If you’re involved in the website building world at all, you probably know about Google and other search engines taking “content mills” for a ride.
I hate saying it’s content mills, because Entrepreneur.com and other websites that weren’t content mills were hit as well. That’s a pretty prominent magazine. What are they doing on the chopping block? A lot of people are questioning why certain sites were targeted (Suite101, LoveToKnow) over other content mill websites (eHow, Examiner).
So I’m taking a look at the top ten most dramatically decreased (according to sources) to see why readers might find the websites unappealing.
WiseGeek
This was listed as number one, with about a 70% drop in rankings.
Here’s a page:

Click on the images for a closer look.
This is a typical page at WiseGeek. Designers will probably cringe at it. It’s pretty crude. The design isn’t pretty. The yellow circled areas are either advertisements or links to get you to click on additional content throughout the website. The pink is the actual content.
Here’s the page: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-urban-planning.htm
On an average page, there’s over five Google text ads, and over five areas where WiseGeek places similar “you may be interested in the following articles as well” type of link placements (whole page navigation?).
Does the content answer the question? Yes, but can you find the answer? It’s hard to read when you’re “stopped” at least four times throughout the article, an ad or links to other pages are between every paragraph.
The content is pretty formulaic. Four or five paragraphs, all about equal in size. Each one has a few keywords. There’s answers, but sometimes you have to work past the fluff to get to it.
This is a website that pays editors to edit the content. How well they do the job may vary from person to person, but it doesn’t matter how well the content is written if I can’t read it.
It doesn’t matter how well the content is written if I’m unable to read the content.
Ezine Articles
One of the “scourges” of the web. People write about whatever they want and hope to get a link back from the page.

I separated navigation from advertisements this time. It’s not so bad until you scroll down the page.
http://ezinearticles.com/?5-Proven-Profit-Strategies-For-Info-Publishing-Success&id=5966966
As soon as the content is over: Ad, Ad, Share this Article Stuff, Links to over 40 different related and unrelated content inside the website, Ad, Ad, Ad.
So over five ads a page, and many, many links to other pages.
Can you get answers from this place? Well, yes and no. Some writers write well. But there’s no editorial process at all. If an article passes Copyscape standards (barely) and looks like it was written by someone who can write in English (barely) the article is published. But without some editorial process, the information is highly skewed to get the person to click on the writer’s links to find out more. And THAT design is heavily “unfriendly” toward the writer because it’s one link among at least a hundred posted.
If you scroll down on the page, even on my big fat screen, it’s a lot of additional stuff below the content, ads and more links to other parts of the website.
Outside of that, there’s content that might vary in size, but most fit the standard “over 300 and under 500″ category.
Suite 101
I’ll pick on my own article this time.

http://www.suite101.com/content/personal-ringtones-on-the-samsung-exclaim-a159864
As you can see, the ads on the left is actually in a bigger font size than the text of the article. The article is interrupted halfway through for advertisements. Navigation isn’t too bad on top, but as you scroll downward, the worse it gets as far as ads. At least seven on this page.
Does the content answer the question? It can, yes. Mine does, others who have written there do answer with knowledge they possess. There’s an editorial process with this website. It’s heavily SEO based, though. Editing grammar problems is there, but there’s a huge focus on keywords in the right places and following what is presumed to be Google friendly.
The formulaic 400 words and under 1000 words intro, fluff, meat, conclusion can happen.
HubPages
If you check out HubPages, the website itself isn’t too bad, but it might depend on which hub you land on.

