Google has announced an upgrade to the Keywords report that’s available in Webmaster Tools. The report now features a daily update of the most common keywords that Google found while crawling a web site.

And each keyword is linked to another report that details up to “10 top pages” where the keyword was found.

It’s a nice improvement over the previous Keywords report, but if I’m being picky, I wish it wouldn’t just show one-word keywords. Seems like there would be even more value in surfacing multiple-word combinations here.

A year or two ago, Google hosted a webmaster chat even every few months. They were designed to allow webmasters to see presentations from Googlers on web search and SEO topics and then ask questions to Googlers, who would answer those questions in real time.

The Google Webmaster Central blog announced the first new live chat event in over a year. This event is named the “Holiday Webmaster Webinar” and takes place a week from Friday, November 13th at 10:00 am, Pacific Standard Time (GMT -08:00, San Francisco). Again, this is the first one since October 2008.

This meeting is hosted by Senior Search Quality Engineer Greg Grothaus, and AdWords Evangelist Fred Vallaeys. They’ll be discussing a range of webmaster best practices and useful Google tools followed by a Q&A session to make sure you and your site are well primed for the holiday rush.

The meeting number is 574 659 815 and the password is webmaster. To access the event:

1. Go to https://googleonline.webex.com/googleonline/j.php?ED=133402392&UID=0&PW=db339c4e641e0f525412171e5646
2. Enter your name and email address.
3. Enter the meeting password: webmaster
4. Click “Join Now”.

To join the teleconference only call-in toll-free number (US/Canada): 866-469-3239 or call-in toll number (US/Canada): 1-650-429-3300.

My piece this morning, Google Removes PageRank Data From Webmaster Tools from the Search Engine Roundtable has sparked a lot of discussion on Twitter. Google had indeed removed the PageRank statistics from Google Webmaster Tools. I believe it was removed when Google released the Webmaster Tools Labs features earlier this week. PageRank being pulled from the crawl stats, has gone mostly unnoticed until I wrote about it this morning.

Susan Moskwa from the Google Webmaster Central team explained it was removed because Google keeps telling webmasters “that they shouldn’t focus on PageRank so much.” They felt it was “silly” to keep telling webmasters that, and at the same time show it in Webmaster Tools. So Google removed it from Webmaster Tools. I think this is a good thing, since I agree it is obsessed over too much, plus what Google showed in Webmaster Tools was not very useful to webmasters.

But I really think Google has to take a stronger stance, if they indeed want webmasters to not obsess over the score. At one point back in 2007, Google asked webmasters about removing PageRank from the Google Toolbar for this exact reason. The conversation and discussion ultimately died with no recourse from Google. I personally would like to see Google remove the PageRank score from the Toolbar as well. Yes, the Toolbar shows page by page PageRank score, but we all know that Google shows out dated PageRank data in the Toolbar, plus it is often buggy.

I think, Google should either make the data accurate or remove it – just like they did in Webmaster Tools.

For more about PageRank, see our article named What Is Google PageRank? A Guide For Searchers & Webmasters.

Google Webmaster Tools has just launched a “labs” section, where you’ll find new features that may be early in the development cycle and not quite as robust as the rest of the tools. The features available so far are Fetch as Googlebot, which lets you see exactly what Googlebot is served when it requests a URL from your server and Malware Details, which shows you malicious code snippets from your site if it’s been flagged as containing malware.

Fetch as Googlebot

Of most interest to webmasters, SEOs, and web developers is likely the Fetch as Googlebot feature. You can specify any URL on your site and see the HTTP response (header and contents) that the server returns. Simply  indicate the URL and click the Fetch button. It may take a few moments for Googlebot to access the page and return the results, since it fetches the page in real time. (Refresh the page to see the progress.)

Click the Success link once it’s been processed to see the results.

How is this different from simply looking at the source code of the page?

• You see the HTTP header information at the top. This information is generally easily available through tools such as Live HTTP Headers, but isn’t contained in the source code itself (since that information is coming from the server, not the page).
• You can see if the server is returning any of the page information differently than the page has been coded.
• You can see if the server is returning something different to Googlebot than what other users see. This tool uses the same user-agent and IP range as Googlebot when it crawls the web, so if the server is configured conditionally for user agent or IP address (typically known as “cloaking“), you’ll see  what’s being conditionally served to Google.
• You can use the tool to test changes (particularly things like redirects) in real-time.

