Google Algorithm Updates - 2024 Ongoing Discussion

[CCarter]

I think we need a new Traffic Leak bootcamp, 9 years later I need another 9 - cause I'm losing hope in a lot of ya'll ability outside Google.

I'm getting several inquires about that, it was more of a tongue-in-cheek comment. However, I do need to stretch my legs out for 2 of my projects. The biggest problem last time around were people weren't aware of how much time and effort it took to get traffic or up and running IMO. Should we create a separate thread or further discuss this?

 

[secretagentdad]

Just do it.
And launch the dashboard builder already. I wanna try it.
And do it as new rewritten threads.
One of the biggest stupid barriers I've had to getting people to educate themselves is the post dates.

 

[BakerStreet]

Knowing PageRank it's also fairly easy to figure out how a hypothetical TrustRank would work, because they both would work essentially with a few seed sites, the main containers.

Where as PageRank has a cumulative value, lots of low PR ranks will increase pagerank too, if I were to create TrustRank, I would simply choose 1000 of the most trusted websites on the planet and assign them TrustRank 10 and then otherwise let the trustrank filter down through the links, but I would not let it accumulate upwards.

Meaning, in order to get max trust, you'd get a link from Harvard, but to get a trustrank 9 link you could get a link from someone that has a link from Harvard and to get a trust 8 you get a third separation link from Harward. Of course this would be logarithmically like PageRank.

It's really a very simple concept that I think would work very well and I really do think most of what is EEAT is simply getting these top tier links from context that is "editorially given" what linksellers would call "niche edits".

I've talked to a few other SEOs and we're defining a good backlink in more detail than just a link from a trustworthy, well known domain. Here's what we've discussed:

• Relevancy - links from a webpage about your niche and a website from your niche. The hunch is that, with LLMs allowing Google to figure out a page's topic well, link relevancy would play a bigger role than before. The guy who told me this runs a CV maker and they have 1,500 referring domains, all from HR, jobcenter, career blogs and the like. All super niche relevant. Their rankings are going great. At the rate of 25 backlinks/month with 3 link builders, it only took 3 years to get those 1,500 backlinks using PitchBox. The other play I know that works well, is making an API/plugin. An example would be a price aggregator Wordpress plugin that shows visitors if the reviewed product can be found cheaper elsewhere than Amazon and, if so, webmaster still get a cut. The plugin puts a backlink to the plugin maker's site.

I'd add real human traffic too, since it makes sense with the PageRank theory. I question if Google uses TrustRank but I do look at the TrustFlow metric in Majestic to see if the backlinks are spam or not. So I do consider TF.

 

[Ryuzaki]

The other play I know that works well, is making an API/plugin. An example would be a price aggregator Wordpress plugin that shows visitors if the reviewed product can be found cheaper elsewhere than Amazon and, if so, webmaster still get a cut. The plugin puts a backlink to the plugin maker's site.

This is against the webmaster guidelines explicitly. It’ll work until you get a penalty.

 

[JOoa0ky]

E-E-A-T?
Helpful or unhelpful?
Are you building a brand?

Local businesses are unaffected by these shenanigans... If you take a step back and look at what is being asked, these are all things that real world organizations inherently do.

You know which "niche sites" are unaffected by these updates? Those who happened to make the pivot from digital-only to a hybrid model of digital+tangible real world businesses.

Google is speaking loud and clear (at least to me) that it is raising the bar for internet-only businesses which historically had next to nothing in startup costs. The days of easy money are over.

 

[chubes]

You know which "niche sites" are unaffected by these updates? Those who happened to make the pivot from digital-only to a hybrid model of digital+tangible real world businesses.

Simply not true. Anecdotal evidence that is easily proven wrong. You could find a counter example for most of these blanket statements, not just yours specifically.

I've been hosting real, in person events since 2018 and they're all documented in photo galleries on my blog. And they were written about in newspapers. My site has absolutely been affected by both of these major updates.

I'm a little bit at my wit's end for sure but it's fueling my drive. Back to fundamentals was good food for thought. @BakerStreet

It makes sense that the winners wouldn't post here. Everybody would try to steal their cheese.

 

[Jamaica0007]

My site is relatively new (a year old) and had a record number of visitors today of 53 which may be tiny compared to most here but it is continually trending upwards.

