing a my content but as a human it sounds more natural to write the city of barcelona. My problem is the the city of barcelona is not given by the keyword explorer, what should I do stick with barcelona city use the city of barcelona even though it is not in the list of keywords ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
HTML5: Changing 'section' content to be 'main' for better SEO relevance?
We received an HTML5 recommendation that we should change onpage text copy contained in 'section" to be listed in 'main' instead, because this is supposedly better for SEO. We're questioning the need to ask developers spend time on this purely for a perceived SEO benefit. Sure, maybe content in 'footer' may be seen as less relevant, but calling out 'section' as having less relevance than 'main'? Yes, it's true that engines evaluate where onpage content is located, but this level of granular focus seems unnecessary. That being said, more than happy to be corrected if there is actually a benefit. On a side note, 'main' isn't supported by older versions of IE and could cause browser incompatibilities (http://caniuse.com/#feat=html5semantic). Would love to hear others' feedback about this - thanks! 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mirabile0 -
When you can't see the cache in search, is it about to be deindexed?
Here is my issue and I've asked a related question on this one. Here is the back story. Site owner had a web designer build a duplicate copy of their site on their own domain in a sub folder without noindexing. The original site tanked, the webdesigner site started outranking for the branded keywords. Then the site owner moved to a new designer who rebuilt the site. That web designer decided to build a dev site using the dotted quad version of the site. It was isolated but then he accidentally requested one image file from the dotted quad to the official site. So Google again indexed a mirror duplicate site (the second time in 7 months). Between that and the site having a number of low word count pages it has suffered and looked like it got hit again with Panda. So the developer 301 the version to the correct version. I was rechecking it this morning and the dotted quad version is still indexed, but it no longer lets me look at the cache version. Out of experience, is this just Google getting ready to drop it from the index?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BCutrer0 -
Is anyone here using Triond? What do you think about it?
I noticed that a few people are using Triond.com to do "guest post".Is that a good way to diversify the link profile and get more traffic? Is anyone here using Triond? What do you guys think about the service?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Felip31 -
Website change of address
Hi Everyone, I apologize if the answer to this questions is obvious, but I wanted some input on how changing our web address of our site will affect our SERP. We are looking to change our website address from a.com to b.com due to rebranding of our company (primarly to expand our product line as our current url and company name are restricting). I understand that this can be done using 301 direct and via webmaster tools with google. My question is how does this work exactly? Will our old website address show in SERP rankings, and when a user clicks on the listing are they redirected to our new address? With regards to building new links from press releases etc, do we have links point to our new web address or the old one in order to increase SERP? Does google see our old address and new address as the same website and therefor it does not matter where inbound links point to and both will increase our ranking positions? It took 6 years of in house seo to get our website to rank on the first page of all the major search engines for our keywords, so we am being very cautious before we do anything. Thanks everyone for your input, it is greatly appreciated 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AgentMonkey0 -
Changing Site URLs
I am working on a new client that hasn't implemented any SEO previously. The site has terrible url nomenclature and I am wondering if it is worth it to try and change it. Will I lose rankings? What is the best url naming structure? Here's the website http://www.formica.com/en/home/TradeLanding.aspx. (I am only working on the North America site.) Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlightAnalytics0 -
Robots.txt: Link Juice vs. Crawl Budget vs. Content 'Depth'
I run a quality vertical search engine. About 6 months ago we had a problem with our sitemaps, which resulted in most of our pages getting tossed out of Google's index. As part of the response, we put a bunch of robots.txt restrictions in place in our search results to prevent Google from crawling through pagination links and other parameter based variants of our results (sort order, etc). The idea was to 'preserve crawl budget' in order to speed the rate at which Google could get our millions of pages back in the index by focusing attention/resources on the right pages. The pages are back in the index now (and have been for a while), and the restrictions have stayed in place since that time. But, in doing a little SEOMoz reading this morning, I came to wonder whether that approach may now be harming us... http://www.seomoz.org/blog/restricting-robot-access-for-improved-seo
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kurus
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/serious-robotstxt-misuse-high-impact-solutions Specifically, I'm concerned that a) we're blocking the flow of link juice and that b) by preventing Google from crawling the full depth of our search results (i.e. pages >1), we may be making our site wrongfully look 'thin'. With respect to b), we've been hit by Panda and have been implementing plenty of changes to improve engagement, eliminate inadvertently low quality pages, etc, but we have yet to find 'the fix'... Thoughts? Kurus0