Technology news outlet CNET recently made headlines for deleting thousands of older articles from its website in an effort to boost its Google Search ranking. The news was first reported by Gizmodo, which revealed that CNET has been removing articles since July.
According to an internal memo obtained by Gizmodo, CNET referred to this practice as “content pruning,” explaining that it sends a signal to Google that CNET is fresh, relevant, and worthy of being ranked higher than its competitors in search results. The memo also stated that stories marked for removal are archived using the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine, and authors are notified at least 10 days in advance.
While removing content from the site is not a decision taken lightly, CNET’s teams analyze various data points to determine whether certain pages are not currently serving a meaningful audience. These metrics include page views, backlink profiles, and the amount of time that has passed since the last update, as stated in the memo.
When comparing Wayback Machine archives from 2021 to CNET’s on-site article counter, it becomes apparent that hundreds, if not thousands, of stories have disappeared from each year dating back to the mid-1990s. However, data for 2022 and 2023 was not available. Red Ventures, the private equity-backed marketing firm that owns CNET, did not provide specific numbers regarding the total amount of removed stories.
Related Post
Red Ventures has been known to employ ruthless SEO (Search Engine Optimization) strategies across its range of outlets, including The Points Guy, Healthline, and Bankrate. Earlier this year, it was revealed that CNET had been using artificial intelligence tools to generate articles, forming part of an extensive AI-driven SEO maneuver aimed at incorporating affiliate ads. Following errors in AI-generated stories, Red Ventures temporarily halted the content and revamped its AI policy. Later, CNET’s staff unionized, seeking increased control over the use of the generative AI tools and how the site monetizes its work.
Red Ventures and CNET defend their content pruning strategy by highlighting the influence of Google Search’s ranking algorithm. They maintain that this process will ultimately enhance SEO rankings and drive more meaningful user engagement. Although removing a significant chunk of archives does not align with Google’s guidance, experts suggest that when executed carefully, it can indeed benefit websites.
According to the memo, CNET will continue to undergo regular content pruning in the future, with the goal of improving its search ranking and user engagement.
In conclusion, CNET’s decision to delete thousands of older articles is seen as a strategic move to enhance its presence in Google Search results. While the implications of this practice remain to be seen, it is clear that Red Ventures is committed to employing aggressive SEO strategies across its various outlets, including CNET. As the landscape of online journalism continues to evolve, the balance between search optimization and preserving historical content becomes an ongoing challenge for publishers and readers alike.
