Today Bill Slawski (@bill_slawski) talks with Jeff Byer (@globaljeff) on the current state of SEO, Google Patents, and understanding the way Google interprets ambiguous queries. Bill is the Director of SEO Research at Go Fish Digital and is very generous with his time and knowledge.
About Bill Slawski
I answer questions #SEO #Search, #SemanticWeb, #patents, Director of SEO Research @gofishdigital, Juris doctor.
Blog: SEO by the Sea ⚓
Bill Slawski Speaking Engagements 2019
Mentioned in this episode
Quality location visits
How Google May Interpret An Ambiguous Query Using a Semantic Interpretation
Query intent using contextual histories
Edge of the web episode with Erin Sparks
GS1 Web Markup Tool for GS1 SmartSearch
Location Extensions Augmented Advertisements
How would Google Answer Vague Questions in Queries?
How Google May Interpret An Ambiguous Query Using a Semantic Interpretation
Bill Slawski’s Hardest SEO Quiz You’ll Ever Take – 2018 Edition
Bill Slawski Reply: OK. TF-IDF is term frequency & inverse document frequency, which have nothing semantic built into them. I do use co-occurrence of meaningful phrases on pages that rank highly for the same query terms to build semantic topic models because those are related semantically.
Latent semantic indexing
(Wikipedia) Latent semantic indexing (LSI) is a system search engines use to analyze the other words people use surrounding a given topic. LSI keywords are words and phrases with a high degree of correlation to your target topic. Google’s algorithm uses them to help determine content quality and relevance to the search term.
Bill Slawski wrote about it on an Inbound.org thread:
Latent Semantic indexing was invented and patented in 1990, before there was a web.
It was developed to help index small (less than 10,000 documents) databases of documents that didn’t change much (like the Web does).
There have been a number of companies that started selling LSI Keyword generation tools that promised that they could help identify synonyms and words with the same or similar meaning.
Where those fail is that the LSI process requires access to the database (of documents) in question to calculate which words are synonyms – and the only people with access to Google’s database to do that kind of analysis (which isn’t possible anyway since Google’s index is much to big and changes much to frequently) is Google.
Jeff Byer: 00:08 Welcome to Digital Rage, the podcast about all things Internet and the people that make it great. My name is Jeff Byer and today I talk with Bill Slawski. If you don’t know, Bill Hill is an SEO expert. He answers questions about SEO, search, semantic web and, and patents. Google patents specifically. He’s the director of SEO Research at go fish digital. And he’s just a really nice guy and very smart. That today was was a, was a fun episode. It was very good, informative
Jeff Byer: 00:41 Learning basically how search engines work and how they think and how they have evolved. So the topics that we discuss in order is bill’s history, how he got into web and SEO. Talk about GS1 Schema. GS! Is the company that originally invented barcodes and they have, they have been the first ever creator of third party Schema. And so I was looking at implementing this into my own ecommerce websites to just to, you know, experiment and take a look at it and the structured data tool and, and beyond and see if [inaudible] can output that information even further than just regular Schema goes. We talk about quality location visits about Google rating, a visit to a physical location and how that is going to affect your results and how it interprets the quality of a location. There’s a ton of go in there.
Jeff Byer: 01:52 We talk about semantic interpretation of an ambiguous query. Bill gives great examples of what happens when you search for something that is not detailed and you don’t have any history of searching for it in the past and don’t have any, any history at all. What does it do with that different, with that very vague search term and how the search engine tries to understand what it is you’re looking for. All the research. And he has a pretty in depth article on it with a diagram of his model of how a search engine would work through that problem. So definitely something, something very important to, to read and find out, especially if you’re in c s e o and you want to make sure that all of those signals are, you’re all those intent and semantic signals. And you know, the, the way that you’re searching, the way that you’re providing your information to people who provide vague search queries.
Jeff Byer: 02:56 So very good there. Query using contextual histories and we talk a little bit about the, the controversy of lily re posted or retweeted a, an article that that bill was quoted in, which is debunking the TF IDF myth. And we go into detail on that and bill mentions that he’s creating a SEO myths blog post, which I’m looking forward to reading. That’ll be fun. So with all of that said I don’t have much going on here at Jeff Buyer Inc other than, you know, continually trying to clean up all of the references to Jeff Buyer Inc. I’ve still got the buyer, buyer, Co social media and the Jeff Buyer Inc. So for media it’s getting a little confusing and I’m just trying to stick with one and abandon the others. We finally got a Po, a project done that took over a year. It was a simple refresh of a local flooring business and I, it was just on the back burner for so long.