I have been applying the avalanche technique to my some of my existing pages (gradually working through them)

I am seeing really good results using it and it has given me something to focus on. I suspect I will have completed all pages and have all of them using this technique within 6 months.

Initially my site was 100% AI content and it was utter garbage. I noticed after a few months that I got a huge spike in impressions and a terrible CTR of about .5%. Couple that with the feeling of low level shame upon reading what I was putting my name behind, factual errors and 2000 word articles that spewed a bunch of flowery nonsense phrases and not a single unique point that someone could learn from.

That was about 8 or 9 months ago and I committed to using zero AI and rewriting the articles. I do not have a target of how long they need to be, I just write what needs to be written but they all seem to fall between 2500 and 4000 words with most at around 3000 words.

By the time the latest update occurred and I started seeing people getting penalties and losing substantial traffic, I still had at least 100 Ai articles online so I immediately put a noindex tag on all of them.
I want to keep them up there because they give a structure to the site for the purposes of internal linking in that I know those pages will always exist even though the content will be replaced.

I did that about a week ago and so far Google has only detected 2 out of the 100 or so pages and set them to no index, the rest are still indexed and am hoping that occurs soon.

Rewriting the pages has been hard work and it takes me about 5 hours or so with the internal linking to complete a single page versus 2 minutes for the AI version and that meant I had to believe that human content has that level of value over AI when it comes to any subject that requires expertise and experience.

Granted, if you want to create an article on how to make a banana milkshake then AI can probably do as good a job and in some cases a better job than many humans however once the subject requires specialist knowledge, AI at the moment falls apart and outright lies about the very few facts it lists among its annoying catch phrases.

So I have about 120 human written articles and have to say it was tough to stay the course while I watch these AI gremlins spruking about making thousands of dollars a month by generating millions of pages of rubbish while my very small number of pages that required a lot more time invested earned me 2 cents a day on average.

I am happy to continue growing at a slow and steady pace, I intend to ad training courses and a youtube channel that compliments the site and all of that including finishing off rewriting the pages is a 2 or 3 year plan for me all while I make very little return.

That is the thing about getting older, at some point you realize that aiming for fast results in a few months or even a year is why things so often end up being failures. Being 50 now I have finally grown up and have put in place a 10 year plan to get where I want to be rather than chopping and changing every 5 minutes like I used to.

The underlying human nature that drives how search works will never change. People want authentic, accurate information from people with experience and human written content will always have that edge.

Put it this way, Adrian Newey, the F1 design wizard who always manages to build the best car aerodynamically for his car is paid insane amounts of money to undertake this job.

Aerodynamics on a car a based on known mathematical formulae and physics and should be an area that AI could just crunch a bunch of known numbers and come out with the mathematically perfect car and yet that has not and will not happen.

How come a human can so convincingly outperform AI when the parameters of aerodynamics are a fixed and known quantity? Because AI is just a glorified database that has no actual intelligence.
If AI was actually capable of producing worthwhile content or even making the most basic decisions from the unimaginable information it has to work with then people like Adrian Newey would not have a job and every single F1 team would have identical cars.

 

[CCarter]

has no actual intelligence

A.I. is simply a tool in a mechanic's toolbox. It's not supposed to replace the mechanic, not yet at least. I think people have gotten out of control and use A.I. wrongly.

Right now it has all of man's knowledge, but you still need to be creative to ask it the RIGHT question for the right answer.

A.I. mimics behavior, doesn't create anything.

It can help the aerodynamics of a car by helping measure, but it's nowhere near designing the perfect car since that requires creativity- which is seeing something that is not there YET.

A.I. only see what is already there and categorize.

The one resource and skill to survive anything you need is imagination and creativity - if you can think beyond the current moment to what IS possible yet not yet here, then you'll survive.

 

[Jamaica0007]

A.I. is simply a tool in a mechanic's toolbox. It's not supposed to replace the mechanic, not yet at least. I think people have gotten out of control and use A.I. wrongly.

Right now it has all of man's knowledge, but you still need to be creative to ask it the RIGHT question for the right answer.

A.I. mimics behavior, doesn't create anything.

It can help the aerodynamics of a car by helping measure, but it's nowhere near designing the perfect car since that requires creativity- which is seeing something that is not there YET.

A.I. only see what is already there and categorize.

