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
-
Does anyone know how to fix this structured data error on search console? Invalid value in field "itemtype"
I'm getting the same structured data error on search console form most of my websites, Invalid value in field "itemtype" I take off all the structured data but still having this problem, according to Search console is a syntax problem but I can't find what is causing this. Any guess, suggestion or solution for this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alexanders0 -
Search Results Pages Blocked in Robots.txt?
Hi I am reviewing our robots.txt file. I wondered if search results pages should be blocked from crawling? We currently have this in the file /searchterm* Is it a good thing for SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Javascript search results & Pagination for SEO
Hi On this page http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches we have javascript on the paginated pages to sort the results, the URL displayed and the URL linked to are different. e.g. The paginated pages link to for example: page2 http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& The list is then sorted by javascript. Then the arrows either side of pagination link to e.g. http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 - this is where the rel/prev details are - done for SEO But when clicking on this arrow, the URL loaded is different again - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:60&orderBy:5&pageView:list& I did not set this up, but I am concerned that the URL http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 never actually loads, but it's linked to Google can crawl it. Is this a problem? I am looking to implement a view all option. Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
'?q=:new&sort=new' URL parameters help...
Hey guys, I have these types of URLs being crawled and picked up on by MOZ but they are not visible to my users. The URLs are all 'hidden' from users as they are basically category pages that have no stock, however MOZ is crawling them and I dont understand how they are getting picked up as 'duplicate content'. Anyone have any info on this? http://www.example.ch/de/example/marken/brand/make-up/c/Cat_Perso_Brand_3?q=:new&sort=new Even if I understood the technicality behind it then I could try and fix it if need be. Thanks Guys Kay
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eLab_London0 -
Search box within search results question
I work for a Theater news website. We have two sister sites, theatermania.com in the US and whatsonstage.com in London. Both sites have largely the same codebase and page layouts. We've implemented markup that allows google to show a search box for our site in its results page. For some reason, the search box is showing for one site but not the other: http://screencast.com/t/CSA62NT8 We're scratching our heads. Does anyone have any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheaterMania0 -
Does Google still don't index Hashtag Links ? No chance to get a Search Result that leads directly to a section of a page? or to one of numeras Hashtag Pages in a single HTML page?
Does Google still don't index Hashtag Links ? No chance to get a Search Result that leads directly to a section of a page? or to one of numeras Hashtag Pages in a single HTML page? If I have 4 or 5 different hashtag link section pages , consolidated into one HTML Page, no chance to get one of the Hashtag Pages to appear as a search result? like, if under one Single Page Travel Guide I have two essential sections: #Attractions #Visa no chance to direct search queries for Visa directly to the Hashtag Link Section of #Visa? Thanks for any help
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Muhammad_Jabali0 -
Long term strategy to retain link 'goodness', I need some help!
Hi, I have a few questions around the best approach to retain as much link juice / authority from transitioning multiple domains into 1 single domain over the next year or so. I have 2 similar websites (www.brandA.co.uk and www.brandB.co.uk) which I need to transition to a new website (www.brandC.co.uk) over the next 2 years. Both A&B are established and have there own brand value, brand C will be a new website. I need to start introducing the brand from website C onto A&B straight away and then eventually drop the brands from A&B and just be left with C. One idea I am considering is: www.brandA.co.uk becomes brandA.brandC.co.uk (brandA sits as a subdomain on brandC website) Ultimately over time I would drop the subdomain (brandA) and just be left with www.brandC.co.uk The other option is: www.brandA.co.uk becomes brandC.co.uk/brandA...with the same ultimate aim as above. In both above case the same would be done for brandB, either becoming a subdomain of a folder on brandC website What I need to know is what is the best way to first pass any SEO goodness from the websites for brandA and brandB to the intermediate solution of either brandA.brandC.co.uk or brandC.co.uk/brandA (I see this intermediate solution being in place for approx 2 years). And then how to transition the intermediate solution into just having brandC.co.uk Which solution will aid growing the SEO goodness on the final brandC.co.uk website? Does google see subdomains as part of the main domain and thus the main domain will benefit from any links going to the subdomain or is it better to always use /folders as google sees these as more part of one website? ...or is there another option that I haven't considered? I know it's rater confusing so please give me a shout if you want anymore info. Thanks James
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cewe0 -
Alexa site title shows as "302 Found" on search result pages
If you search for the site "ixl.com" in Alexa, for some reason, it's showing the site as "302 Found" instead of showing the website name, IXL. If you drill into that, it shows the site as ixl.com, but underneath that, it says "302 Found" again. Every other site I search for seems to show the site's name properly. I have no idea where it's getting this "302 Found" from. Does anyone know how to fix this? Here's a link directly to the search results page: http://www.alexa.com/search?q=ixl.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | john4math0