Jeff Byer: 04:10 And after I had the company do the floors in my office, I was like, Oh God, I really gotta just hunker down and do it. So I did it. And I think it looks incredible at that scored almost a hundred across the board on the lighthouse audit that we did. It’s, it’s just static and there’s not a lot of content to it and it’s a great platform if they wanted to start a content strategy and really nail the, the local results for flooring anywhere in Los Angeles. So that was a fun project and I’m sure I’ll be working on that and mentioning it more in the future as their, their SEO and web needs evolve. So beyond that, we are in the middle of quite a few projects and I’m excited about sharing them with you once they’re far enough along to share right now their Photoshop mockups in, in my folder.
Jeff Byer: 05:10 So I think that’s it. I’m not going to bother rambling on. I will be posting a video tutorials. The first tutorial is my website launch process and a website audit process. So this is my first dip into the process, the video world of offering content about my processes. So there’ll be fun, hopefully educational for you and if not, it will be a good learning experience for me. I’ve never really put myself out there before in, in video format, so it’ll be an experiment and we’ll see how it goes. So looking for your support and your, your constructive criticism. I’ll word it that way. All right, that’s it. Let’s go talk to bill [inaudible]
Jeff Byer: 06:00 Lasky. Thank you for listening. Today we are talking to Bill Slawski, Bill Slawski is an STL expert. He answers questions about SEO and search through Twitter.
Jeff Byer: 06:14 And I’ve also about semantic web and Google patents. We use the director of SEO Research at go fish digital. How are you today?
Bill Slawski: 06:24 Good. How are you today?
Jeff Byer: 06:26 Doing well, thanks. So just briefly, I know you’ve been a in SEO since 1996 just for a brief history on how you got into SEO.
Bill Slawski: 06:40 Okay. So 1996, I had a friend who was bored with his job is a service manager at a car dealership and he said, I need to do something new. And I was reading a book on how people were incorporating people in Delaware as business and acting as a registered agents through the corporations. And I suggested that to him. He said, well, that sounds good. Separately. Sounds like something I need a website for. I said, no problem. I also just picked up a book on how to learn html two weeks. So two weeks later I had website forum.
Jeff Byer: 07:21 Yeah. Yeah. It sounds like we took a little bit of the same path I was at USC at the time and they were handing out pamphlets of, of literally three pages of how to write an html webpage. Yeah. Just simple static html. And I thought it was great and that’s how it all started for me. Yeah.
Bill Slawski: 07:43 Ah, so I was working in the US, the court system and Delaware and they were having us go through the evolution of the web. We, we had a mine, Oh yeah. A map of the Internet. That was your introduction to email.
Jeff Byer: 08:03 Wow. [inaudible]
Bill Slawski: 08:06 We were using dump terminals at that time to add stuff to recruits database. So we ended up switching over to pcs, which were web accessible. It’s a dumb terminals. Yeah. So we were learning bet the web, I’m learning bad email can go, things like that at that job.
Bill Slawski: 08:34 So teaching people how to use the web while learning how to use it myself.
Jeff Byer: 08:39 Okay. That seems always like a good learning tool is teaching other people. Yeah.
Bill Slawski: 08:45 Is it something that tried to do with my block? Yes.
Jeff Byer: 08:49 Yeah. So now you’re a self-professed you’re for fun. You read Google Patents, is that correct? Right. Yeah. I’m very curious. Yeah. So and this is helped out a ton of people, especially me and SEO, just to understand how search engines work, modern search engines work. So it’s more that your insights bring a lot more to the table then, you know, than any previous information that, that you would get online, which is, you know, from keyword stuffing to buying backlinks to all that stuff you’re saying now it’s smarter than you
Bill Slawski: 09:33 Usually a lot of myth on the web and a lot of misinformation. I’m trying to come back there.
