Biggest ever Google Search algorithm Leak in history
The 2,500 page leak of internal documentation proves quite a few beliefs wrong, including using user data, conducting manual analysis and tagging sites being a deciding factor of search engine ranking.
Data Utilization Revealed
A massive leak of 2,500 pages of internal documentation claims Google Search engine does utilise user data to rank websites, contrary to popular research. Google’s Search is a household go-to for any and all kind of information indexing, and for years websites and brands have fought tooth and nail to best the algorithm and appear on top.
Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) and Search Engine Marketing (SEM) are two fields born out of the very need to be able to navigate it’s mysterious algorithm, tried and tested methods that combine data given by researchers and journalists alike.
However, this major leak has led people to believe that Google hasn’t been ‘lying’ about it’s algorithm.
According to Google, it does not utilise user data or clicks to choose what to prioritise in SEO. However, according to the documentation, your Chrome activity matters. Specifically, it tracks how many clicks a webpage receives from users in its web browser, Chrome.
While this data doesn’t directly impact overall site rankings, it does play a role in determining which internal pages to display in search results under a website’s homepage. It also reveals a whitelist for certain topics that require manual approval to be ranked and don’t rely solely on algorithmic factors.
Rand Fishkin, a SEO expert, says these documents have considerable information on Search’s API and is accessible to most of its employees.
Another SEO expert, Mike King, says this information, if true, is disingenuous to all the effort that has been put into figuring out the functioning of the Search and that he takes “issue with their efforts to actively discredit people in the marketing, tech, and journalism worlds who have presented reproducible discoveries.”
King also noticed that Google tags “small personal sites” for some unknown reason but while the move may be unexplained, it opens conversation into if Google has a criteria for labelling websites.
In response, Google spokesperson Davis Thompson told The Verge, “We would caution against making inaccurate assumptions about Search based on out-of-context, outdated, or incomplete information. Google has shared extensive information about how Search works and the types of factors that our systems weigh, while also working to protect the integrity of our results from manipulation.”
Google has declined to make any further comment.
