| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
LB and Goggle Indexing Problems Revisited - part II
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 9:23 AM on 03.31.10 |
->> Like me, I'm assuming a few people think that the issue is LB's use of flash is the root of the issue. It may be, but according to this article it is not likely. It seems that Google can properly index flash driven sites.
"In fact on June 18, 2009, Google announced that it could load external Flash resources, including text, HTML, XML, additional SWFs, and more. This feature means that you can create a Flash application that draws its content from a structured and external XML document."
Best Practices for Search-Optimized Flash Development...
http://www.getelastic.com/seo-for-flash/ |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 12:21 PM on 03.31.10 |
->> clark,
google's ability to index flash has been known for several years. they can extract text as the article states, however, they cannot correlate a caption to an image in the way that you can with the ALT attribute in HTML. the 2nd problem that plagues many flash sites is the fact that user actions don't change the URL. livebooks is one of the few providers that does provide this functionality.
the issue isn't that LB is using flash -- i'm speculating that there has been a change in the google algorithm that might be penalizing the html mirror site behind it.
google might be saying: you have flash site that has a certain type of content, and then we see an html site that has a different type of content -- ergo, you're trying to do something deceptive.
so the mirror site design, which was created to enhance SEO, might ironically be creating a loss of SEO with the alleged algorithm change.
it's all speculation, of course. the only truism we know is that some of these sites fell out of the top rankings in the google index. |
|
Joel Hawksley, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Athens | OH | USA | Posted: 12:44 PM on 03.31.10 |
->> Allen-
EXACTLY. You hit the nail right on the head.
All the tricks, smoke and mirrors, finagling and whatnot that surrounds the whole Flash/shadow HTML setup is a recipe for disaster. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:49 PM on 03.31.10 |
->> Allen,
"... so the mirror site design, which was created to enhance SEO, might ironically be creating a loss of SEO with the alleged algorithm change ..."
That statement would also echo my hypothesis. Also, than you for posting the info about backlinking in the first installment of this thread. The link to the web tool proved to provide some interesting data about my site. Thank you. |
|
Ron Vesely, Photographer
|
Chicago Area | IL | USA | Posted: 2:21 PM on 03.31.10 |
->> Thanks, Allen, for your insight... As more and more Livebooks sites drop off the radar, I'm with your hypothesis related to the use of an HTML mirror site..
Ron |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 2:29 PM on 03.31.10 |
->> no prob guys.
in fairness to livebooks, i can't think of another company that has done more with trying to optimize flash for SEO than what they have done, and for that they should be commended. i've had conversations with michael costuros in the past about SEO, and they spent a lot of resources in the past trying to ensure that the sites looked good and had good SEO.
but unfortunately, we are all at the mercy of the google death star. |
|
Jack Howard, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Scott Holstein, Photographer
|
Tallahassee | FL | USA | Posted: 4:49 PM on 03.31.10 |
| ->> Everything is in flux; my site was just restored - at least for a search of my name. |
|
Derek Montgomery, Photographer
|
James Escher, Photographer
|
Garden City | NY | USA | Posted: 1:23 PM on 04.05.10 |
->> LiveBooks has yet to acknowledge the extent of the problem, much less correct it. Considering this latest Google indexing debacle comes just a short time after the company hosed its original customers by failing to offer them a site-incorporated blog the way they do for newcomers, it's safe to say the only thing they've succeeded in recently has been giving a reason to potential new clients to take their business elsewhere.
Very disappointed. |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 1:32 PM on 04.05.10 |
->> The extent just isn't as wide as the affected are making it out to be, that's the thing... If it was something Livebooks was doing wrong, it would be quite visible across all of their clients, but it's just not the case; these things happen from time to time with any hosting environment, whether flash or HTML. It's just the nature of the internet being a fluid entity.
For example, try searching for "sports photographer". First site: Brad Mangin's livebooks site.
As Andy Patrick (from Livebooks) said, they've had this happen before, and things returned back to normal in a few days to a few weeks, and that process is now repeating itself - everything is going back to normal. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 2:34 PM on 04.05.10 |
->> James,
What makes you think Livebooks can correct it? SEO is a fluid situation with a certain amount of just plain guessing involved.
Anybody who claims that they can place any particular business on the first page of results is either exaggerating or about to be wrong when Google tweeks their algorithms.
I don't mean to imply that there are not positive measures that one can take with their site to improve their search visibility, but -- except for Google -- it's not an exact science.
Caveat emptor.
--Mark |
|
Phil Hawkins, Photographer
|
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 4:01 PM on 04.05.10 |
->> The only immutable fact about Google is that they HATE SEO tricks; and the definition of "tricks" changes every time they discover someone doing something that they, in their subjective, arbitrary opinion, is "abusive". You can be cruising along, apparently successful in your efforts, thinking you've mastered the art of SEO then wake up one day and find you've been dumped. What I have discovered over many years of attempting to shinny up this greased fire pole, is the harder you try the worse it's going to be over the long haul.
My main portfolio website is a flash website, and it's been there for 4 years, and I still don't come up under search terms that one would think I would; "Yosemite landscape photographers". (I have decided to live with that limitation because I want the flash functionality that facilitates displaying the broad spectrum of my work.) Yet, as of 4/6/10, my workshop site, a 100% HTML site is number one in less than a year for search terms "photo workshops in Yosemite" and number THREE under the general term "photo workshops".
If SEO is that important to you, then DON'T do a flash website, LiveBooks included. Learn the proper ways to legitimately maximize your site's relevance in search terms with an HTML website, and live in peace with Google.
Brad's site position is the exception to the rule due to his prominence and long standing presence in the sports photography profession. He has a huge reciprocal link network, massive internet recognition in this profession, and it's no wonder he comes up way ahead of anyone else. Neither you nor I can expect that kind of positioning on such a general search term on a flash web site without years of hard effort, industry recognition and awareness.
Stop vilifying or even trying to figure out Google and learn what TRUE SEO optimization is, make decisions about your priorities and move on. LiveBooks would do well to put it's efforts into designing a functional HTML website template to meet the needs of sports photogs, and stop wasting brainpower on trying to figure out how to herd cats. |
|
Patrick Fallon, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Columbia | MO | USA | Posted: 7:12 PM on 04.05.10 |
| ->> Hoooray! I'm part of this mess to.... |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 2:05 AM on 04.08.10 |
->> I did a little more research into the issue.
You may be aware that Google has been testing a new version of its search engine called "Kaffein (aka Caffeine)", and depending on who you listen to, it is about to launch or has launched. (I'm seeing some pretty significant difference depending on which google search cluster i see, so i'm not convinced it's completely rolled out).
SEO experts and webmasters have been noting some significant changes in search rankings in the past few months, so the LB issues are probably a part a material change in the ranking algorithm. A few factors that seem to matter:
- website speed
- "quality"
- social bookmarks
- design/navigation
- backlinks
I would venture to guess that backlinks are still the most significant factor in SEO weight, and that's why brad mangin is still doing well. I suspect if you have an LB site with only a few backlinks, that the site is penalized for slow load times and *maybe* for some change in the way google views the html mirror site.
So what should you do?
- in the long term, you might consider migrating away from Flash, but I think this is probably a premature action
- create more than one online presence. If you stack all your cards under a single domain, you risk algorithm changes. remember, a search engine result page isn't going to list 10 results from a single domain. so it makes sense to have a website, a twitter account, a blog, an archive, etc to stack the results in your favor.
- make sure your online strategy implicitly includes link building. if you're not building links to your site over time, you will not succeed in SEO. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|