Jeff Byer: 09:38 Yeah, yeah, there, there is. So the first thing, so you had a, you were on on edge of the web with Aaron Sparks and you’ve mentioned [inaudible] Schema. And it’s the first I’ve heard of it. And so this sounds like a huge deal cause I, I knew about gs one from, you know, consumer products. So, so when did this become an official standard and is this something that is, is a, it’s being implemented in, in current e-commerce?
Bill Slawski: 10:12 Well to give our listeners a really brief introduction and g s one during the company that first came out with barcodes. So when you go to supermarket in skin food products and they use the machines, do you read the prices? And so on, those machines are in barcodes. So she has swan has been involved in commerce need Chalmers for years. They take them to be charmers to try to
Jeff Byer: 10:41 Yeah,
Bill Slawski: 10:42 Make that work better. They introduced something they called g tans, which are a multi number of codes that products have. When you go to like an Amazon, you’ll and you look for g 10, so you’ll find Prac g chains. They’re like the digital version of barcodes.
Jeff Byer: 11:03 Okay.
Bill Slawski: 11:03 They help identify where something’s from, how much it cost and so on. So gs one got involved with Schema. They introduced the world to the first extended Schema. Schema is a process. [inaudible] Was developed by Google, Microsoft Yahoo and Yandex join mayor to provide machine readable information on a website and on news sites that search engines could read and understand and get a different view of products or more precise view. Often using something like Jason LD Marco, which is attribute name value. It’s, it’s, it’s not quite the bag of words type thing you see on a webpage where there’s no real format. It’s not a, what pages aren’t too structured. Right? Schema tends to be really structured and makes it easier for a search engine to be sure that’s what your page is about if you do it right. Yeah. So [inaudible] said, well, we did this stuff for barcodes and collars offline. Let’s do something for commerce online. Let’s come out with this Schema. And they have a demo wizard that could be used if you want. If you run an ecommerce website and you want to include information about your products and how they’re shipped and so on, it, it goes into so much detail, include stuff about what things are packed with, what allergens
Bill Slawski: 12:59 Potential allergens they might be packed with.
Jeff Byer: 13:02 Does that also carry with it where it’s sold and, and inventory type that up. [inaudible]
Bill Slawski: 13:10 If you’re, if you’re running the commerce story, you’re the one who is providing information about what is being sold. It’s being sold on your website. Right. But it, it provides lots of information about products themselves. Okay. And the wizard is supposed to make it easier for you to present that information on you website.
Jeff Byer: 13:35 Okay. And do you know if any e-commerce providers, cloud-based e-commerce providers have been implementing this?
Bill Slawski: 13:43 Gs One is a nonprofit you works with lots and lots of consumers around the world. And I think the number, at least in the very tens and tens of thousands, if not more. So, so they, they work with lots of websites.
Jeff Byer: 14:03 Okay. Okay. So as the reason that was so interesting to me is that I, you know, if, if there is an implementation of it, I’m not seeing it in the structured data testing tool and I’m not seeing it in a backend systems like woo commerce or Shopify and wondering why that is. Is it too new? Is that something that’s going to happen later or is it something you just need to do manually?
Bill Slawski: 14:30 Well, the gs one extension came out I think about two years ago.
Jeff Byer: 14:37 Okay. So,
Bill Slawski: 14:40 And Schema is something that at this point, it’s being updated monthly. So you’re not going to see necessarily see
Bill Slawski: 14:53 Product website tools that are built timely for schema updates. It’s, it’s something that needs me there needs to be some flexibility. Just like people do all plug in into popular CMS systems. It’s a way of, of of providing the newest implementations to those products. Well, it’s ideally with
Bill Slawski: 15:26 CMS is may need for Schema.
Jeff Byer: 15:30 Yeah. Yeah. So we’ll move from, from gs one scheme at two quality location visits. This patent that you, that you wrote about what’s involved there.
Bill Slawski: 15:44 Okay. So who spend about being a mobile location history information and it’s tied to using a gps information or cell tower triangulation or Wifi access information to navigate from place to place. [inaudible] Google to have some idea where you’re at and to do things like prop you to upload that pictures, just took to a Google maps to let people know more about the business you’re at, where you took picture.
Jeff Byer: 16:21 Okay. And so this patent is, was it specifically where they’re going to modify search results based on your GPS history?
