Radar [Part 2]: The Connection to Poor Quality User Experience Why Google's Quality Updates Should Be On Your Algorithmic Radar [Part 2]: The Connection to Poor Quality User Experience Posted: 2020-11-18 google-quality-updates-phantom-lg In Part 1 of this series, I covered a number of important points about Google's (aka Phantom) Quality Updates. I have tried to provide a solid foundation for understanding what Phantom is and how it works, explaining its history, its journey since 2015, and how it unfolded . In Part 2,
I'll take it a step further by providing examples of “low-quality user engagement” that I've seen on sites affected by Phantom. I've analyzed and helped many businesses that have been affected by Google's quality updates since May 2015, and I've seen many fax number list types of quality issues in my travels. Today I will try to explain these issues further and provide some recommendations for sites that have been affected. So fire up your proton packs. There is an ectoplasm to come. Back to school, back to algorithm updates
First, a quick note on what we've seen so far this fall. September 2016 was one of the most volatile months in a long time from an algorithm update perspective. We've seen a serious mix of updates since August 31, 2016. First, Joy Hawkins detected a major local algorithm change that many call Possum in local space. This was combined with what looked like another quality update from August 31st (I cover Google's quality updates in this series). And to add to the already volatile September,