The one resource and skill to survive anything you need is imagination and creativity - if you can think beyond the current moment to what IS possible yet not yet here, then you'll survive.

Agreed, one job it does really well is when I ask it to make all of the letters on the page lower case.
I get a great deal of satisfaction at the speed it does that one task.

 

[CCarter]

And do it as new rewritten threads.
One of the biggest stupid barriers I've had to getting people to educate themselves is the post dates.

I am not rewriting anything. This time around it would just be examples of wins and discussions on improvement and/or what went wrong.

If they can't be bothered by some publishing date are they even serious? Doubtful. They'll quit after the first 3-4 failures. Those aren't the people that will get anywhere in life, don't waste energy on them.

 

[BakerStreet]

I have been applying the avalanche technique to my some of my existing pages (gradually working through them)

You're on the right path. I spent $30,000 having my writing team spew out AI content last year and we had to rewrite all articles by hand. I am guilty of hopping on the AI train without considering how readers would respond to it. Total waste of money. We went back to the foundations of writing and just write well now.

As for the avalanche technique, we're doing the same thing. My hunch is that, since LLMs aggregate documents, if there's a topic where there's not a lot of pre-written data for, the LLM will have a hard time generating that content. Hence why I think long tail keywords are safe against LLM content -- LLMs can't make good content there.

My traffic went down 10% in the last 7 days vs previous but sales are up. Whatever this new algo is doing, I like it. My traffic quality is better, I conclude. I think I'm safe from all this turmoil with big brand sites (although my sites well branded too) because I am in the long tail.

This isn't related to business at all but the Viet Cong and the Afghans defeated the most technologically advanced military in the world, the USA, by going underground and into caves. I think they're right and I'm going to go into my keyword caves too. It might be the only place that's safe from this new technology. I'm glad that my competitor's SEO teams don't know the avalanche technique or long tail keywords. I suspect that I've found my niche.

I am not rewriting anything. This time around it would just be examples of wins and discussions on improvement and/or what went wrong.

If they can't be bothered by some publishing date are they even serious? Doubtful. They'll quit after the first 3-4 failures. Those aren't the people that will get anywhere in life, don't waste energy on them.

Tell me about it. Even for me, a "millionaire" on paper, the most scariest thing in the world, right besides a false conviction for a fucked up crime like child molestation where you'll get bullied for life in prison, is actually fucking succeeding with your plan.

The fear of success is a real fear. It means that, in fact, all those people who disregarded you and bullied you were in fact wrong and you in fact have always deserved self-respect, where self-respect is defined as "you allow yourself to be happy." Being kind to yourself and allow yourself to be happy (and therefore to succeed) is hard for someone who believes "I deserve to be poor" or "I am too fucked up to win" or "I can't do this." It's a huge grief to let that victim self of yourself go and move past all that. It's really hard.

I see this in others too. Some people get a little bit of success and that victim self of theirs becomes vindictive and they become a tyrant. No one likes that. They became their bullies and I see that in a lot of business people. It's like the CMO who hands out PPC math questions to prove to himself that he knows how to run ads, when the people he hands those PPC math questions, weren't applying for a PPC role. A bruised ego really shows.

Others, like my CPO, have a hard time accepting that he's on the cusp of becoming wealthy. He is anxious about this new reality and avoids meetings, saying he's busy but, in fact, he is avoiding the possibility, that he can succeed. He is holding himself back from winning, because it'll be a big mental shift in who he is. He'd rather have it fail and wasted his time, then to succeed and figure out what to do next, as it is totally unknown to him.

So yeah, don't rewrite shit. If they can't do the work, it's on them. Others were able to succeed from it just fine. and you're totally right @Jamaica0007 , much of business is all personal, emotional, relationships, and social. I'm still noob in business and a mentor/friend of mine who has been running his business since the '00s does it with grace, even during hard times or when he's upset. I respect him for that. That's a CEO. I also allowed a buddy of mine to rent from me. He has an irritable side to him and, guess what? Two years later the property manager has to kick him out because the city inspector is so scared of him, they had to call the cops to escort the inspector for the inspection. I learned that irritability shows signs of disrepect and entitlement, which are red flags. That guy fucked so much shit up by his entitlement that the property was not profitable for two years. So yeah, it's all the emotional and social things that makes people succeed in business. 100%.

