{"id":13800,"date":"2022-06-07T12:25:01","date_gmt":"2022-06-07T12:25:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.searchenginejournal.com\/avoid-seo-misinformation\/445731\/"},"modified":"2022-06-07T12:25:01","modified_gmt":"2022-06-07T12:25:01","slug":"tips-for-avoiding-misinformation-in-seo-resources-conversations-via-sejournal-martinibuster","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/marketingnewsbox.com\/?p=13800","title":{"rendered":"Tips For Avoiding Misinformation In SEO Resources & Conversations via @sejournal, @martinibuster"},"content":{"rendered":"

There are many contradictory ideas about the best way to approach SEO<\/a>.<\/p>\n

For every idea proposed, there are others in the SEO industry who disagree.<\/p>\n

Turning to Google for help isn\u2019t always helpful because Google ranks information about SEO that Googlers themselves are on record saying is wrong.<\/p>\n

There is a way to cut through the noise and figure out which information is likely valid and which information is smoke and mirrors.<\/p>\n

Googlers Statements On SEO Information<\/h2>\n

What Googlers say about SEO is generally limited to four topics:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Actions to avoid a negative outcome.<\/li>\n
  2. How to increase indexing.<\/li>\n
  3. How to help Google better understand your webpages.<\/li>\n
  4. Confirmation that site promotion is important.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Googlers don\u2019t offer loopholes for how to influence rankings, of course. But the information they do provide is useful and consistent.<\/p>\n

    For example, a Googler can\u2019t necessarily say that Google has an algorithm that\u2019s specifically for hunting down and killing guest posts for SEO links.<\/p>\n

    But they can advise that guest posting for SEO is done and that publishers should stick a fork in it<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    By doing that, the Googler is helping publishers avoid a possible penalty or spending money on a service that won\u2019t produce the desired results.<\/p>\n

    It makes sense to seek out what Googlers say. What Googlers say is literally the most authoritative statement about how Google works.<\/p>\n

    Why Google Has A Webmaster Outreach<\/h2>\n

    The whole reason why there is a Webmaster outreach is that former Googler Matt Cutts sees value in communicating with the search community to help them avoid mistakes and misinformation.<\/p>\n

    So, he began communicating with publishers at various SEO forums under the nickname, GoogleGuy.<\/p>\n

    Here\u2019s a post from 2004 where GoogleGuy introduced himself<\/a> and explained the origin of Google\u2019s outreach and his motivation:<\/p>\n

    \n

    \u201cAbout three years ago, I was waiting for a program to finish compiling, and I was reading what people online were saying about Google.<\/p>\n

    I remember seeing a question from a site owner about how to structure his site for better crawling, and thinking it would be great if a Googler could just pop by to answer technical questions like that.<\/p>\n

    And then I thought, I\u2019m a Google engineer. I can answer technical questions like that. So, I did.<\/p>\n

    Since then, I\u2019ve managed to post around 2,000 messages in various web forums, setting the record straight whenever possible.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

    Are Googlers Inconsistent?<\/h2>\n

    It\u2019s common to hear people complain that Google is contradictory. If that\u2019s true, how can you trust what Googlers say is not SEO misinformation?<\/p>\n

    But, the reason for the contradictions is usually not the Googler\u2019s fault. It\u2019s consistently the fault of the person who is writing about what the Googler said.<\/p>\n

    In my experience of several years of listening to the Google office-hours hangouts, Googlers are very consistent about what they say, even when you backtrack 10 or more years to previous statements, what they advise is consistent and not contradictory.<\/p>\n

    Paying attention to what Googlers say has always been a good practice. And if what a publication reports seem to contradict a previous statement, listen to the statement itself.<\/p>\n

    For example, there are some sites that post about ranking factors based on what an ex-Googler says in a video.<\/p>\n

    But when you listen to the video, the ex-Googler never said what people say that he said.<\/p>\n

    Even so, the erroneous statement about a false ranking factor keeps proliferating on the internet because no one stops to listen to the video.<\/p>\n

    Don\u2019t take what someone writes for granted.<\/p>\n

    Always check the video, blog post, or podcast for yourself.<\/p>\n

    Google Search Engine Is A Source Of  SEO Misinformation?<\/h2>\n

    While Googlers are a trusted<\/em> source of SEO information, Google itself can be an unreliable source of SEO information.<\/p>\n

    Here\u2019s an example of Google\u2019s John Mueller debunking LSI Keywords in a tweet<\/a>:<\/p>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n
    \"ScreenshotScreenshot from Twitter, May 2022<\/em><\/span>\"Screenshot<\/div>\n<\/dt>\n<\/dl>\n<\/div>\n

    Searching Google for SEO information yields inconsistent search results.<\/p>\n

    For example:<\/p>\n