Google is constantly updating its quality rater guidelines. These updates are designed to help marketers understand how best to advertise on Google, while also making sure that ads don’t violate the law or advertisers’ policies. Here’s what you need to know about recent changes in Google Quality Rater Guidelines for 2018..
Google has released 5 new quality rater guidelines updates. The updates are important because they provide a better insight into what Google wants from its advertisers and publishers.
Google today revealed five changes to its Search Quality Raters Guidelines (QRGs), and released an updated version of the paper with a changelog explaining each one.
While these standards have no bearing on rankings, they do provide significant insight into the many elements Google evaluates when evaluating content quality.
The standards are also used to teach human search quality assessors, whose responses are benchmarked and used to influence future Google algorithm modifications.
Paying careful attention to changes to the QRG may provide insight about the future direction of Google’s algorithm modifications, as well as the sorts of subtlety it looks for when evaluating content and E-A-T.
What’s New in the October 2021 Update to the Search Quality Rater Guidelines?
- The YMYL category’s definition of ‘groups of individuals’ has altered.
- The method for gathering reputation data for websites and producers has been updated.
- The ‘Lowest Page Quality’ section has undergone significant changes.
- The word ‘upsetting-offensive’ has been revised in the dictionary.
- Throughout the document, there are edits for clarity and consistency.
What does this imply for SEO experts, and what do they need to know about these modifications to the guidelines?
Advertisement
Continue reading below for more information.
1. YMYL Content ‘Groups Of People’
“Expanded the definition of the YMYL subcategory ‘Groups of individuals,’” according to Google.
Previously, Google’s definition of YMYL – “Your Money, Your Life” contained a section on “Groups of individuals” that included data on “race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, nationality, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity,” among other things.
Google preserved those groupings in its definition, but added the categories below to its definition of human groups:
Advertisement
Continue reading below for more information.
- Caste.
- Gender identity.
- Status as an immigrant
- Sex/gender.
- Victims and family members of big violent events.
- Or any other attribute linked to systematic marginalization or prejudice.
This demonstrates Google’s efforts to broaden its definition of YMYL content to encompass a wider range of identities, socioeconomic situations, and other factors.
Because E-A-T is so important for YMYL material, it also means that E-A-T is essential when producing content for any of the following categories of individuals.
2. How to Find Out About Someone’s Reputation
“Refreshed guidelines on how to explore reputation information for websites and content providers,” according to Google.
Google’s phrasing has been updated from mentioning that “stores” commonly include user ratings that may give reputation information to stating that “websites” can do the same.
It also said that a significant number of “detailed, trustworthy, positive” evaluations might demonstrate a favorable reputation, when Google previously just noted the quantity of positive reviews.
The Pulitzer Prize as proof of a favorable reputation for a journalistic website was deleted by Google. In past editions of the QRG, Google has both added and deleted references to the Pulitzer Prize.
Google changed their definition of how reputation should be calculated at the person/website level by adding to the QRG that “biographical information articles may be a helpful source of reputation information for individual writers and content providers.”
They also changed the terminology to “for YMYL informative themes,” rather than “where a high degree of authoritativeness or knowledge is required.”
This is another another example of Google combining YMYL concepts with the highest levels of E-A-T.
Google, for example, took down the comment that “reputation research is required for all websites.” Instead, reputation research is only required “to the degree that a well-established reputation can be discovered.”
Google also asks raters to examine if the issue is YMYL before assessing reputation. User reviews are useful for an online business, but not so much for a medical information website, according to Google.
This is a significant change since it suggests that user reviews may be more relevant for customer-facing websites than for medical (or other YMYL) websites, where the E-A-T may be computed differently.
Advertisement
Continue reading below for more information.
‘Worst Page Quality’ is number three.
“Restructured and revised ‘Lowest Page Quality’ section; rearranged and refreshed samples to suit new structure,” according to Google’s update.
To create its section describing how it estimates the Lowest Page Quality, Google made substantial adjustments.
Most significantly, it clarified terminology and offered particular instances of how a website might damage visitors, propagate hatred, or misinform them.
The following are some instances of these additions:
Advertisement
Continue reading below for more information.
- Users are doxxed on websites.
- Instructions for committing suicide or murder may be found in this content.
- Content that conveys degrading or harmful stereotypes.
- Harmful stuff that is readily debunked by well-known facts.
- Unproven hypotheses that are not supported by facts or evidence.
4. Definition of ‘Upsetting-Offensive’
“Simplified the description of ‘Upsetting-Offensive’ to reduce repetition with the Lowest Page Quality section,” according to Google.
Google revised their definition of “upsetting-offensive” to make it shorter and more succinct.
According to the definition, information should be categorised as “upsetting-offensive” if it may be seen as such by searchers in that location.
The remark that a result should be regarded “upsetting-offensive” even if it fulfills user intent was also deleted by Google.
5. Minor Modifications Throughout
“Minor updates throughout (updated screenshots and URLs, language, and examples for consistency; deleted old examples; addressed typos; etc.)” according to Google’s update.
Advertisement
Continue reading below for more information.
In a blog post announcing the changes, Danny Sullivan, Public Search Liaison, explained:
“We update the rater quality rules from time to time to ensure they’re performing as intended, just like we do with Search.”
He later added:
“Other updates include things like changing the structure and revising the wording for clarity. That was the focus of our October 2021 update, which contained clarifications on what constitutes low-quality material as well as updated and modernized guidelines on investigating a website’s reputation.”
A Changelog Is Included With The Search Quality Rater Guidelines
Since December 2019, Google has preserved a changelog of modifications at the end of the document to be more open about how and when the QRGs are changed.
Keeping up with changes to these standards may help marketers stay on top of Google’s knowledge of what constitutes a good search experience and how to optimize their own content appropriately.
Additional Information:
Advertisement
Continue reading below for more information.
Fonstra/Shutterstock/Fonstra/Shutterstock/Shutterstock/Shutterstock/Shutterstock/Shutterstock
Images in the article were created by the author.
Google has released 5 new quality rater guidelines updates that will be implemented in 2019. The updates are designed to help marketers build a better search engine, and they also provide more information about the ranking algorithm. Reference: google search quality guidelines 2019.
Related Tags
- quality rater google
- google content quality guidelines
- search quality evaluator guidelines
- google: seo updates list
- search quality rater
