Today, most of us have access to a considerable amount of useful information about SEO. The truth is, along with this good, comes a little bit of wrong news as well. It is never helpful when Google’s search outcome reflects the unwanted data. The SEO experts are always trying their best to find the source of all SEO myths. The million-dollar question is that how does a marketer identify which SEO data is correct when Google search outcomes showcase SEO misinformation?

Finding out which is a fact and opinion-based insight

It is essential to authenticate if a writer is mentioning and linking the content to a sound source. For instance, a Google statement, a research paper, a patent assists in showcasing an opinion as one fact-based insight. Most things are opinion, and it doesn’t matter if there is no evidence to assist it. Sometimes, you need something more than what sounds reasonable. Not everything that Googler highlights is true. It is here you need an expert SEO agency to help you. To know more about this, you need to get in touch with Houston SEO

The Googler statements should have a relevant context

Some people have specific agendas. And hence, they usually tend to mention Googler statements without mentioning the background, to place their plans. Generally, a method comprises planting a little bit of uncertainty and fear to promote a business. It’s not a very uncommon thing for the search marketers to mention that facts in Google often contradict, from time to time.

There are SEO experts who find that Googler statements are consistent. However, they find people’s interpretations as inconsistent. 

Understanding a fact-based insight

Have you experienced a minimal drop in your SEO rankings? If yes, then chances are another page might have become more prominent to users. It could be that the page offers more valuable data and information to the same query, which the users find helpful. SEO experts can say this, as Google has already published official guidance on these updates. One of the common reasons that get used is that the other website was “under-rewarded.” There are many reasons why it didn’t get confirmed. The other common purpose could be that the facts aren’t verified and need more research and analytical assessment.

And not many people had talked about the algorithms that define this situation. Also, no Googler statement has affirmed that the algorithm is fact analyzing. The SEO community feels that today, fact-assessment might be taking place. Can we be sure about Google’s fact-checking? The answer is yes.

Google had its research termed as “Relevant Document Discovery,” especially meant for Fact-Checking Articles. The paper talks about a way that assists in fact-checking articles. It also proposes a method of validating the actual data.

Hence, the claim that Google can be placing a fact-check on medical and health-related sites can be valid. But still, you can’t be entirely sure about it. However, since there’s the existence of this research paper and the likes of it, talks of the possibility.

The question remains the same! How to identify SEO misinformation and avoid it? Though there is no perfect answer to this, you could make use of the following factors to stay aware.

  • Fact-check all that you read

In the article about what got reported at the Webmaster Hangout, make sure to have a look at the cited video clip. When you do that you can determine whether all that you read is correct, or it’s placed to promote an agenda. 

  • Know that correlation studies aren’t always reliable

Usually, the articles that showcase correlation data garner a considerable amount of attention. The data that got obtained from researching on various search outcomes will showcase patterns. And you can’t deny the patterns that get revealed. However, what makes these patterns meaningless is a correlation.

Let’s explain this with an example. Take the specific chunk or percentage of the best three rankings that got published in WordPress. And does that indicated publishing something on WordPress assist in getting good ranks? The answer is no. 

Generally, correlations are flawed. And the meaningless correlations take place every time and are the usual norm. To assign a specific meaning to any data that lacks proof is a big mistake.

That is not all! Also, a correlation study of the SERPs usually comprises of multiple search intents, that won’t reveal valuable data about the new Machine Learning and AI algorithms. The articles that talk about correlation is are usually a clickbait. It doesn’t help much to understand what helps in ranking high in SEO search results. 

Usually, the SEO articles that get based on correlation move towards the wrong conclusions, of what caused an impact. You need to keep in mind two important facts:

  • Data is irrefutable and concrete
  • Data interpretation is refutable and fluid

When you have a research, Google statement and a patent, which certifies of the report getting researched, you can consider that to be correct. SEO experts and SEO agencies will inform you about several techniques to guide you through the process. It will help you in curating your SEO and web content as well. And when you are creating your SEO articles, you should avoid assumptions and guesswork, as that results in SEO misinformation. Proof of validation is essential. And when you provide ample facts to prove what your articles talk about is true, it helps to establish a better audience connection.

The world of SEO is continually changing! The algorithm changes often bring about changes in the SEO strategy that should get aligned with a company’s marketing strategy as well. However, when you are planning an SEO strategy for your new brand or an established brand, make sure that you steer clear from SEO misinformation. Neither should you count on it nor should you try and add to it. The only way to go forward is by presenting verified and valid facts in an informative and conversational manner. It will help your users get the desired answer to their queries. Also, your website will have a reputation for providing only factual and correct data.