This is how search engine optimization is changing

Search engine optimization is a craft in constant change. Trying to predict the future is often a hopeless task, yet it falls upon the SEO specialist to try to future-proof their work. One way to do this is, of course, to learn from history. Here are a number of major changes that have occurred over the years.

One important thing to keep in mind when looking at how search engine optimization develops—especially from a global perspective—is that Google often reacts rather than acts. When a tactic becomes very effective and popular to the point that Google’s search results become skewed, Google responds in one way or another. Take the guest posting craze of recent years, a method that quickly gained popularity for building links. When it was used to such an extent that Google (I assume) felt it was damaging the search results, they reacted. This can be compared to Panda, which was a way to deal with so-called content farms in the search results, or when they cracked down on link directories. All of it is a reaction to something being ‘overused’.

In this post, I will cover a number of major changes and skip over some that haven’t had much impact. Many, for example, talk about Hummingbird (one of Google’s later updates) as something that needs to be taken into account, but in my view, its impact on search engine optimization deserves more of a ‘meh’ than the trembling voices caused by Panda and Penguin.

Panda, February 2011

It’s impossible to talk about major changes in search results without mentioning Panda. As the first algorithm update from Google to seriously use machine learning, the big, heavy panda landed like a bomb in the search results. Sites previously valued at hundreds of millions were wiped out overnight. Thin pages became the most dangerous thing you could have on your site—something that previously hadn’t mattered at all.

Back then, content was king, and the more content you had, the better. More pages could rank in more search results, and people used all sorts of methods, like indexing search results or hiring very cheap labor in the third world, to produce massive amounts of landing pages. Panda effectively put a stop to that, and when it was rolled out, it affected 12% of search results.

Penguin, April 2012

Penguin was Google’s next major filter and was just as devastating as Panda for an industry of SEO professionals already shaken. Just like Panda, Penguin caused major upheaval in the search results, and once again, big companies that had been confident in their superiority in the rankings saw things fall apart. Both updates clearly show that the old truth about not putting all your eggs in one basket still holds in the new economy.

While Panda targeted site content, Penguin cracked down on aggressive link building. Many had built far too aggressively (for what would work after Penguin—though it had worked before), even though there were reasons to be cautious even before Penguin. Sitewide links and one-sided anchor text were the primary targets.

Link selling rule, October 2007

Many believe that this “rule” has always been part of Google’s webmaster guidelines. That’s not true. In October 2007, Google added to the guidelines for webmasters that selling links on your site was something they disapproved of. Shortly after, a series of PageRank downgrades were rolled out, which likely primarily affected toolbar PageRank (the value shown in Google’s Toolbar, not the value used to rank the site). Initially, this primarily affected sites that explicitly advertised that they were selling links.

The death of link directories, October 2008

Link directories were a popular way to build links before 2008, both in Sweden and abroad. It was also something Google actually encouraged in their guidelines. The guideline that could be read in the document looked like this: “Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.”
In October 2008, Google decided to shift from recommending link directories to warning against them. Overnight, they went from being something Google thought was good to something they felt the need to warn about, as it could lead to worse positions in search results. Before this date, link directories, often many of them, were something used frequently. Afterward, they became something to be used with caution.

EMD Update, September 2012

We haven’t seen much of this in Sweden as compared to English-speaking countries, but we can at least sense it. Google’s Exact Match Domain update. Something that had previously given a significant advantage to those working with search engine optimization was having a domain that exactly matched the search term. It still offers benefits, but not in the same way. The difficulty for Google lies in determining what is a company’s name and what is just a commercial word. It makes sense for Brath to hold the top spot when searching for Brath, but it’s not as obvious that domains with names like Insurance, Loans, or One-Armed Bandits should rank first for those terms.

Florida, November 2003

Florida was the first update from Google to gain celebrity status. Many at the time called it an anti-SEO update. Around that time, doomsayers began declaring that SEO was dead.

Do you think any updates are missing from this list? Let us know.