An Insight Into The Google’s Feedback Process
Danny Sullivan, from Google recently explained how the company listens to feedback from the public.
Sullivan posted on X, sharing screenshots of a document he sent to Google’s search team.
The document revealed his user interactions, including their thoughts, concerns, and suggestions.
Here is Google’s inner workings reveal the company’s awareness of the challenges publishers face.
So, now let’s look at the top concerns raised by users.
Table Of Content
People First Content
One of the key issues discussed is the concept of “people-first” content. Many users worry about making content for users, not just to please Google. Sullivan recognizes the challenge. “To please us, don’t think about us,” he advises.”
He thinks Google should find better ways to tell publishers this message.
Additionally, he recommends refining guidance around publishers comparing themselves to top-ranking sites.
“We also need to recognize that our search results are, indeed, an effective part of our documentation. I9.People do look at them to see what works – or what they can get away with.
Our guidance even encourages people to compare themselves to other pages in our results – something we probably need to amend to say something like I covered in this post: Do a search, and look at the sites that come up. Those are what our systems find helpful. That said, the systems aren’t perfect. So if you see a site that seems to be doing things against our guidelines, it might not be successful in the future.”
Dominance By Big Publications
The next concern raised by the Google Search team is the dominance of large publishers in search results. Some publishers seem to rank well on any given topic. This has led to the rise of what Sullivan calls “parasite SEO.”
““Over and over, people noted large publishers that seem like they can write about anything and get rewarded…
Related is the idea that “parasite SEO” sites win, sites that lease themselves out to third parties and then content ranks on these sites that would never succeed on a different site.
This differs from big sites winning for original (but not necessarily people-first) content, but the two get conflated.”
Sullivan Also Addresses The Lack Of A “Helpful Content Tool”
He suggests creating a tool to evaluate if a publisher’s content meets Google’s standards for “helpful content.”
Many publishers are unsure about what Google defines as helpful content. So, this tool could provide clarity and guidance in this regard.
Some publishers fear that a single page with “unhelpful” content could negatively impact their rankings…
…even though Google’s guidance states that a site needs “relatively high amounts” of affected unhelpful content.
Clarity on this matter is essential to alleviate the stress on publishers.
Google’s Search Liaison engages users and addresses publisher challenges to improve search quality. With active listening and improved communication and tools, Google aims to improve the search experience for users and publishers.