Note that this tool won’t necessarily show you the content that Google is able to extract from the page. If the page contains JavaScript, for instance, you’ll see the raw JavaScript code contained on the page, not the rendered view visible in the browser. Which, unfortunately means you can’t use this tool to determine if Google is able to access content contained in rich markup.

What’s this about cloaking?

This tool can help you determine if the pages are being cloaked to Google. This may be useful if you’re coming into a project late and aren’t sure what’s been previously done. It can also help uncover if your site has been hacked. Back in 2006, Googler Matt Cutts and I did a show on Webmaster Radio during which we talked about how in some cases, a hacker might add links to a site and then cloak those pages so that the site owner never sees them. Only Google does. At the time, Matt suggested using Google Translate (and choosing English to English) to see what Googlebot was being served, but this tool can now more easily serve that purpose. Matt confirmed this to me this morning: “The biggest use case is just debugging site issues. Of those, the biggest case will be hacked sites. Some attacks will hide content until search engines fetch the page (and some attackers add a noarchive tag so that the search result doesn’t have a “Cached” link), so a site could look clean to the website owner. Using this feature will site owners verify that there are no hidden links in the page that Google actually fetches.”

How do I test redirects?

If you’ve implemented redirects, you can use this tool to test how Googlebot will interpret those redirects without waiting for those pages to be crawled. For instance, when I fetch www.searchengineland.com, I see that the redirect is correctly implemented as a 301 and points to searchengineland.com:

You can also use the tool to troubleshoot URLs listed in the Crawl Errors > Not Followed report. You can also test these URLs using something like Live HTTP Headers or by trying to access the URLs in a browser, but if neither of those methods uncover the problem, this tool can help determine that the issue is specific to Googlebot. You can also use this tool to verify that fixes you’ve made to redirect errors uncovered by the Not Followed report have really solved the problem.

(Note that the tool currently has a limit of 100kb per page. However, this is for the tool only and doesn’t apply to Googlebot’s normal crawl of the site. Google is monitoring feedback to see if many site owners find this size to be limiting.)

Malware details

The Google Online Security Blog has more information on the malware details tool. Previously, webmaster tools reported when the site was flagged has having malware and listed sample URLs. This new tool will also show samples of the malicious content, and in some cases, the underlying cause. This should help those site owners whose sites have been hacked to include malware find the problem and fix it. If your site does contain malware and you’ve fixed it, you can request a review to have the malware alert removed in search results.

Search conferences are an excellent opportunity to connect personally with representatives from Google, as well as Yahoo and Bing, for advice and assistance with SEO issues. With our SMX East search engine marketing conference starting tomorrow in New York, I thought it was a good time to list my personal thoughts on the right and wrong way to approach them.

I’m not a search engine representative, but I know a number of them and have talked with many about the interactions they have with people at conferences in the 10 years I’ve been programming such shows. I think my tips will help, and perhaps they’ll inspire actual search engineers and representatives like Google’s Matt Cutts to put together his own.

1) Catch Them At A Session: Looking for a search engine rep? Check the agenda, and find the sessions they’re speaking at. Remember, not everyone from Google deals with SEO issues. Don’t go to a panel on paid search and expect the Google speaker to address your SEO issues. Find an appropriate session that’s dealing with SEO. At our show this week, such sessions include:

• Ask The Search Engines: Best Practices Edition
• Duplicate Content Issues: The Search Engine Edition
• Maps, Maps, Maps! (Local Search SEO)
• Pumping Up YouTube (YouTube SEO)
• Universal & Blended Search Opportunities (SEO into blended/vertical search)
• CSS, AJAX, Web 2.0 & SEO
• Meet & Eat Networking Lunch Tables

Other shows have similar sessions specifically about SEO issues. Review a show’s agenda. Read the session descriptions to see if they involve SEO. Look for sessions with the major search engines represented, and you’re on the right track.

2) Make Your Problem Relevant For Everyone: Often search panels have an open Q&A period. If you’re having a particular SEO issue, that’s an opportunity to get your question in front of a representative. It’s fine to talk about your specific issue. For example, if you feel you’ve been penalized, ask how you or others can request a review. But….

