5 ms·

so what does that mean?

• minimaxir 11y ago
  Absolutely nothing from Twitter should be appearing in search engines.
  • chc 11y ago
    Except don't they have a special deal with Google to use the firehose?
    • guiambros 11y ago
      IMO, that's exactly the reason. Before search engines could scrape the data and load the content for free. Now they'll need to reach firehose data agreements.
      • Paulods 11y ago
        Take a look at the robots file without the "www" subdomain. Its likely to prevent content duplication/push for only the non "www" url to appear on search engines. https://twitter.com/robots.txt https://twitter.com/robots.txt
        • guiambros 11y ago
          Uh... Excellent point. Seems the entire speculation is/was unfounded.
  • teaneedz 11y ago
    So only firehose agreements get data? What's the impact to general SEO or 3rd parties? Doesn't sound good.
  • Paulods 11y ago
    Actually i believe its only from the "www" subdomain. Take a look at the robots without the "www" https://www.twitter.com/robots.txt https://www.twitter.com/robots.txt https://twitter.com/robots.txt https://twitter.com/robots.txt This is likely just to prevent content duplication/nudge users to visit without the "www".
    • thenextcorner 11y ago
      yep makes a huge difference... as explained here as well http://webmarketingschool.com/no-twitter-did-not-just-de-index/ http://webmarketingschool.com/no-twitter-did-not-just-de-ind...
      • sp332 11y ago
        You should never use Google's estimate as a real estimate, especially once it gets past 100. There are better ways to move content, like 301 redirects or rel=canonical.