<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google&#8217;s Halloween Update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.internetbusiness.co.uk/01112008/googles-halloween-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.internetbusiness.co.uk/01112008/googles-halloween-update/</link>
	<description>Business and Internet news from the UK</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:37:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Catalin</title>
		<link>http://www.internetbusiness.co.uk/01112008/googles-halloween-update/comment-page-1/#comment-75753</link>
		<dc:creator>Catalin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:16:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.internetbusiness.co.uk/?p=1852#comment-75753</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s a bad data push, which is unsolved yet (8 days after Matt&#039;s message). I really don&#039;t want to think that this is the new Google algo, as a lot of junk sites comes to top of SERPs. If yes, it means that Google made a big step back in terms of relevance and quality of SERP.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s a bad data push, which is unsolved yet (8 days after Matt&#8217;s message). I really don&#8217;t want to think that this is the new Google algo, as a lot of junk sites comes to top of SERPs. If yes, it means that Google made a big step back in terms of relevance and quality of SERP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
