Google Search SEO: Indexing, Mobile-First, and User Intent Optimization

Key Quotes

"I think the one that stands out the most to me at least the one that's coming to my mind right away was the one where we did dramatic readings of the SEO starter guide just because the format and the concept was so uh silly and unhinged and it was also one of the first episodes I joined in as a guest and I remember being a lot more nervous about that than I am today and since then it's been several years and we've recorded so many more episodes not just as a guest but as a recurring host"

Lizzi highlights a memorable episode where the team performed dramatic readings of the SEO starter guide. She explains that the unusual format and concept made it stand out. Lizzi also notes that this was one of her early appearances as a guest, contributing to its significance for her.

"in fact starting in late 2016 google has begun experiments to primarily use the mobile version of a site's content for ranking parsing structured data and generating snippets three years later uh we got to do another episode on the seo starter guide uh because we picked up a project um to revamp it um it's a document that's i think in the top three of uh page views for our site uh and it just hadn't received much love in like 10 15 years"

Gary discusses the importance of mobile-first indexing, noting Google's experiments began in late 2016. He then transitions to the SEO starter guide, explaining that a project was undertaken to revamp it. Gary points out that this document is highly viewed but had not been updated for a significant period.

"I feel very conflicted about documenting antipatterns because we perhaps also give ideas about like new worries for site owners to think about i mean you've done myth busting presentations in the past one of the things in our myth busting presentation is that using any other google product will not influence your rankings in google search but the antipattern thing it's imagining what our users already know and should we address that like hey they might have heard this or read this thing before and so we should tell them like hey actually you don't need to do that or by absence of information is that enough"

Cherry expresses a conflict regarding documenting antipatterns, concerned it might introduce new worries for site owners. She contrasts this with myth-busting, where the aim is to clarify misconceptions. Cherry questions whether addressing potential user knowledge of unhelpful practices is beneficial or if simply omitting information is sufficient.

"so doodles and delight can you tell us a little bit about what does it mean to be the lead of google doodles are you hand drawing them are you uploading them to the search results page what is involved there okay yeah sure so i lead up several teams that are devoted to bringing joy to our users and our audience and so there are doodles which hopefully you're familiar with but they are the changes to the logo that we've done since the beginning of google and that sometimes have interactive games or experiences behind them and sometimes just bring you to a related search page"

Jessica Yu explains her role leading teams focused on creating joy for users through Google Doodles. She clarifies that doodles are modifications to the Google logo, which can include interactive games or experiences. Yu also mentions that some doodles simply direct users to related search pages.

"why why why is scoping so stupid in javascript it's not stupid come on just because it's slightly different from most programming languages doesn't mean that it's stupid it's counterintuitive that's true okay i give you that point it is counterintuitive thank you hoisting i think that comes back to historical reasons should we actually explain scoping and hoisting before we go ahead"

Martin Splitt and John Mueller discuss JavaScript's scoping and hoisting. Martin questions the perceived "stupidity" of JavaScript's scoping, while John acknowledges it can be counterintuitive. John suggests that hoisting is likely due to historical reasons and proposes explaining these concepts.

"so with traffic usually what you want is to have it convert in case of search documentation or developer documentation that would be complete some action as a result of reading the documentation and if they are for example reading the wrong kind of documentation because we optimized for something that we shouldn't have then they are not going to be able to complete said action and i think we have quite a few examples for this but one prominent one was the removals documentation if you think about it there are at least two tools maybe three um where you can remove search results for example those three tools documentation should be optimized differently for different keywords so they attract the right kind of traffic from search engines so that the people use the right tools for what they are trying to accomplish"

Lizzi explains the concept of "converting" traffic in the context of documentation, meaning users complete a desired action. She highlights that optimizing for the wrong keywords can lead to users reading irrelevant documentation, preventing them from completing their tasks. Lizzi uses the example of "removals" documentation, suggesting different tools require distinct keyword optimization to attract the correct audience.