Bill Slawski: 16:35 Would they say it was they’re looking at visits. You make two places and whether or not they can consider those raise, it’s a quality visit. And for instance, if you go to a sit down restaurant, you spend five minutes there and you leave, that’s not quality visit to that type of restaurant. If you go to McDonald’s, order at the counter, grab your take out and go and you spent by minutes, it’s quality. Revisit that at restaurant. Right? Right. So, so it depends button type of business you’re visiting as whether or not it would be considered a quality visit. And they can track where you go, how long you wait. If you see knowledge panels where they tell you which times place are busy at and the most popular time for people to visit, they’re using that GPS information and knows. And so, so this isn’t too different. The idea that these quality visits might be used as a indication of a place being popular of a place being someplace people might want to go to. And, and there’s likelihood that people might visit if it’s close enough to them.
Speaker 6: 18:00 [Inaudible]
Jeff Byer: 18:01 And is this unique enough to be patent worthy? Wouldn’t other providers be, have the same access to this data? Like apple [inaudible]
Bill Slawski: 18:13 And apple did file patent in bed four or five years ago. There’s talks about them using a GPS information to rank businesses on maps. So they’ve been there already. Goose is different enough so that it’s not quite the same thing. Okay. That they’re protecting different processes. Like the apple pen doesn’t talk about using quality visit score. It just says we can use a GPS information track where people go in which places the go too much back Murray.
Jeff Byer: 18:53 Okay. That brings up another general point that that I wanted to ask you about is how do you feel about all of these Google patents being filed in the, in the day and age of, of open source and sharing information? Is, is there, is, is Google protect protecting itself or are they litigious in any way as far as seeking a copyright infringement?
Bill Slawski: 19:23 Well, the patent process is supposed to protect businesses and it’s supposed to protect the public. It protects businesses by giving them a license or giving them exclusive rights to use the process big patented, and they need to go through a adversarial process with the patent examiner to get them pans approved. So the pants need to be new, not obvious and useful. And those are sure at the lowest level of the requirements were patent. So they can’t just be something that people already been doing. Right, right. So they can’t patent things or public domain already or common practices. So they think you become up with something unique and innovative and the trade off to the public is these pen pander filers are required to publish patents so that the public can read them and the public can talk about them, which is true why I felt it was important than me write about these pants because if, if they’re written and the standard they’re written too is so that somebody learned in, in the technologies, the retinue bad and understand it. So it’s not, they’re not written for the public, they’re not written in such a low level, then you can teach them in kindergarten. Right, right, right. So, so if somebody writes about a certain change in process, the writing to people who build search engines or who work with search engines all the time,
Jeff Byer: 21:15 Right. And you help discern that information and bring it to the public in a more readable way.
Bill Slawski: 21:20 Right. I’m, I’m, again, I’m not teaching elementary school kids that build the search engines. I’m not, she ness you. Is that a build search engines? I’m assuming some knowledge on their part,
Jeff Byer: 21:34 Yeah. For a digital marketer to help understand how things work in the search world. Right. Okay. So, yeah. And, and you know, I know that I’m a coauthor on a couple of patents and they do, you know, we got very in the weeds as far as explaining how our process was different than anybody else’s. This was a long time ago. It was a flash content management system. So that’s how old it was.
Bill Slawski: 22:01 And sometimes the use of words isn’t really intuitive. For instance, when Google writes about advertisements, they don’t refer to them as advertisements much. They refer to them as content.
Jeff Byer: 22:17 Huh. Okay. So it didn’t matter if it was paid or not, it’s just content.
Bill Slawski: 22:21 It’s just content right there they’re talking about I see a ICO patent title with the word content in it. I know it has something to do with paid search.
Jeff Byer: 22:33 Oh Wow. So, I mean, are they referring to organic search or something else?
Bill Slawski: 22:40 Sometimes there might be something that comes out, like, like there was a pattern that came at, ran two months ago that talked about location extensions in a paid search where we’re, if you, if you we’re advertising something and it involved a local business, you could pay for what was the location extension, which means you can show other things with your ad like a map. Okay. And that’s usually something that only really happens in local search these days. Who, yeah. But there they’re extending the contact with additional search features. They’re all manually.
Jeff Byer: 23:34 Okay. And so there have been in your your translation of these patents, have you ever seen I patent pursuit by Google to see somebody from doing something similar. So like DuckDuckGo has to have a lot of the same features, right?
Bill Slawski: 24:00 Think about, you know, beyond history and all these cars with all these round steering wheels, they weren’t so in each other to stop making round steering wheels.
Jeff Byer: 24:11 Right, right. Okay.
Bill Slawski: 24:14 There are, there are limits and I’ve seen
Bill Slawski: 24:19 Google, Microsoft and Yahoo all come out with things or very similar, not exactly the same. They worded them differently, they described them differently, but the results were ultimately the same. Like, like a segmentation of content on a and this not advertisements on a webpage. Like what’s mean content in a a news site, you’ve got multiple stories. So you’ve felt multiple blocks of information about different things and being able to distinguish each of those blocks and that refers to something different and being able, we’ll segment that is something that’s important for a search engine to be able to do. Right. So Microsoft got to the point where they’ll and Google where those show pictures associated with the new story in search results. They’ve been able to identify the pictures that go with the content that go with the story.
Speaker 7: 25:29 [Inaudible].
Bill Slawski: 25:29 Microsoft actually came out with something they called block-level page rank, which said that they might, if they wanted to, they might be able to associate links with specific stories from specific blocks and give those links more weight than other links that may appear in the same page that might be like in navigational blocks on the page.
Jeff Byer: 25:55 Yeah. And I was talking to Cindy Krum about that on a, on a previous podcast about the the, the deep linking to to what she referred to as Frankel’s on a page. So that not only is Google being able to grab the content from the page, they’re also able to grab a deep link to where that content is.
Speaker 7: 26:18 Okay.
Bill Slawski: 26:21 At the gate used to call named knackers Frankl.
Jeff Byer: 26:26 Yeah, I liked the term. Okay. So we talked about quality location visits. The other, you, you posted a article and also tweeted about it and answered a lot of questions about, but a semantic interpretation of an ambiguous Curie query. So is I know that there’s contextual histories that, that we’re going to come to next, but on, assuming that Google doesn’t have any, any information about the searcher, how would they interpret that ambiguous query?
Bill Slawski: 27:06 So some questions people ask, inquiries are vague. And the example that was in the patent was how long is Harry Potter?
Speaker 7: 27:17 And
Bill Slawski: 27:20 If I asked you that, I don’t know how you would answer duration, really duration. Duration of what?
Jeff Byer: 27:29 Of the movie of which movie, you know? Yeah. That’s how I’m beg was saying
Bill Slawski: 27:33 It’s a movie. It is. Are they asking about movie? Are they asking about certain book? Did Disney come out with the Harry Potter ride? Are they asking about how long the ride is? Is there a podcast on Harry Potter? So it’s ambiguous. I don’t know. So search engine doesn’t know. It’s got to say, okay, what are they likely asking about? So they’re, they’re going to go through and, and I refer to it as mantic interpretation because they’re going to try a semantic approach to answering that. They’re going to say, okay, your query has an entity in it. Harry Potter. Harry Potter is a movie character of book character a potential ride. Some somebody people talk about, he’s a character, he’s a certain number of feet and inches tall. He lives a certain number of years. Are they asking how old is Harry Potter when they ask, how long is Harry Potter? Are they asking how, how tall is he?
Bill Slawski: 28:46 Those are all reasonable. And so they’re trying to come up with which question is the best answer that we can provide? Which topic answer pair is the type of thing that p a person most likely wants to see. They’re probably talking about one of the books, how many pages or one of the movies, I mean minutes. So every time I’ve done that query in Google, it’s shown two or three of the Harry Potter books and lengthy or two or three of the Harry Potter movies and lengths of time. Because there’s assumption is this person probably wants to know about the movies.
Jeff Byer: 29:34 Right? And so what, so the only information that it can draw from that is the character and the, the different forms of media that the character was in to, you know, try and create this from this one query, create this universe of information about that one specific character, and then bring about what would be the most popular [inaudible]
Bill Slawski: 30:00 Nope, the one most likely to meet the intent of the searcher. So that’s why it was an intent question. It was a, and they’re, they’re trying to do it semantically by understanding who’s in your question. What did you mean when you mean Harry Potter? When you ask Harry Potter? Another example was in same patent was how old is Washington,
Speaker 7: 30:29 Right? And [inaudible]
Bill Slawski: 30:32 The first step you got take there is for you what they mean when they say Washington. Do you mean Washington DC? Eight Washington state. Abraham, Washington. Denzel Washington.
Speaker 7: 30:43 Right, right.
Jeff Byer: 30:44 So so that brings us into contextual histories. So how do those tie in?
Speaker 7: 30:51 Okay.
Bill Slawski: 30:54 It’s actual mysteries.
Jeff Byer: 30:58 I interpreted it as that there is a history of the type of searches that you have done in the past and that creates a content a context or possible subject matter that would narrow it down.
Bill Slawski: 31:18 There are a number of ways to interpret contextual history. One of them would be a way of search engine interprets to query pizza. If you’re asking about pizza during lunchtime or dinnertime, you probably want to know where the closest pizza follower is. If you’re asking at a different time, 3:00 AM you may still be [inaudible], but you may want to know something about the history of pizza.
Jeff Byer: 31:48 Okay. So
Bill Slawski: 31:50 The context matters in the asking in question and location may matter too. So if you’re asking from a mobile device, you’re in some place where there might be lots of restaurants. Again, you’re probably asking about where the closest place you can get pizza is.
Jeff Byer: 32:11 Yeah, correct. If you’re, you know, pretty much anytime of day pizza’s good anytime of day. So, okay. I know this, you know, you laughed when I mentioned this before we started recording, but the conversation with Lily Ray about a article that you were quoted in about TF IDF and how it does doesn’t fit. So title of the, of the, the article is actually a little misleading why TF IDF doesn’t solve your content and SEO problems, but it feels like it does. So first of all TF IDF, how did, how did, so I’ll, I’ll just tell the audience term frequency, inverse document frequency is what that stands for. How did this become a thing?
Bill Slawski: 33:07 So term frequency is something they came around in the 1950s and it was the idea that you look, the number of words that appear in document and the words that appear the most, or either what the page is bad or their, what’s considered stop words, words. It appear frequently in language like the, our end. So you eliminate the stop words. The next words that appear most regionally are likely with the pages about. So inverse document frequency is the idea that it’s an idea. It came around in the 1970s 72, it was the idea that you could use a statistics and repetition of language to better understand the language itself. With the most commonly used words are with the rarest words are. So if you have a document that is rare in terms of how many documents actually include that word, there’s a term that frequently appears in that document. So the page, your page, your document is about that word. That means you have a page that’s frequently about the term. That’s one of the rare pages that terms appears. It should be page that ranks highly in search results because of that,
Jeff Byer: 34:51 Which is, which is the myth. And this is what led to a lot of keyword stuffing back in the day.
Bill Slawski: 34:59 Well, it’s that part of it’s not necessarily myth. TF IDF is something that’s likely been used by search engines. It’s, it was probably something that was replaced in a number of search engines by a more advanced algorithm called BM 25 which, which search engine like alter of Easton in the late nineties, probably switched over from one to the next. And it’s possible the Google never used df idea as something that ranked with beaches. They probably use some more advanced [inaudible] 25 they possible use a TF IDF in some of the other processes. And I’ve seen Google pans referring to TF IDF. Like there’s one bad query refinements. The when you do query you might see a list at the bottom of your search results that tell you other things that are related to what you searched for that people also search for. And that’s partially derived by process like TF IDF.
Bill Slawski: 36:18 Now, one of the, one of the things that happened at Google in the past couple of years is they’ve gotten better at natural language processing. They, they can have machines read documents and tag them with stuff like parts of speech with entity recognition process. Other things that tell them more about those documents than a TF on the f program ever did. It’s old technology and they’ve been replacing it. They’re, they’re using names like Bert and Elmo is to the algorithms. So there’s a sesame street now, algae there, but it is all technology and there they’re using newer stuff.
Jeff Byer: 37:33 I can’t find it. So anyway, it was, it was something about that that it was it was used in a very small amount of documents like 10,000 documents and not meant for something as big as, as what the web is.
Bill Slawski: 37:51 It’s, that’s Liens, mannequin vaccine, which is lung mythology rent too.
