> Take responsibility for the results of your actions like an adult.

"your actions", give me a break. The parent commenter doesn't own Google, and you aren't forced to use the platform.

Are people on this site really convinced that an L3 Google engineer can flick the "Fix Google" switch on the search engine? I'd hope there were more technical users here.

You said L3 so I was curious. I looked up the guy's LinkedIn [0] and I honestly a L3 engineer would have a lot more context about Google's search. Danny, what do you even do?

[0] https://www.linkedin.com/in/dannysullivan/

I work for our search quality team, directly reporting to the head of that team, to help explain how search works to people outside Google and bring concerns and feedback back into team so we can look at ways to improve. I came to the position about six years ago after retiring from writing about search engines as a journalist, explaining how they work to people from 1996 onward.

That’s impressive! Congrats.

So you're PR

Yes, I believe you are correct.

Before Google, Danny Sullivan was a well respected search engine blogger/journalist. As far as I know, he isn't an engineer. There's no need to be rude.

> Are people on this site really convinced that an L3 Google engineer can flick the "Fix Google" switch on the search engine?

No, it's just when someone speaks on behalf of the company with the terms "we," they are typically addressed with "you." That doesn't mean we think they're the CEO. Are you unfamiliar with this concept? I can send you an SEO guide on it.

You're missing the point; This guy has zero power over what Google does so publicly berating him is not going to accomplish anything.

If you choose to throw yourself on a public forum doing PR for a company doing dumb things and you also insult everyone's intelligence by lying to them, people are gonna be a little rude

"choose to throw yourself"

"a company doing dumb things"

"insult everyone's intelligence"

"lying to them"

That's a little hyperbolic, don't you think? Do you even hear yourself? I fully understand Google hate but directing it at one person who is literally just doing their job (and hasn't lied to anyone despite your allegation) is childish and counterproductive. Save that for Twitter.

Danny has been here since 2008. Your account was created in 2022.

And also, "people" aren't being rude, you are. Own your actions.

No, I'm not being hyperbolic. There is one reason for the SEO algorithm to reward longer articles, and that's ad revenue. To paint it as anything else is lying. And you opened up this conversation extremely rudely with "OMG are you so dumb you think he owns Google."

How long I've been here is irrelevant.

>you opened up this conversation extremely rudely

That wasn't me. Maybe pay closer attention?

>reward longer articles

The age of articles was being discussed, not article length. Maybe pay closer attention?

Actually... you know what, never mind.

The age of the articles was discussed in the original article, but when I was speaking to this engineer, I was talking about the length of articles which is the main criticism levied against Google SEO. I'm aware you didn't read any of it

I followed the thread just fine. You accused me of being rude (it was someone else) and also accused the other commenter of lying. Neither of which are true.

You did that, not me. It's you who seem to be having a problem with understanding the thread.

We don't have a policy or any guidance saying to remove old content. That said, we absolutely recognize a responsibility to help creators understand how to succeed and what not to do in terms of Google Search. That's why we publish lots of information about this (none of which says "old content is bad." A good place to review the information we provide is from our Search Essentials page: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials