[Ipg-smz] New Google algorithms cost a site 99% of its traffic

[Christine Hall]

Also a +1 Even though in the age of fake news and nation state 
propaganda wars that Google does down rake some sites -- and I do think 
Mercola rightfully would fall into such a catagory since the information 
on the site is not dependable -- even in it's bias.

If that seems like I'm contradicting my earlier email, not entirely. 
It's complicated (and I'm a Gemini).

Christine Hall
Publisher & Editor
FOSS Force: Keeping tech free
http://fossforce.com

On 6/28/19 2:43 PM, Richi Jennings wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 7:15 PM Andy Patrizio <andy at andypatrizio.com 
> <mailto:andy at andypatrizio.com>> wrote:
> 
>     [You] have no problem with Google hosing the guy and no concern that
>     one day a site you work for will be deemed double plus ungood and
>     buried.
> 
> 
> Andy, those in the group who were IDG staffers or, like me, a frequent 
> freelancer for an IDG pub will have been through this mill a few years 
> back.
> 
> Personally, I often complained about the SEO-inappropriate way the sites 
> were being run, and I know mine wasn't the only voice crying in the 
> wilderness. However, the Big-G-banhammer-of-death came and the rest is 
> history. IDG wasn't nuked because Larry and Sergei didn't like what it 
> published. It was nuked because of its SEO practices. And it had had at 
> least a year of notice that it was doing the wrong thing.
> 
> I have no insider knowledge of why Mercola's ranking authority has been 
> downgraded, but his conspiracy-style explanation that you linked to is, 
> from where I sit, *unconvincing*.
> 
> // @RiCHi <http://twitter.com/RiCHi> | +44.7789.200701 
> <tel:%2B44.7789.200701> | 1.408.256.0084 <tel:1.408.256.0084> | richi.uk 
> <http://richi.uk/>
> 
> 
>