3) Do Your Homework: In the example above, asking how to get Google to review a penalty is a terrible question. That’s because if you’d done your homework, you’d have discovered that Google has tools to tell you if you’ve been penalized as well as to request reinclusion. Don’t ask what you can find out online. Make your questions count. In the situation I’ve described, you should have already checked to see if a penalty has been reported and filed a reinclusion request if so. If you’re still having problems, THAT’S the question you put to the rep. “I’ve done all that Google advises, but I still think I’m being penalized. What do I do next?”

4) We Can Talk About That Offline: If you give a search rep a stumper — like the above “I’ve done everything you say, now what” question, you might have stumped the speaker. Almost inevitably, they’ll still want to help. That’s not just for good PR. They actually do discover problems within their own systems by investigating site owner problems. If you’ve stumped them, you’ll probably get a response along the lines of “Let’s Talk About that Offline.” Congrats. You just won a golden ticket for special attention. Hang on to that, you’ll use it after class.

5) Move On, Already: If you haven’t gotten a satisfactory answer, don’t keep hammering away. Asking a short follow-up for clarity is fine. But not letting go of an issue, and continuing to ask, ask, ask loses you friends in the audience plus the sympathy of the rep. If you’re still not happy — and you didn’t get the “let’s talk offline” invitation — then simply say you’d still like to know more, but perhaps you both can follow up offline. Watch the look of relief that will flow across the search reps face. And get your business card ready….

6) See Them After Class: When the session ends, the representatives typically stick around to answer some additional questions. This is a prime opportunity. Sit up front, so that you can immediately get to the stage ahead of the inevitable rush. Usually, speakers will remain in their seats at the speaking table. Just line up right in front. Don’t go onto the stage. Don’t be that person. No one likes that person. If you weren’t at the front, eventually the reps will have to leave the stage. Let them. Often they’ll move out of the room, so that another session can begin, but they may linger in the hallway. That’s a sign they’re still willing to take questions. But if they start to move — if they give subtle hints like “I’d love to stay more, but I have to go,” hand them your card (more prep on that in a minute) and let them go.

7) Be Brief: It’s your big moment. The rep’s all yours. So tell them your issue. Be brief. Explain the situation clearly. Imagine you had to tweet it in 140 characters. Listen to their response. If you have a follow-up, also keep that brief, and keep it to just one. You’re not alone in wanting access. Don’t be a speaker hog.

8) Leave Your Diagram At Home: Is your problem or issue so big that you’ve drafted a diagram? Forget it. Seriously, don’t show up with a convoluted diagram of how you want to cross link 50 different sites car rental sites, each one targeting a different US state, but you’re worried there might be a spam issue. Diagrams scream out that you’re overthinking your SEO efforts. They scream out you’re not someone with a question that can be dealt with in a few minutes. And they make search reps want to run screaming from you, trust me. If you’re thinking SEO that much, you don’t want a search. Instead, find one of the many good SEOs who are speaking. And consider booking a consultation with them. It’ll likely be money well spent.

I also ran this point past search conference speaking veteran Matt Cutts, who added:

It’s true that a diagram on the fly is probably a warning sign, but I welcome people who have thought hard about an issue and walk up and say “The spam report form only allows N characters, so I brought you this in-depth report.” Or “I wanted to give you this reconsideration request where I documented all the ways we’ve tried to clean up our site.” I don’t mind taking printed material and carrying it back to the team to check out.

That said, handing over a 25 page report is probably still overkill :)

9) Your Business Card Is Your Friend: Got a complicated question? Again, tell the rep what the issue is briefly, but say you understand that it might take more time than they have now and ask if they’d like to contact you to learn more. Then give them your business card with a short summary of the issue on the back. Move along. You’ll be appreciated for having been reasonable, and people who do this DO get follow up contact. If you were one of those “let’s talk offline” folks, say that. Literally say — “you wanted to talk offline about my issue. Please contact me when you’re ready.”

10) Don’t Expect Their Contact Information: You can a search engineer or representative for their business card or email address, but don’t expect it nor insist upon it. Search reps tend to be rather protective of their information, mainly because once they help someone with a problem, they sometimes find the same person then decides they’re a well to tap for any issue in the future — and they just don’t have the time to do one-on-one like that. There’s also an issue that if they give their contact details to someone, that person in turn might give it to a friend, and so on. That leads to another tip. If you’ve been trusted enough with a search rep’s contact details, don’t start handing it out without permission.

11) Fess Up & Clean Up Your Mess: If you think you have a penalty — and are pretty sure why, such as for buying links or having spamming content, be sure to have done everything you can to clean things up before asking for help. And fess up to everything you’ve done. Nothing will lose potential support more than having a rep hear your “I did nothing wrong” story, take the time to investigate your issue and then discover plenty of evidence you were knowingly violating guidelines.

12) Hallways & Other Encounters: You’ll find reps outside formal sessions, such as just wandering in hallways, having lunch or sometimes at their company’s booth, if they have one on the expo floor. All the rules I’ve mentioned above apply. Be brief, have a business card ready, etc. If they’re working a booth, ask away — that’s what they’re there for. If you catch them outside a booth, be polite. If they’re walking, don’t try to stop them. They’re probably going somewhere. You might ask if you can “walk and talk.” If they say yes, keep it brief. If they look at all uncertain or say it’s a bad time, don’t try — give them a card. If they’re talking to someone, don’t interrupt. Stand off in view, so it’s clear you’d like a moment but not so close that you’re eavesdropping.

13) Let Them Rest: Reps often attend parties and networking events. It’s fine to approach them at these times. But be especially brief. Ask if they have a moment, and stress you’ll be brief because you know they’re out trying to relax. Because, you know, they are. The reps are human, and after answering a huge number of questions in a day, sometimes they need a break. Have that business card ready. Another tip. Don’t talk shop. You’re at a social event. Socialize about something other than search. You’ll have a nice conversation and perhaps build the foundation for future talks about search.

14) Don’t Monopolize: Don’t monopolize a search rep’s time. For one, there are many other people trying to talk to them. Similar to Mike Arrington’s advice on how to interact with speakers at a conference, if you see the rep looking around a lot, they’re probably aware of other people behind you also wanting a chance to talk. Also to Mike’s advice, don’t assume that trying to spend as much time as possible with the rep will make for a better relationship. It can have the opposite effect. Many SEOs do form good relationships and even friendships with search reps, but these don’t happen because someone tried to force it.

If in the end, you don’t get time with a search rep, don’t be offended. There can literally be over hundred or more people trying to catch them over the course of a conference. You might also have unlucky timing, catching them as they’re trying to prep for a panel or perhaps when they’re trying to catch up on work back at home base (just like everyone else, they have jobs with needs that don’t wait just because they’ve gone to a conference.

There are other ways to contact reps, of course. Google maintains an official group for webmaster issues, as does Bing. Google Webmaster Central has a variety of tools allowing webmasters to diagnose their sites, as does Bing Webmaster Center. Yahoo has advice and a support form here. Representatives also frequent forums such as our Sphinn social news site and WebmasterWorld. Check those out, if you don’t have an opportunity to meet a rep in person.

Finally, there are plenty of panels where you’ll find search representatives from the paid search side of the house. I haven’t covered advice for these reps primarily site owners and marketers dealing with paid search issues often find it much easier to get help. You’re paying for those ads, so the search engines put plenty of routes out there (and kudos for them putting so much out on the “free” side, as well). Still, general courtesy and tactics above outlined for search reps on SEO issues apply to paid search reps, as well. Heck, it’s good advice for approaching any speaker.

The Google Webmaster Central Blog announced they have updated the verification tool to make it easier for webmasters to verify their sites. There are three main changes:

(1) New look for HTML file verification process:

(2) If you use the META Tag verification option and you change your email address tied to that Google account, the sites will now still remain verified.

(3) If you use the HTML file verification option, you no longer need to make sure your 404 pages actually return a 404 server status code.

With this update, some publishing tools no longer have the ability to verify their sites with Google Webmaster Tools, one example is Google Sites. Google is aware of this and working on addressing the issue.

The Google Blog announced two new features within the Google search results we have spotted earlier. The first are the anchor based links and the second are the snippet based links. Google Testing Enhanced Listings, “Pagelinks” article from back in December 2008, told us this was coming as well. Here are pictures of both, that clearly describe each:

Anchor Based Jump To Links or Sitelinks:

Snippet Based Jump To or Sitelinks:

Both these types of links take you to the same page of the main link, but they anchor you down or jump you to a specific point on the page. This is done using anchor links within the page source. The Google Webmaster Central Blog explains how webmasters can help gain these links in their snippets. Google explains:

First, ensure that long, multi-topic pages on your site are well-structured and broken into distinct logical sections. Second, ensure that each section has an associated anchor with a descriptive name (i.e., not just “Section 2.1″), and that your page includes a “table of contents” which links to the individual anchors. The new in-snippet links only appear for relevant queries, so you won’t see it on the results all the time — only when we think that a link to a section would be highly useful for a particular query.

As a side note, Google has also been testing what I am calling “deep sitelinks.” This is a combination of date and post data with Google Sitelinks in one snippet.

A new feature has appeared in the Site Configuration Settings Sections of Google Webmaster Tools. The setting, called Parameter Handling, enables site owners to specify up to 15 parameters that Google should ignore when crawling and indexing the site.

Google lists the parameters they’ve found in the URLs on your site, and indicates whether or not they think they those parameters are extraneous (with a suggested “Ignore” or “Don’t ignore”. You can confirm or reject those suggestions and can add parameters that aren’t listed.

So what does this mean for site owners?

The primary value of the feature is to improve the canonicalization of a site in Google’s index due to duplicate content. Canonicalization issues occur when multiple URLs load the same content. This scenario can be problematic for a number of reasons (for instance, it can skew analytics data) but from a search perspective, canonicalization issues can cause:

• Crawl efficiency problems: if search engine bots crawl the same page via multiple URLs, they may not have resources to crawl as many unique pages on the site
• PageRank dilution that can lead to lowered search rankings: if external sites link to multiple versions of a page, each page has less Page Rank value than if all links were to one version
• Display and branding problems: search engines display only one version of the URL; you ideally want the canonical version of a URL to display (mysite.com/goldfish) rather than a version with extraneous parameters (mysite.com/goldfish?adid=1205123&sid=452006&sort=high-rating&loc=sea)

A number of canonicalization solutions exist, including several that are Google-specific, so why did they launch this new feature? Yahoo! has included a similar feature as part of its Site Explorer webmaster product for some time and site owners have been asking for a similar feature from Google for a while (certainly at least since I was working on Webmaster Central).

Below a rundown of the various canonicalization options and how this one differs.

Google Webmaster Tools Parameter Handling: When URLs Can Contain Optional Parameters

This new option only helps with canonicalization issues that are caused by optional parameters that are in a standard key-value pair format and that you specify. In other words, it can only be an exclusionary list (don’t crawl parameters x,y, and z) rather than inclusionary (only crawl parameters a and b).

Wouldn’t you always know the complete list of potential parameters? Hopefully. But some canonicalization issues happen because a URL can take any parameters at all. Ideally, you want to ensure your server isn’t set up this way, but if you need this configuration (for instance another team or outside agency needs the ability to use any custom tracking code without waiting for that parameter code to be added to the server set up), then you’re better off using the meta canonical tag.

The two most common reasons for optional parameters and that this feature will work well for are:

• Tracking codes used for analytics data (in this case, you may not want to implement a 301 redirect from the long version of the URL to the canonical one since you could lose the data)
• Page layout changes, such as sort orders (in this case, the code on the page uses the parameter to change the layout of the page, but from a search engine perspective the content on each version is the same, just in a different order)

Why use this canonicalization option over the others? The biggest benefit is likely in the increase in crawl efficiency. When Google discovers a new URL, they can check the included parameters against the parameter handling list and remove any optional ones before crawling it (but still credit any found links to the page). This could substantially reduce the crawling overhead on a site and could free up considerable bandwidth for getting other pages of the site crawled.

It’s also fairly simple to use. Just scan the list of suggested parameters and click the ones that are optional. In some organizations, it can be difficult to get source code added to web pages, making the implementation of the canonical tag difficult and time consuming. With this option, if you have verified webmaster tools access, you don’t need to involve IT at all.

What are the drawbacks to this option? The most obvious issue with this option is that it only works for Google. In time past, you could use this setting and the corresponding one in Yahoo! Site Explorer and not worry about other engines. But with Microsoft Bing’s impending (likely) replacement of Yahoo’s search index, it’s quite possible that Yahoo’s feature will go the way of its index, and if Microsoft doesn’t offer something similar, then a search index with 25%+ market share could be getting your URLs wrong.

You could also shoot yourself in the foot, metaphorically speaking. You could accidentally tell Google to ignore important parameters that, if dropped from the index, could wipe out large portions of your site. As Google adds more of these types of features to webmaster tools, it becomes more important to ensure that anyone who has access to them know what they’re doing.

In reality, Google likely has safeguards in place that at least partially protect against such accidental destruction. That’s undoubtedly why they say that “While Google takes suggestions into account, we don’t guarantee that we’ll follow them in every case.” They don’t want large portions of their index disappearing either.

Unlike accidental blocking with robots.txt, which search engines follow as a directive, this feature (and many of the others) is a signal only. If the other signals already in place strongly contradict it (for instance, the content seems to be vastly different), it likely won’t be used.

But even though Google has safeguards like this one in place, you may not want to chance it if you’re not confident of which parameters are really optional (all the time, since this is a site-wide setting).

This option also won’t work if your canonicalization issues aren’t related to parameters or if the parameters aren’t in standard key-value pair format.

Meta canonical attribute

The canonical attribute is a page-level meta tag that specifies the canonical version for the page. This can be useful because no matter what optional parameters are added to the version of the URL that renders the page, search engines can always know the canonical version. You can find detailed information about this tag in my article about its launch.

Why use this canonicalization option over the others? You just specify the canonical version of a page once, and no matter what parameters are added to the URL, search engines are always provided with the canonical version.

Since this meta data is on the page itself, any search engine can read it, and in fact, Google, Yahoo!, and Microsoft have all announced support for it. As of yet though, only Google seems to be actively using it.

What are the drawbacks to this option? Unlike with the parameter handling feature, search engines have to crawl the page before they can read the tag, so some crawl efficiency is lost. This tag should promote long-term efficiency, however, since theoretically,  once the bot has crawled the non-canonical version of the URL and read the tag, it shouldn’t have to crawl that version of the URL again.

As already noted, implementation requires modification of the page source code, which isn’t always easy within some organizations.

As with parameter handling, it’s possible to implement this tag incorrectly. For instance, it’s been discovered that some sites have accidentally set the canonical version of every page to the home page. As with the parameter handling feature, search engines consider the tag a “strong hint” as a precaution against these types of mistakes and won’t use the data when it strongly contradicts their other signals. In the case of Google, the only search engines who is actively using the tag so far, this has proven to be the case.

301 redirect

It’s  universally agreed that (other than not have multiple versions of a URL at all) the best way to canonicalize URLs is to redirect all versions to the canonical one using a 301 redirect. This implementation sends all users and search engines to the canonical version and effectively consolidates all links to the page and ensures only the canonical one is indexed and ranked.

Why use this canonicalization option over the others? It’s understood and followed by all major search engines and it provides the best user experience (visitors have one URL to access, bookmark, and share). In most cases, search engines consolidate all links to the redirect target and rank the canonical one.

This option is the best choice when you are moving content (for instance, changing your URL structure or changing domains) and to indicate whether your want content indexed under the www or non-www version of the domain.

Also keep in mind that if you redirect to the canonical version you’re more likely to get links to the right version, since most visitors will simply copy and paste what they see in the address bar.

What are the drawbacks to this option? When you are using parameters for sort orders or tracking, a redirect may negate those parameters. ou can generally configure your analytics program to handle this properly, but it probably won’t work out of the box.

Redirects aren’t always properly implemented. For instance, they might inadvertently be implemented as a 302 (or worse yet, a JavaScript redirect or meta refresh). Or they may generate redirect loops or infinite redirect chains. In these cases, search engine bots eventually abandon the crawl attempt (and with Google and Microsoft, you can get a list of these URLs in their webmaster tools products).

Redirects can also slow down crawl efficiency, particularly due to redirect chains. Ideally, search engines crawl the redirect then eventually stop crawling the origination URL, but if the bot encounters links to the original URL, it will continue crawling both versions (or more, if the page has moved multiple times).

Google webmaster tools change address feature

This feature enables you to tell Google when you’re changing domains. You have to verify ownership of both the old domain and the new domain and then you can specify a move from one to the other. You can find more information about this  feature xx.

Why use this canonicalization option over the others? The best use of this feature is when you are changing domains and you aren’t able to implement a 301 redirect from the old domain to the new. (This is the case, for instance, with blogspot.com sites.) Even if you are able to implement the redirect, it can’t hurt to let Google know as well!