 

[uzz]

I feel like 80% of SERPs would improve if G would just de-rank Forbes, GQ, NYMag, USA Today, CBS etc for things they are not obvious authorities in. The fact they haven't done so, even with previous "hiDdEn gEm" and SERP diversification-oriented updates means that these sites are apparently beyond reproach.

Well Google did give them a 'timeline' to remove/audit all the parasite shit they have on their site. We'll see come a couple months if anyone does anything.

 

[Jamaica0007]

I see this in others too. Some people get a little bit of success and that victim self of theirs becomes vindictive and they become a tyrant. No one likes that. They became their bullies and I see that in a lot of business people. It's like the CMO who hands out PPC math questions to prove to himself that he knows how to run ads, when the people he hands those PPC math questions, weren't applying for a PPC role. A bruised ego really shows.

Not going to lie, I can start to see that attitude in myself sometimes. You can see the disinterest in other people about what you say or the dismissive behavior and part of what has driven me in the past is the drive to prove others wrong.

I have never become a bully but I have dressed up as a clown and danced in front of their place of business to demonstrate I was right and they were wrong (jokes)

I have found over the years that the satisfaction of proving someone wrong is never as good as you believe it is going to be and it is always better not to say anything, I have found people respect me more.

Stands to reason, whenever someone rubs my nose in being wrong, all they do is make me not like them more than I did before.

***Unless its Facebook or other social media where being obnoxious is a basic requirement

 

[Jamaica0007]

Something that Google could easily do for a few points towards making themselves useful again is to prevent the millions of redirects that Microsoft has setup that just goes to their generic landing page.

What is the go there? I have noticed for the last 6 months at least that Microsoft must have cleaned up a bunch of content they no longer want which I do not have an issue with but what really gets up my nose is that they should not still be ranking in the number one spot for keywords in an article that has not existed for 6 months to a year.

You can legitimately select from millions of different search terms and end up being redirected to shop landing page:
EG: I do a search in google using the following search term which is pretty clear in its intent and it forwards me to a page trying to sell me a surface pro.

microsoft search bar not working

Notice if I do it too many times then I get the following message:
{"reason":"fraud","clickId":" a082ab7503854bc19d8105de9fc93de9"}

Bit rich considering they are the ones sending me to irrelevant pages from the search I made.

 

[devise]

ThatFitFriend has been getting talked about a lot since Google is punishing it in the latest update.

https://thatfitfriend.com/

Any ideas of what's going on here?

Jake has EEAT and all the articles are well written.

 

[Ryuzaki]

ThatFitFriend has been getting talked about a lot since Google is punishing it in the latest update.

https://thatfitfriend.com/

Any ideas of what's going on here?

Jake has EEAT and all the articles are well written.

It’s already been discussed on the previous page of this thread. You might find something useful there.

 

[Zoro]

Will be fun to know what these updates are about and what they did to the SERPs.

I got three different sites in three different directions and all got the "0 filter" aka no obvious penalty, no spam penalty, site and posts are still indexed but google doesnt show them to anyone so impressions and visits are down to one digits.

 

[devise]

Great summary!

GP seems like worse content. So does a lot of similar fitness sites I see in the industry.

Yeah, that is a good example.

This is what I'm seeing first for "Best gym shoes":

https://www.gearpatrol.com/fitness/a433299/best-gym-shoes/

They have unique images of the shoes, but there's zero proof at all that they used them and there's zero proof of EEAT or even names of those who tested the shoes.

There simple isn't the things Google claim there should be. Only thing is that Gearpatrol for some reason has trust with Google and thus can do everything they want.

I guess for GGR it's the authority of the YT channel?

That said, if you want to see how a similar site raised the stakes and basically did what was asked check out https://www.garagegymreviews.com/.

500.000 youtube subscribers, 8 years Youtube channel.

Exactly! It makes no sense how these well written smaller publishers are getting hammered.

Google clearly needs an insanely strong backlink profile or you are don't get to rank.

He's still outranked by those shitty magazines though and that's really a problem.

In a better SERP, these kind of niche sites should be top and maybe 1 or 2 of the magazine sites, so that people can get the "big brand" opinion if they trust that more.

That's a good point about the reviews.

I also want to point out the difference in professionalism when comparing these two sites. Thatfitfriend.com is nothing but reviews, Garagegymreviews.com has a lot of DIY and info content and it is displayed prominently on the front page.

These two sites are fundamentally the same, but one is simply better executed. In a better world, these would both be the sites in the top, because they're just better than Gearpatrol, but I also feel as if it is quite easy to see why Google would prefer Garagegymreviews.

It's getting ridiculous.

You really need authority and backlinks.

All about brand building.

The level required to match Google's current long term good graces is extremely high and likely requires a significant capital investment.

 

[JOoa0ky]

Since everyone else has been getting wrecked... does that mean the price for links from sites that haven't gotten hit should be going up?

 

[Trump]

You really need authority and backlinks.

All about brand building.

I think so, too.

Like, almost, always - it's just down to backlinks.

We can deep-dive as much as we like into on-page and tech SEO. But from what I can see in my niches, the clear winners are sites that:
1.) Have great backlink profiles. They all have powerful links from reputable magazines or institutions that the common man rarely have access to.
2.) Have been in the game for a long time, compared to the others. With only a handful of exceptions.

I guess this is a natural development, due to the influx of AI-sites and garbage affiliate sites. To combat this, they choose to boost "reputable" sources - no matter how good or bad the content really is.

The majority of my niche sites (that are completely different in topic) gets beaten by one big site. It's a "best of"-affiliate site that's been around for years. It was one of the first big affiliate sites in my country, so they have links from all the big media sites and other authoritative sites.

Their UX is the worst, they don't actually test the products and their "reviews" are just re-writes of the product description. Every article is written by "Editor staff" and would score 0% in EEAT (if that was what most SEO claim it is).

But they have age and backlinks - and that's why they are winning.

Without good content, without a fast site, without social presence, without what people think "EEAT" is (I believe EEAT is just backlinks, which they have) and without showing that they tested the products themselves.

 

[Encrypted]

ThatFitFriend has been getting talked about a lot since Google is punishing it in the latest update.

https://thatfitfriend.com/

Any ideas of what's going on here?

Jake has EEAT and all the articles are well written.

What’s going on here?

It’s simple.

For stuffs like the HCU, Google does not and cannot manually “police” every content website on the internet. It’s IMPOSSIBLE.

What THEY CAN DO is manually review a small sample of the web (usually the spammiest websites), to create a profile for the algorithm to automatically penalize sites that matches this profile to a certain degree.

So even if you have the most excellent content site, if a number of factors are weighted heavily in the profiling (e.g, TOC, high Ad-density, number of “Best” in title, e.t.c) and you don’t pass them, you will get punished accordingly.

But I’m giving Google the high quality hands-on reviews that they claim to want to reward. Why is my content quality not overriding everything?

Well, it doesn’t work that way. Google can’t read, remember?

And they’ve probably never manually visited your website. So they don’t see your content or know you exist

 

[Smith]

Here's an interesting interview that some of you might get value from...

TL;DR: Create high-value content focused on helping users. Hard to say how much of this is real or whether this is a covert attempt at seeding the idea they don't do any optimization (can you tell I'm cynical?). In either case, the site is interesting and can be a source of inspiration for establishing EEAT. Interestingly, they focus on community and YouTube... but they don't do link-building or structured interlinking for optimization purposes.

Site being discussed: https://www.rtings.com/

AH interview:

 

[devise]

My only site that saw an increase in this latest update was built on a domain with an extremely strong links.

50% of the content is pure AI. Google doesn't seem to care.

If it was a new domain with new links. No way would this rank.

I think so, too.

Like, almost, always - it's just down to backlinks.

We can deep-dive as much as we like into on-page and tech SEO. But from what I can see in my niches, the clear winners are sites that:
1.) Have great backlink profiles. They all have powerful links from reputable magazines or institutions that the common man rarely have access to.
2.) Have been in the game for a long time, compared to the others. With only a handful of exceptions.

I guess this is a natural development, due to the influx of AI-sites and garbage affiliate sites. To combat this, they choose to boost "reputable" sources - no matter how good or bad the content really is.

 

[BakerStreet]

Here's an interesting interview that some of you might get value from...

TL;DR: Create high-value content focused on helping users. Hard to say how much of this is real or whether this is a covert attempt at seeding the idea they don't do any optimization (can you tell I'm cynical?). In either case, the site is interesting and can be a source of inspiration for establishing EEAT. Interestingly, they focus on community and YouTube... but they don't do link-building or structured interlinking for optimization purposes.

