- Feb 2022
-
www.wired.com www.wired.com
-
That’s because setting policy around fake information that’s not seeded by a hostile state actor or a spam page remains an issue platforms are still deciding how to handle. YouTube chose to remove the video; Facebook chose to leave it up, and to leverage the “inform” approach (from its “remove, reduce, inform” framework).
Why are platforms such as Facebook deciding to leave this inaccurate information up on their site? Although Facebook isn't a news site they still should not encourage the spread of doctored information by allowing it to stay public.
-
- Jan 2022
-
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
-
The social media posts started in May: photos and videos of smiling people, mostly women, drinking Mason jars of black liquid, slathering black paste on their faces and feet, or dipping babies and dogs in tubs of the black water. They tagged the posts #BOO and linked to a website that sold a product called Black Oxygen Organics.
Reading this article raises so many questions. First why are people dipping their own body parts into this black liquid that later in the article says is hard to classify but, is basically dirt and why are they also, dipping their babies, dogs, consuming it etc. What benefits is this product supposedly giving them? Why would drinking expensive black dirt help you? Many red flags are raised just from 2 para graphs of this article.
-
- Feb 2021
-
-
If you’ve ever been told, “You need to include {critical keyword} on this page X times,” you’ve seen the confusion over keyword usage in action. Many people mistakenly think that if you just include a keyword within your page’s content X times, you will automatically rank for it. The truth is, although Google looks for mentions of keywords and related concepts on your site’s pages, the page itself has to add value outside of pure keyword usage. If a page is going to be valuable to users, it won’t sound like it was written by a robot, so incorporate your keywords and phrases naturally in a way that is understandable to your readers.Below is an example of a keyword-stuffed page of content that also uses another old method: bolding all your targeted keywords. Oy.
How does Google differentiate if it is valuable to the users experience or not since it cant tell what you are thinking before you type it? I would understand if Google weeded out pages that sound like the one in the example they gave but, what if Google weeded out to much content they thought was invaluable to a user and it hurt their experience or they couldn't find exactly what they were looking for all together couldn't key word stuffing be useful in an aspect where it is not robotic and does flow naturally but, just happens to have a ton of keywords the user is looking for?
-
-
-
When people began to learn about the power of links, they began manipulating them for their benefit. They'd find ways to gain artificial links just to increase their search engine rankings. While these dangerous tactics can sometimes work, they are against Google's terms of service and can get a website deindexed (removal of web pages or entire domains from search results). You should always try to maintain a healthy link profile.
This blurb in Chapter 6 talks about how companies manipulate links for their own benefit and it says they do this to increase their search engine ranking but, wouldn't Google or other search engines be able to tell that it is an artificial link? Isn't there an algorithm or something that weeds out bad links like this especially if it against Google's policy?
-