What are the drawbacks to this option? You can only use this option to move from one domain to the other. And as with the other Google webmaster tools features, it only works for Google.

Google webmaster tools preferred domain feature

The preferred domain feature enables you to tell Google whether your want your domain indexed with the www subdomain or without it.. Since most sites resolve either way, a complete duplicate set of content  of your site will exist if you don’t set www/non-www canonicalization. Why is this a problem? Ideally it’s not and search engines consolidate the content correctly. But often, search engines find links to both versions and end up crawling both, indexing both, and crediting the links to the versions separately.

Why use this canonicalization option over the others? You may as well always use this option, although you should implement a 301 redirect as well, if you can. Google initially implemented this feature for those sites that weren’t able to do so.

What are the drawbacks to this option? Again, this option works only for Google. And it doesn’t provide as much of a guarantee as a 301 redirect.

Blocking duplicate content with a robots directive

The traditional advice for avoiding duplicate content has been to block the duplicates with robots.txt (or a robots meta tag) to ensure the correct version is indexed. It can be important that the right version be indexed vs. the version intended for print, for instance.

Why use this canonicalization option over the others? Generally speaking, you shouldn’t now that the canonical meta tag is available. The scenarios for which you wouldn’t want to redirect (such as the print version example) can be more easily solved with the canonical tag and the scenarios for which you’re worried about crawl efficiency issues that would leave large portions of your site uncrawled (such as large-scale optional parameters) can now more easily be solved with Google’s parameter handling feature.

What are the drawbacks to this option? The primary drawback to this option is the loss of link credit. Any links to blocked pages fall into a black hole and can’t be credited to the canonical version of the page, as happens with the other options.

The parameter handling feature can also provide insight on how Google sees your site

For some time, Google has been attempting to canonicalize URLs and show the canonical version in the results, even when a site owner hasn’t implemented any of these canonicalization options. For instance, they may determine that several pages contain the same content and algorithmically consolidate them and associate them with the one Google determines is canonical. They haven’t described exactly how they determine the canonical version, but they might, for instance, choose the URL with the fewest number of parameters or the shortest version of the URL.

Last year, they started letting webmasters know when they encountered URLs that they thought were extraneous and were causing crawling problems. It’s likely that Google is using a similar source to generate the list of parameters it suggests should be ignored.

In this way, the parameter handling feature provides insight into how Google perceives the site. If you see many parameters listed that aren’t optional, take a look at the content on the URL that use those parameters.

This could signify a larger problem. It could be that Google doesn’t see enough unique content on them (this can happen, for instance, with pages that list part numbers, contain mostly images and item codes, or list little information outside of a login). You may want to look for ways to differentiate the pages a bit more.

Interestingly, the Google Webmaster Central blog has a new post about duplicate content, but no mention of this new feature. Thanks to Brian Ussery for pointing it out!

Michael Wyszomierski announced at the Google Webmaster Central blog that they are looking for the SEO and Webmaster community to create videos that they can share in the Google Webmaster YouTube channel. You have seen many of the videos from Matt Cutts in this channel, and now they want to allow the community to share their videos in this channel.

How does it work?

• Make a video, upload it to YouTube
• Then go to the Google Webmaster Help Center, and submit your vid via the Help Center gadget on the bottom right.
• Keep the video short; 3-5 minutes is ideal. Think small: a short video is a good way to showcase your use of – for example – Top Search Queries, but not long enough to highlight your whole SEO strategy.
• Focus on a real-life example of how you used a particular feature. For example, you could show how you used link data to research your brand, or crawl errors to diagnose problems with your site structure. Do you have a great tip or recommendation?
• Upload your video before September 30.
• The full guidelines can also be read for more details

Here is Wysz explaining this on, guess what, YouTube:

The next time you login to Google’s Webmaster Tools, you may notice a few minor changes to the interface and functionality. Google announced four changes today — two of which seem worth highlighting here:

• Blocking non-home page sitelinks: The ability to block certain sitelinks from showing in Google results now applies to all pages on your site that have sitelinks, not just the home page.
• Viewing URL removal requests made by others: On the “Crawler Access” page, you can see any URL removal requests that other people have made about URLs you own — and you can revoke them, too.

The other changes include a more clear listing of verified and non-verified sites, and a site selector drop down for quicker access to all your sites.