Deconstructing Google’s Above-the-Fold Layout Algorithm Change
@intrapromote‘s own @ErikDafforn Deconstructs Google’s Above-the-Fold Algorithm Change bit.ly/IPSEO2 ^MLS
— Intrapromote (@intrapromote) January 23, 2012
Last Thursday, Google announced an algorithm update designed to target pages whose above-the-fold layouts are significantly ad-heavy:
…we’ve heard complaints from users that if they click on a result and it’s difficult to find the actual content, they aren’t happy with the experience. Rather than scrolling down the page past a slew of ads, users want to see content right away. So sites that don’t have much content “above-the-fold” can be affected by this change.
Characteristically, Google declines to say exactly what above-the-fold ratio of ads to content will trigger the algorithm. Instead, it suggests that readers run their own sites through Google Labs’ “Browser Size Tool,” which is designed to show (with rather crudely drawn lines) how a site appears in various resolutions, and what percentage of the browsing public can see various parts of your content based on known statistics of browser resolution distribution. Here, for example, is a shot of the home page of the Christian Science Monitor, pulled on a screen resolution of 1280 x 800 (click to enlarge):
The Christian Science Monitor home page, run through Google's Browser Size tool
The X and Y axes are aligned with various resolutions, and the curved lines represent the percent of users who live within those resolution confines. I’ve outlined the ad locations in red — a horizontal banner at the top, and a block in the lower right. As these two areas are the only paid ad space in this particular version of the “above-the-fold” area, one would infer that the CS Monitor has little to fear from this particular algo change.
As do most sites, according to Google’s Matt Cutts, who penned the blog post: “This algorithmic change noticeably affects less than 1% of searches globally. That means that in less than one in 100 searches, a typical user might notice a reordering of results on the search page.”
JS code from the Christian Science Monitor (click to enlarge)
While trying to sidestep the euphemistic glory of a phrase like “reordering of results,” many people had a common question: How, exactly, is Google determining which content blocks are ads? What about site-specific (but, perhaps, not textual) images or widgets? After all, even Google isn’t immune from snagging a few dolphins in the tuna nets, as multiple updates to Panda have confirmed.
No one’s talking specifics about the technology behind determining which content is ad-based. But my own hypothesis is that since Google is already adept at parsing through JavaScript files, it has a pretty good understanding of the links and code that go into building ad structures, versus other “similar” structures such as a scrolling panorama of images linking to “top stories,” social media assets, and other widgetry.
In short:
- Check your site with the tool.
- Try to look objectively at the content viewable by, say, 65% or so of the general population, to determine whether most people would find the layout annoying or distracting.
- If you have ad blocks taking up “lots” (sorry for the vagueness) of the viewable space, try to scale back, and confirm/deny your results by segmenting your organic traffic and closely looking at measurements such as path analysis and bounce rate.
Google itself took some heat from the furnace of irony in, among others, Danny Sullivan’s column on Friday. Using several screen shots taken by himself and others, he illustrated that for many queries, Google’s own search results page can, depending on the resolution (which defines the “fold”), be taken up entirely with paid advertisements.
But don’t try to confirm that with Google Labs’ Browser Size tool. As Danny’s column pointed out (and I confirmed with numerous tests), one site on which Google’s browser size tool will NOT diagnose is a traditional Google search result. So there.
Follow Erik Dafforn on Twitter:
