Phantom and low-quality user engagement: Hell hath no fury like a user scorned After analyzing many sites that either dropped or surged during Google quality updates, I saw many examples of what I’m calling “low-quality user experience” (which could include low-quality content). Clumsy and frustrating user experience I’ve seen many sites that were impacted negatively that employed an awkward user experience. Lackluster content is not meeting user expectations From a content standpoint; there were many examples of sites dropping off a cliff that contained content that simply couldn’t live up to user expectations.
- I tried to provide a solid foundation for understanding what Phantom is and how it works, explaining its history.
- I’ve analyzed and helped many companies that have been impacted by Google’s quality updates since May of 2015.
- a quick note about what we’ve been seeing this fall so far. September of 2016 was one of the most volatile months in a long time from an algorithm update standpoint.
“It’s also important to note that there’s usually not just one problem that’s causing a drop from a quality update. There’s typically a combination of problems riddling a website. I can’t remember analyzing a single site that got hit hard that had just one smoking gun. It’s usually a battery of smoking guns working together.”