This one is pretty classy.
http://hubpages.com/hub/WomensFashionsofthe1920-FlappersandtheJazz-Age
So yeah, the top part, about 1/3 of the page is content, the rest are ads, but they are less obtrusive, especially as you scroll downward.
I think I counted five ads, but the amount of content was staggering compared to it. The number of ads, compared to the gargantuan content, isn’t so bad. Top-heavy, yes, but not bad.
But other hubs may show ads inserted by the writer of the hub. The hubs are self service. Anyone can log in and post a hub, and then link it to their own websites, ebooks for sale, Amazon book ads, and so on. If the Hub’s page was unobtrusive with ads, the content may make up for it in advertisement and heavily biased content. The one link posted actually did a pretty awesome job but if you click around, you may see a lot of variances.
Does the content answer the question? Depends on the hub you land on. The person might have been very good, or the person may have posted more ads (Amazon.com ads, links to other hubs, self promotion etc.) with very thin content. There’s not much of an editorial process. Because it’s a crapshoot in an ocean of hubs, there’s room to believe that content may be a big part as to why HubPages is on thin ice with Google.
Your Dictionary
A dictionary, of all things!
Let’s look up a word: Content

So you have less than a full paragraph of content, and three big ads on top. The orange, again, is navigation. The navigation is understandable. So it’s top heavy when it comes to advertising.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/content
But as you scroll down, there’s more content. This is actually content from a legit dictionary. I don’t know off-hand if this dictionary website has permission to publish the content, but it seems like it does.
Does the content answer the question? While the ads are top heavy, there is useful content. The website does answer the question. I don’t know why this one was brought down. It could be users didn’t like it for some other reason. I’d love to hear from people looking at this, what is your opinion? Why would Google be less interested in this dictionary?
BrotherSoft
I haven’t been to this website before, and now looking at it… I don’t know. It’s a software download website, so why is Google lowering it a notch?

There’s ads and navigation problems here. There’s ads riiiiiiight next to that download link. I scrolled down just under the name of the software they want you to download.
http://www.brothersoft.com/eyes-relax-portable-edition-368161.html
This one is a little bit trickier. There’s obtrusive ads, that’s obvious, but look at the green highlighted text. I marked over them in orange in the image, but look at the page.
If you scroll over it, there’s a big ad that pops up. So while you are cruising the website, if you happen to mouse over something, up pops an advertisement.
There’s a paragraph of content, and the download link, but there’s mostly navigation away from the page and ads. On other pages, there’s content like “how to stay awake at night when you have work to do” but instead of content, it’s minor content with links to software downloads.
Does the content answer the question? If you were looking for software, it’s here. There’s downloads. I don’t want to download a program, so others will have to share how safe it is, but with the ads all over, it’s hard to navigate, the ads are obtrusive. I can see why if you were searching for an article, and you got links to software programs covered up by ads, it’d be a little tough to stay put.
Buzzle
Here’s a confusing one:

It’s not pretty… well it’s just really plain. But there’s nothing wrong with that.
Two ads on the page.
Both are after the article and left side navigation.
Below the ads are links and links and more links, not as bad as Ezine but could be a contributor to the decline on Google.
So the real problem has to be the content.
See that place I highlighted, it is a link that goes to another page on the website. I didn’t find it obtrusive.
Does the content answer the question?This one does. I don’t know of the editorial process for this one, but it looks like the workers are not paid. That usually means self promotion. I could be totally wrong about this one though, because I’m clicking on people’s names and I don’t see links to their website, just more of the author’s work on Buzzle.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/birthday-gifts-for-teenage-girls.html
So why do you think Google kicked it down a notch?
Associated Content
Here’s Yahoo’s purchase of the ones solo entity of Associated Content. Most writers will know that AC pays a very small up front fee for content (ranging from a couple of dollars to maybe $20… but I’ve not seen anyone claim to make that much on a single article in years) and now they offer revenue share for writers.
Now the ads are less obtrusive. They are kind of big. Four big ones on this page.

There’s two on top, two on bottom. Here’s the rub: Content can be minimal. There’s very little editorial work being done. As long as the content looks original and looks like English, anyone can write for Associated Content.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/7815722/protect_yourself_part_5_12_tips_to.html?cat=25
Does the content answer the question? It’s up in the air. While the ads are tolerable, and navigation streamlined, the quality of the writing will be subject to whatever whims the writer feels like. If he or she wants to write fluff, there’s fluff. If it’s great, it’s great. It’s just unreliable.
Free Downloads Center
So this one is similar to Brothersoft.

