<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Getting a grip on social signals in  search</title>
		<description>Discuss Getting a grip on social signals in  search</description>
		<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 08:05:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://searchnewscentral.com/feed/com_content/114/Page-1.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Critchett says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-365</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think you're right. So far, as far as the social thing goes, most people in the conversations on the net are talking about sort of a "social takeover," where massive retweets from authority tweeters and shares on Facebook are huge factors in rank. But, I agree with looking at what we KNOW NOW, and what's working, and trying to determine how the social signals fit in and how we can calibrate our approach if needed to align with new signals.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Critchett</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-365</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Uttoran Sen says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-241</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Facebook and twitter has a huge userbase, and basically the real use of links from the search engines point of view is votes. But when it comes to linking, most people do know that it will affect the search engine value if one links but the same is not true for a regular facebook guy. He just shares, out of his own free will, with out thinking of any consequences. Hence a facebook share or like is a lot more natural and it comes from the everyday "Joe" and not from some blogger or website owner that knows what linking means... some day the search engines will give more value to a social vote, but at this moment, a no follow twitter link is just as useless to a search engine (ranking), as a link from wikipedia. of course both has traffic, and sometimes they bring organic links as well, when someone finds and links to us from there...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Uttoran Sen</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:20:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-241</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Marjory says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-234</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, I think that depends. If all you're going to do is tweet your latest deals on windows, then only zombies will follow you. But if you're going to really interact with other Twitter users and share interesting content, then probably more will follow. However, whether that will get you any more sales in windows is a whole other issue. I'm guessing not so much. Maybe if you hooked up with other home improvement types (linkerati - with blogs that could write about you or let you guest blog) you could get collateral links but I'd have to say overall, that I'm not sure I'd recommend a heavy-duty twitter strategy to a local HVAC or replacement window contractor. I think you'd get more out of sponsoring local events and getting listed in local directories or guides. So, would we expect that Google is taking niche into account or will they just blindly give a local window replacement contractor higher rankings because he happens also to be an amusing guy with lots of followers on Twitter?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Marjory</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-234</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jim Ryan says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-233</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Another social media reality has and will always be in play. The business category. Who follows a local HVAC retailer or replacement window contractor on Twitter or Facebook?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jim Ryan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-233</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Harry says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-229</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Tad - well, as with any 'testing' we can really never truly know how any factor is being employed and the associated weights therin. There's what? 10k factors total last I heard? Personalization  is definately going to play an important part of the melding of PageRank, social graph and other elements IMO. At the end of the day social is just another marketing channel that plays nicely with search. We simply need to keep our heads on until we have a better idea of just how it's being used (Google for instance is using for RTS, News and entities from what I know). @Marjory - right, personalization  will be key IMO as will TrustRank type concepts. That's where the social graph elements come in. We shall see where it all leads. I just wanted to put my little ol finger in the dyke as the buzz, ingorant and misguided as it is, has been swelling of late. Of course, as with most of my attempts, it will be futile. At least I have these posts to use as "I told ya so" later on down the line.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Harry</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 01:46:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-229</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Marjory says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-228</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, it seems to me that if there was any impact of social links on SEO, it would have to depend on who was doing the linking which kind of adds a level of complexity to the problem of sussing any effects out. For example, if David Harry shares a link, it's probably more important than if I share a link and that might be more important than if xPornstarX shared a link although that might also depend on my social network profile. If it was a porn link, I might not be as authoritative. I tend to interact with SEOs, foodies, and scuba divers. If I decided to share a link about CD rates (or porn), I might be disregarded (assuming I'm not being disregarded anyway which is very likely the case). Of course, those 'link building videos' that Garrett French had were a little porno. :-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Marjory</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:11:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-228</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tad Miller says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-227</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm definitely a creator of noise around this subject. But I'm in agreement that a signal isn't necessarily a ranking factor. I find it amazing that no one has been able to quantify specifically how these signals might be impacting rankings. Maybe they have figured it out and just aren't sharing, but I think the more likely scenario is that the Algorithm is becoming much more situational and personalized and less concrete treating all search queries equally. I've been trying to crack the code myself to see what the impact on social links on SERPs is. What I've found is really inconsistent data so far. SEO is evolving with the integration of Social, I don't see the "blurring of the lines" myself. Chuck Berry evolved into the White Stripes - it's still Rock and Roll. The same is true with SEO 5 years ago and SEO today.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tad Miller</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:58:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-227</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Marjory says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-226</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Entities - sounds very geeky. Thanks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Marjory</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-226</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dev Basu says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-225</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Dave - I'm glad you did because I find site architecture sexy too! Some of the social media proposals I see make me want punch a hole in a wall.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dev Basu</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:17:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-225</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Harry says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-224</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Marjory - most certainly 'entities' (yer word for the day) are also something I believe they'd be interested in. We can even look at the purchase of Meta-Web last year as further interest. Interstingly enough, we also talked about that some with Danny in the podcast. As you noted, citations (essentially an entity) are being used so moving that towards the social graph also makes some sense. @Dev - hehe... well, I am still a SEO geek at heart and actually do find things like architecture pretty damned sexy!! I just had to finally say something because I was choking on my tongue with all the 'social' hype over the last year. I guess peeps just want to get paid to sit around on twitter all day huh? tee hee...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Harry</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/20110117114/Technical/social-signals-and-search-engines.html#comment-224</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
