I noticed that a strong comment from Google’s VP of Search, Hyung-Jin Kim, at SMX Next in November 2022 has largely gone unnoticed by the SEO community up to now.

He stated (my emphasis):

“E-A-T is a template for how we rate an individual site. We do it to every single query and every single result. It’s pervasive throughout every single thing we do.” He also said, “E-A-T is a core part of our metrics.”

E-A-T, and later E-E-A-T, are frequently mentioned among SEO professionals. Most will quickly claim that they aren’t part of any Google ranking system. Statements from Google representatives also support this. These are quality principles provided to human evaluators whose reports help ensure the ranking systems are returning the best results to the SERPs. Evaluators are given a copy of the Search Quality Rater Guidelines.

I shared the SMX Next quote in about five forums and chat groups. Each has an audience ranging from hundreds to thousands. I focused specifically on the second quote stating that E-A-T is a core part of Google’s metrics.

How could it be applied to “every single query and every single result” if it's not integrated into the ranking algorithm?

I speculated that it might be a post-delivery quality assurance process. The steps could potentially include:

• An AI mechanism analyzes signs of expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness across each page in the index. By now, they may have incorporated Experience as well.
• This evaluation occurs continuously during crawls of the website and other sites that reference or link to it.
• Each factor receives a numerical score that can change with each crawl.
• Each component of a SERP — snippet, carousel image, and URL result — would carry such a score. This score should hold significant value compared to the results beneath it and on subsequent pages during infinite scroll.
• Clearly, SERP results are chosen by distinct ranking systems, so I theorize that E-E-A-T serves as a post-event quality check.
• Therefore, it doesn't hinder SERP delivery speed. If negative trends appear, they’re studied thoroughly, and either the ranking systems are adjusted or the E-E-A-T criteria are refined.

I might be completely off base here, but interpreting the Google researcher’s words isn’t the main point of this article.

Of the numerous SEOs who might have seen my invitation for discussion, only about five responded seriously. They are long-time friends, and I’ve met three of them multiple times in person. Other replies were light-hearted jokes, sarcasm, or general doubt toward anything coming from Google. Then silence.

Where has SEO curiosity gone?

I’m stunned that an unusual statement from a Googler hasn’t sparked further conversation, even when I tried bringing it up recently.

Whatever happened to the classic SEO curiosity around guessing the "200 ranking factors?" Authors used to survey the SEO community to identify and rank major ranking factors. We loved adding our own insights to the collective knowledge.

A lot of energy and interest is currently directed toward building flashy tools using Python, especially those incorporating AI. Some of these efforts seem like reinventing the wheel.

Daily discussions revolve around SEO tools. Is there truly a better tool for keyword research, as marketers claim? Can AI writing tools genuinely benefit all areas of SEO?

There’s no shortage of self-proclaimed experts growing their email lists by offering to reveal their "secrets." A great deal of misinformation is being passed off as truth.

We've lost the early pioneers who meticulously analyzed every search engine patent and attempted to relate it to their observations of the SERPs. I miss visionaries like Ted Ulle and Bill Slawski, who would dissect algorithm updates and try to determine ways to avoid getting caught in Google’s filter.

Be more curious

SEO curiosity isn’t entirely gone. Using the E-E-A-T example, many argue that these elements don’t belong to Google’s ranking systems. It’s fine to remain skeptical of statements made by search engine spokespeople.

Direct your curiosity into investigation. You may choose not to share findings if they're inconclusive. Still, we recently saw Cyrus Shepard examining 50 websites to find correlations between certain website features and winners and losers after a Google algorithm update.

Shepard found “experience” was one of the characteristics present on “winner” websites. But haven’t SEOs been repeating the idea that E-E-A-T isn’t part of the ranking algorithms?

Maybe not directly, but whatever algorithm examines experience sends a positive signal to a ranking algorithm. Since relatively few pages are product or place reviews, it makes sense to maintain an Experience algorithm separate from a ranking algorithm.

I'm fortunate to observe a curious SEO, Daniel K. Cheung, develop a matrix of E-E-A-T attributes for auditing a page. So far, he’s found it necessary to assign each attribute a numeric value to indicate some contribute more to a page than others.

For instance, an attribute could be the presence of a video showing the author using the reviewed product. This might carry more weight than a still image of the same scene. Whether Google’s actual method is more complex doesn’t matter. Such curiosity inspires ideas worth testing.

Be skeptical

You might contend that Shepard’s sample size of 50 isn’t sufficient. That’s fair. One of the big SEO tool providers could use their crawlers to examine a million websites and confirm whether they agree.

Don’t wait for a tool company to run the study — pick 100 or more sites and test on your own. Repeat until you’re ready to publish your results.

Contributing authors are invited to create content for Search Engine Land and are selected based on their expertise and contribution to the search community. Our contributors operate under editorial supervision, and contributions are reviewed for quality and relevance to our readers. Their opinions are their own.

The above is the detailed content of Are we becoming less curious about SEO?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!