Site being discussed: https://www.rtings.com/

AH interview:

Thanks for the imbed.

I disagree with you, that they're advising people to not focus on optimization. Paula joined 7 years ago and she said the site structure was created before she joined. They also said that they let writers choose internal linking. It sounds like they created a company culture that seeks to give value to users first and foremost, and the technical optimization aspects were already operationally in place, which is why their employees are free from worrying about it. That's what it sounds like to me.

I agree with RTINGS that creating content that's valuable for users is the first and foremost goal of any content publishing company. They did it so well that their brand is trustworthy and their community wanted to pay them. They also differentiated their brand, by doing long term testing and keeping their products around. The fact that they still own their products years later is fucking cool. They also have a huge operation to keep content up-to-date. I'm very impressed with their operations, content and just pure product management wise. The fact that they had a team of (who knows how many people) focused on bringing value to the reader means that they instilled a good company culture. You really gotta repeat the same thing over and over again to instill it in the culture and "what value does this bring to the user" was a fucking good question.

I also think it's fucking cool that RTINGS support their employees with in-house developed tools. They are under good management. Because the employees are well supported, Paula doesn't worry. That's great employee branding. A good workplace doesn't start at HR. It starts with good managers and good owners.

I also sense that Mark was quite limiting in mindset and should have asked more about the company culture. He was so focused on technical things that he limited the conversation. With a content based business, you scale with people and RTINGS scaled while keeping quality. That's hard AF to do!

I'm gonna ask my team how our content brings value to users. First thing we're changing is those damn FAQ items in PDP that were just there for keyword coverage, while not being useful at all for someone making a buying decision!

Damn. I just checked out one of their articles! https://www.rtings.com/soundbar/reviews/hisense/hs2100 HOLY SHIT! That's better than ConsumerReports content quality! They fucking tested it at a scientific methodology level! Damn! That's fucking good! I get why they are not worried about Google. People who find out about this brand will go back here for a purchase research! That's fucking awesome!

 

[Smith]

I disagree with you

Not sure why you would disagree?

I said, they "don't do link-building or structured interlinking". I'm referring to the fact that they don't use silo structures intended to pass link juice through the website in a hierarchical structure. Based on what Paula said in the interview, they do not do this.

As for the site being developed seven years ago, I took her comments to mean that they developed a custom CMS seven years ago - not that they developed the perfectly optimized site structure seven years ago.

That said, custom CMS vs WordPress would be an interesting test from a ranking perspective since a custom CMS could suggest to the algo that a site has received higher investment and is therefore (possibly) of higher quality than most spam sites. I think someone (maybe @bernard?) talked about custom CMS as a ranking factor elsewhere.

(who knows how many people)

THIS was the biggest question mark for me after the interview. I wasn't 100% convinced that they have a massive team of researchers/writers/etc.

So I checked out Linkedin. They have "55 associated members" of the company on the platform, which typically includes current and past employees if I'm not mistaken. And, given that this is a tech/gear review company, I'd expect almost 100% of employees to be on Linkedin.

So, that probably means that Rtings has somewhere between 35 to 40 current employees, which could include contractors and full time. And this seems to be supported by their hiring page...

This is a totally useless data point to most people. But I find this interesting when you consider their traffic and the revenue you would need to sustain a staff of this size in a benefits-heavy jurisdiction like Canada... not to mention FRENCH Canada where they soak up benefits like maple syrup at a late Sunday brunch.

BUT... I think they skipped over one MASSIVE contributing factor to their performance in the SERPs, which is their massive bank of UGC.

These guys have basically built their own Reddit for reviews, on their website... look at the number of comments in each of the categories:

TV & Projectors: 44,292 comments
Cameras & Printers: 1,754 comments
Laptops: 1,326 comments
Headphons: 8,400 comments
Sounbards & Speakers: 3,956 comments
Computer Peripherals: 3,595 comments
Monitors: 16,125 comments (WTF really!?)

(Edit: I just realized that Rtings... a review site... has more comments on their forum than BuSo has in total!?)

They can talk all day about creating value for users... and YES their content is fucking awesome... BUT, they skipped over their biggest asset IMO, which is the fact that people are coming back directly to this website and engaging in their forum, creating content (UGC), and showing Google this isn't a spam website that is just trying to rank affiliate links.