sullivandanny

5 ms·

1.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
The Honest Results policy is that we're not going to allow advertisers or partners or any one with a relationship to Google to have an advantage in our unpaid search results. As for ad labeling, I don't work on the ad side. I work
2.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
I'm Google's public liaison for Search, and I communicate on this stuff all the time. Typically I'm most active on Twitter. You can always ping me here: https://twitter.com/searchliaison I'm looking into
3.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
We don't show radically different results based on user account. Region, however, can make a difference, though everyone in the same location doing the same search would generally see the same things. More: https://twitter.c
4.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
Yep, thanks -- got directed to this thread. Our spam team was already on it. It is spam, not malware. No one is infected with anything. I think things are already improving and they'll keep debugging it.
5.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
Thanks. I work for Google Search. It's spam, not malware and we are looking into this.
6.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
Quotes do work. They really, really do. Every time I look into a complaint about this, I find that the text really is on the page. It just might not be readily visible. Twitter link is in my bio here. If you ever get an example where you fi
7.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
When most people search, they're generally looking for information that matches a topic, not necessarily every single word in a query. You can imagine the number of misses that would happen if we didn't compensate for misspellings
8.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
We wouldn't say the word is censored. It's just an indication we found a page tha that might be relevant even though it doesn't contain one or more of the search terms, and we want to help the user understand that. But yes ov
9.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
We cater to power users. If you absolutely, positively need a word or phrase to be on a page, use quotes. "age" or "tim lee" would tell us that exact word or that exact phrase has to be on the page. Which still doesn&#x2
10.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
We show this to indicate to you that we found a page that might be relevant but which doesn't contain that exact word. And why we would conclude that is explained better if you search for ["tim lee" food vlogger "age&quo
11.
by sullivandanny 5y ago
I work for Google Search. Knowledge panels are automatically created and generated. And it is possible that if we have two people of the same name, our systems might select an incorrect photo. My apologies for the concern this has caused yo
12.
by sullivandanny 6y ago
The image was not removed purposefully. Images in the Knowledge Graph can update at any time. If they do, they briefly disappear. That's what seems to be happening here. We're exploring the issue more. Here's more info we pos
13.
by sullivandanny 7y ago
I'm Google's public liaison for search. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and our apologies for the inconvenience caused. This was indeed a bug that our engineers have explored, and it should be fixed now.
14.
by sullivandanny 9y ago
Thank you. On the loss part, I'd left journalism. So Google's not causing it -- I just really needed a change after 21 years of doing it. I appreciate your kind words about it. I'm also absolutely fascinated by understanding
15.
by sullivandanny 9y ago
I'd love to see + do what + was supposed to do and not do the guessing. Has been frustrating to me, too -- though I suspect (this is part of what I'll be learning) that for the vast majority of people, it might help. In the meanti
16.
by sullivandanny 9y ago
Yes and no. Matt oversaw search spam efforts and was an engineer. I won't be doing that. And I'm definitely not an engineer. Matt was also a lead on webmaster relation issues. That's not going to be my focus. There are good p
17.
by sullivandanny 9y ago
This types of concerns are very much part of the remit.
18.
by sullivandanny 9y ago
It's not a PR position. I don't work for corporate communications. I work for the search team. I'll be sharing more about the role after I have more time at Google and shape it more. But it's definitely not PR.
19.
by sullivandanny 9y ago
I actually stepped down as being an advisor. They just haven't updated that part of the page. In my post, I address this. Bottom line: I don't plan to treat the company any differently.
20.
by sullivandanny 11y ago
The title is about "Google PageRank score," not Google PageRank. PageRank was one part of the reason we have a search as powerful as Google, the use of links to assign an authority score. Another big part was the use of link conte
21.
by sullivandanny 11y ago
So as the author, I'll try to clarify. The article isn't about Google's influence on the web, as a whole. Google has had a huge influence on the web in many ways, from making it easier for people to locate information to site
22.
by sullivandanny 11y ago
You're reading things into this that I didn't write, I'd say. When Google arrived, it was a huge advance in search. It offered an obvious improvement in relevancy, which is why so many serious searchers switched to it from Al
23.
by sullivandanny 13y ago
The marketers are the ones savvy enough to understand that Google has deliberately continued to leave a gaping hole in that privacy protection for its paid advertisers. Buy ads; you get the data. So it's increased privacy until it hits
24.
by sullivandanny 13y ago
Of course, for personalized results, Google+ activity can have a huge impact on rankings. At times, it can trump any other factor. For personalized results. Important caveat, but then again, we're probably at the point where more peopl
25.
by sullivandanny 13y ago
No, it's not. What little we've had about super-secret legal requests isn't that companies have to lie about them. It's that they can't acknowledge them at all. So the answer they give when asked, and they do get as
26.
by sullivandanny 14y ago
SEO is not about an unfair advantage. If that were the case, then Google itself wouldn't offer a free guide to SEO. That's simply an unfortunately common and ignorant misconception. It's like saying that knowing HTML design requirements is
27.
by sullivandanny 14y ago
Actually, scratch that. You shouldn't be getting a referrer at all. We'll check further, but you should check with Google searches.
28.
by sullivandanny 14y ago
Good point. I've edited the headline to make it clearer.
29.
by sullivandanny 14y ago
You need to test it with a search. It's not that you don't get referrer data. It's that you don't get search referrer data. Do a search on Google, see if you get the terms you searched for embedded in the referrer. That's what we tested; th
30.
by sullivandanny 14y ago
It is a huge deal and has been since Google stopped passing referrers for signed-in users last October. That's because... 1) If it's a privacy thing, then Google is happy having a leak by giving these terms to advertisers 2) The data is not

More ›