Can you find the download link? It’s next to the name of the software. Took me a minute to find it, too.
More ads and navigation than content.
http://freedownloadscenter.com/Palm_Pilot/Home_and_Hobby/Digital_Photography.html
Now you can’t blame them too much. The bandwidth of an article vs. the bandwidth of uploading and downloading software is a HUGE difference, so to make up for the money they need to operate, they have to do stuff to the page.
But at the same time, it might be risking viewers if they can’t find the download link, or figure out what to read.
Does the content answer the question? If you need the specific software, yeah. It isn’t really content heavy, the most content is on the blog and it just highlights the latest content available.
Essortment
Let me tell you a little store about Essortment. Once upon a time, there was a website that wanted writers to write for them. They paid about $15 or $20 an article, I forget how much, and they asked all sorts of people to write their content for them. Sounds like Demand Studios? It wasn’t. This was before Demand Studios ever existed. I forget the name off the top of my head, but it was something like WriteForUs, WriteForCash, something similar.
But a flood of writers went in, wrote for the website, and then one day, *poof* they said no more, and then they went into dormant mode.
http://www.essortment.com/tips-growing-avocado-53521.html
And that’s where it was ever since. The content was static on pages like Essortment.
I guess one day Demand Studios bought it out, because it is now owned by them.

By web standards, this content is ancient. It didn’t used to look like this, but these are the changes made by Demand Studios. Mostly ads, lots of navigation, content broken up by ads.
Does the content answer the question? Yes. The content is old, but they were evergreen topics, for the most part. You may find outdated content and maybe new content thanks to DS adding more to it, but it’s still there. You’ll have to work around the ads to get to the content. The fact that the content is old may attribute to the lowering of the quality value, according to Google.
That’s ten. There’s some patterns in there.
Formulas are out.
If you’re going to answer a question, answer it. Remove the fluff. Just because you can write 400 words on a topic doesn’t mean you should. You should probably also give room for more words if something requires it. People stuffing “how to replace a 747 jet engine” may need a little bit more room for people trying to answer “how to pick a prom dress”.
Ads need to diminish in size, content needs to be predominant.
Another problem is ad obtrusiveness. If there’s more ad space than content space, there’s a problem. Some websites will have a paragraph on a page, and three huge ads! The paragraph of content will sometimes be enlarged, because it has to be or you wouldn’t notice the paragraph.
Navigation can’t outsize the content.
Also, navigation is important to a website, but overly suggesting other areas to look at with over 40 links and three different navigation tools is confusing. A few mild suggestions is OK. The more choices, the more likely I’ll be confused and will leave the page.
Quality May Vary
As far as quality goes, that’s an individual standard. Here’s a look at something surprising. Yahoo Answers, the “self serve” of content, actually improved in the rankings. Here might be why:
Yahoo Answers

Check this out, one ad (I’ve seen two on there at most at this moment).
There’s the big bold question, with big lettering for the follow up information to the question, followed by a real person answering.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtFOVqf09iEajqApXSCs9lAjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20070529192231AADyRhn
Is there quality in the content? Depends on your definition. These are real people who get very little reward, they just like to help out. This is “forum mentality” where someone asks a question on the forum, and it’s volunteers who answer. Some are extremely helpful. Some are not so grammatically correct. But there’s no formula. No restrictions or qualifications. Just personal experience or knowledge being shared.
Can it be abused? Yes, some people may link their own content to the answer or may have a hidden agenda, but you have back up answers from other real people. Just because you leave a link to your website doesn’t mean it will be selected as best answer.
There’s always a direct answer to the content/question. It may not be edited, formulated or search engine optimized, but it’s an answer. Often short and to the point.
So what do you think internet readers are trying to say about what they want as far as content?