Jeff Byer: 37:57 Yeah. Latent semantic indexing. There we go. And so so and so Leighton Smith endings indexing is used by, by search engines or was correct. It’s unlikely. Okay.
Bill Slawski: 38:16 It was developed in the late 1980s by bell labs and it was used to help index static document collections like a, the panic sample included talks about indexing eight books with material. And one of the limitations on liens mimic indexing is that every time you add new information to an index that you’re using Elyssa and you need to run the indexing process over again. We know the web changes all the time and frank basis, people add comments to things, people publish new things, people delete information. So for a search engine to use lane’s make indexing, they would have to tell us like to stop searching for a couple hours a day so they could catch back up. Right. And that’s not going to happen. Right.
Jeff Byer: 39:21 Okay. So so you’re currently writing an article about all these myths. When do you expect you’d be publishing that?
Bill Slawski: 39:30 I’m not sure. I’m going to turn that in sometime really soon.
Jeff Byer: 39:34 Okay. Well, we’re definitely looking forward to that. So there was one more question I had for you. So in preparation for our talk today, I was looking through and I took your hardest SCO quiz 2018 edition. I dunno, it was asking you if you were planning on a 2019 edition.
Bill Slawski: 39:57 I can Mike, I’m not completely sure I’ve done all your additions and I was a little bit disgruntled by the fact that people were saying the PA there were too many pants in the test. It was more of a patent test than it was an SEO test.
Jeff Byer: 40:20 But that’s what you do. That’s what I expect from Bill Slawsky. Right.
Bill Slawski: 40:25 That’s all. So I’ve been thinking, I did do a newer version. I need to get some patents out of there and just ask questions about search process. It’s, I mean I write about church processes in patents. I don’t need the patents to write about search boxes or to have them in the quiz.
Jeff Byer: 40:51 Yeah. And your understanding of the patents is a adding to your overall understanding of how search engines work, right. Which is where the, where the, the bulk of people are getting are gaining value from your content. So
Bill Slawski: 41:09 If I, if I write sovereign Bennett search engine process and there’s a pen behind it, I can link to the patents. And if you don’t believe what I’m saying about the search engine processes, you can read the patent and say, okay, yeah, Google did Polish that. That did say that. [inaudible]
Jeff Byer: 41:27 Yeah. All right.
Bill Slawski: 41:30 So just having that foundation, that support reinforcing what I write I think makes a difference.
Jeff Byer: 41:37 Yeah. Citing your information and your, that’s another thing that you’ve been talking about. What you’ve talked about at the top of the show is verifying the information that you get online and, and that’s, you’re doing your part by verifying the information that you’re providing by showing the link to the patents that you’ve been referencing.
Bill Slawski: 41:56 Right. Show supporting evidence. It makes what you write stronger.
Jeff Byer: 42:00 Yeah. And it’ll give you a lot more authority and, and trust as, as you write things that are crazy. Yeah. All right. We’re over time. Where can people connect with you, find you, follow you and ask you questions? Well, they can
Bill Slawski: 42:21 Find me on Twitter. It’s bill underscore Slawsky SLA, w. S. K. I, they can find me on Facebook. It’s a bill Slawsky is in the URL for that. They can find me on linkedin. It’s a Slawsky. I publish couple times a month. I’m trying to do a little bit more frequently and SEO by the sea.com. I blog at go fish digital website, usually about three or four times a month.
Jeff Byer: 42:59 All right. And anything you have to promote now or should we just wait for your your SEO myths article?
Bill Slawski: 43:08 I’m going to be presenting at PUBCON in Las Vegas in October. Very nice. I’m going to be SMXL Milan in Italy in November. Yeah, that’s pretty much my speaking engagements. You arrested a year. All right. This should be fun.
Jeff Byer: 43:39 That sounds like a lot of fun. Vegas and Milan. Yeah. All right, so your video froze up about halfway through, so I haven’t been able to see you in a while, but thank you very much for your time. This has been very educational and I hope we can speak again soon about about new topics and possibly th the SEO myths and the 2019 quiz. All right.
Jeff Byer: 44:09 Thanks for your time though. Thank you for show notes and information. Go to digitalrage.fm. Follow us on Twitter and Instagram @digitalragefm, and please give us a rate and review. Insincerely appreciate it.