News Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com
Story Found By: WaltVerastegui 1731 Days ago
Category: SEO
6 Comments
Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.
News Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com
Story Found By: WaltVerastegui 1731 Days ago
Category: SEO
6 Comments
Upcoming Conferences
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
- SMX Advanced Seattle - June 5-6, 2012
- SMX Paris - June 7-8 2012
- SMX Melbourne - Sept. 5-6, 2012
- SMX East - Oct. 2-4, 2012
- SMX Stockholm - Oct. 15-16, 2012
- SMX Social Media Marketing - Dec. 5-6, 2012
- SMX Munich - Apr. 9-10, 2013
- SMX West - March 2013
- SMX Toronto - April 2013
- SMX Sydney - May 2013
Latest News From Marketing Land
- Yahoo Shutters Livestand iPad “Living Magazine”
- Marketing Day: May 25, 2012
- Marketing Biz: Tracking Google’s Dune Strategy
- How Performance Marketing Is Influencing The Next Generation Of Internet Startups
- New Google+ Android App Adds Vivid Imagery & Additional Functionality
- - See more news at Marketing Land -
Upcoming Webcasts
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
- Search, Social and Mobile: What Travel Marketers Must Know - June 26, 2012
Latest News From Search Engine Land
- Google Releases Penguin Update 1.1
- Microsoft: Yes, We Do Send Takedown Requests To Bing, Too
- SearchCap: The Day In Search, May 25, 2012
- Search In Pics: SEO LEGO, Facebook Cooler & A Happy SEO
- Google Disapproved 134M Ads And Disabled More Than 800K AdWords Accounts In 2011
- - See more news at Search Engine Land -
Comments
Dan Thies has a free ebook at seofaststart.com which provides some good information about this.
Nofollow can’t be used to control PageRank flow. Nofollow doesn’t block the page from being indexed. The only benefit from using nofollow internally on your links is to speed up the indexing rate. PageRank is a probability distribution calculation and the probability of a user landing on a page you have nofollowed via a link remains the same. I don’t know if Matt said that by accident or if it was an attempt to cast nofollow in a good light but it’s not correct.
It can be used to control the flow. I mean, if you had any doubts, I was in the room with about 20 other SEOs when Rand asked Matt about this, and Matt talked about how YouTube (owned by Google) specifically uses it to control PageRank flow. In particular, the original PageRank formula divided the amount of PageRank that could flow off a page to other pages across the number of links on that page. IE, the more links a page had, the less PageRank each got. Sort of like a big PageRank pie that you have to cut 25 ways versus 5 ways. We don’t know the current formula, and Matt could be all Mr. Misleadingly, but I think many still believe that the fewer links on a page, the more PageRank share each link gets. Nofollow means those links tagged as such don’t get any PageRank share. It also and seperately means that Google shouldn’t index them. But as you say, Google might find a way to those links in another manner -- that’s why they may still get indexed. But there’s NO way Google will find another way to credit those links with the link love from a particular page, if that page has blocked love from flowing with nofollow.
"But there’s NO way Google will find another way to credit those links with the link love from a particular page, if that page has blocked love from flowing with nofollow." I certainly agree with you on this point. However the way I understand the original iteration of PageRank is based on the probability of a user randomly finding the page in question. Based on that let’s look at this scenario. Page A and B both have 5 outbound links. Page A has all five links followed and page B has four nofollows and one followed. The probability of a user finding each page remains exactly the same as long as all five pages are indexed. I can see flowing PageRank by blocking the four pages with robots.txt or meta tags because the probability of hitting the page in question will increase without the presence of the other links. Obviously on top of that there will be a PR distribution algorithm that will determine what "share" of PR each page gets but I see it as a small subset of a percentage in the overall score. I can see the possibility of this adding some kind of benefit on an extremely large scale (IE, YouTube with 15 billion pages) but the amount of PR gained from this method on anything less than a million pages will be so negligible it might as well be zero. I think I may of misspoke when I said it "can not" be used to control PR flow, and should have said it’s a useless exercise for 99% of websites. I’m sure Matt said it without trying to be misleading but I think it’s been interpreted incorrectly. I could be completely off base but that was my initial reaction when I thought about it. It rings along the lines of "PR hoarding" or whatever it was called when webmasters were afraid to link out for fear of losing PR.
Original PageRank is interesting, but I can’t stress enough how relying on a document from 1998 to talk about Google nine years later is dangerous. I agree that it’s likely many of the basic principles are in play, but there’s also sooooo much that has changed. But to go back to it, I think probability was just part of how PageRank was assigned. Number of links on a page was also another factor. So fewer links, more link juice to flow out. Remember, as far as Google is concerned when doing PageRank calculations, if there are 5 links and 4 with nofollow, it only sees 1 link -- as best as anyone can guess. And yeah, it does ring of PR hoarding and trying to control the flow in ways that Google’s sort of suggested you shouldn’t need to do. I asked Matt about that, because it seemed so odd. And he was pretty much saying yep, it’s OK to do, and in fact you might want to do it to help Google understand what pages deserve the most credit. It hasn’t be interpreted incorrectly at all, in my opinion.
I wonder how many of us use the nofollow to control PR flow. I never really got into myself because many of the sites I work on have decent site structure and aren’t overblown with useless pages (they might not be the best but i dont want to ignore them). There are situations I suppose where I could have implemented it, but that technique just seems like one of those things that will do more harm if you get carried away it.