What does Google say about SEO? /
Quick SEO Quiz

Test your SEO knowledge in 5 questions

Less than a minute. Find out how much you really know about Google search.

🕒 ~1 min 🎯 5 questions

Official statement

The indexing incident on August 10 was resolved quite quickly, and Google has very little additional information to share publicly. The incident on August 15 appears to have been very brief. Google does not systematically communicate about every short-lived malfunction.
13:50
🎥 Source video

Extracted from a Google Search Central video

⏱ 55:02 💬 EN 📅 21/08/2020 ✂ 50 statements
Watch on YouTube (13:50) →
Other statements from this video 49
  1. 1:38 Does Google really track HTML links that are hidden by JavaScript?
  2. 1:46 Can JavaScript really hide your links from Google without destroying them?
  3. 3:43 Is it really necessary to optimize the first link on a page for SEO?
  4. 3:43 Does Google really combine signals from multiple links pointing to the same page?
  5. 5:20 Do site-wide links in the menu and footer really dilute the PageRank of your strategic pages?
  6. 6:22 Is it really necessary to nofollow site-wide links to your legal pages to optimize PageRank?
  7. 7:24 Should you really keep nofollow on your footer links and service pages?
  8. 10:10 Why does Google make it impossible to use Search Console Insights without Analytics?
  9. 11:08 Does Nofollow still affect crawling without passing on PageRank?
  10. 11:08 Does nofollow really block indexing, or can Google still crawl those URLs?
  11. 15:58 Should you really index all paged pages to optimize your SEO?
  12. 15:59 Is it really necessary to index all pagination pages to optimize your SEO?
  13. 19:53 Are URL parameters still an obstacle for organic search?
  14. 19:53 Are URL parameters really a non-issue for SEO anymore?
  15. 21:50 Is it true that Google is blocking the indexing of new sites?
  16. 23:56 Do links in embedded tweets really affect your SEO?
  17. 25:33 Are sitemaps really essential for Google indexing?
  18. 26:03 How does Google really discover your new URLs?
  19. 27:28 Why does Google require a canonical on ALL AMP pages, including standalone ones?
  20. 27:40 Is the rel=canonical really mandatory on all AMP pages, even standalone ones?
  21. 28:09 Should you really implement hreflang across an entire multilingual site?
  22. 28:41 Should you really implement hreflang on every page of a multilingual website?
  23. 29:08 Is it true that AMP is a speed factor for Google?
  24. 29:16 Should you still invest in AMP to optimize speed and ranking?
  25. 29:50 Why does Google measure Core Web Vitals on the actual page version your visitors are really viewing?
  26. 30:20 Do Core Web Vitals really measure what your users actually see?
  27. 31:23 Should you manually deindex old pagination URLs after changing your site's architecture?
  28. 31:23 Is it really necessary to manually de-index your old pagination URLs?
  29. 32:08 Is advertising on your site harming your SEO?
  30. 32:48 Does having ads on your site really hurt your Google rankings?
  31. 34:47 Is rel=canonical in syndication really reliable for controlling indexing?
  32. 34:47 Does rel=canonical really protect your syndicated content from ranking theft?
  33. 38:14 Do security alerts in Search Console really block Google's crawling?
  34. 38:14 Can a hacked site lose its crawl budget due to Google security alerts?
  35. 39:20 Have links in guest posts really lost all SEO value?
  36. 39:20 Do guest post links really have no SEO value?
  37. 40:55 Why does Google ignore identical modification dates in your sitemaps?
  38. 40:55 Why does Google ignore the lastmod dates in your XML sitemap?
  39. 42:00 Should you really update the lastmod date of the sitemap for every minor change?
  40. 42:21 Does a poorly configured sitemap really diminish your crawl budget?
  41. 43:00 Can a misconfigured sitemap really cut down your crawl budget?
  42. 44:34 Should you really have to choose between reducing duplicate content and using canonical tags?
  43. 44:34 Is it really necessary to eliminate all duplicate content or should you rely on rel=canonical?
  44. 45:10 Should you really set a crawl limit in Search Console?
  45. 45:40 Should you really let Google decide your crawl limit?
  46. 47:08 Do internal 301 redirects really dilute PageRank?
  47. 47:48 Do cascading internal 301 redirects really drain SEO juice?
  48. 49:53 Can the JavaScript History API really force Google to change your canonical URL?
  49. 49:53 Can Google really treat URL changes made by JavaScript and the History API as redirects?
📅
Official statement from (5 years ago)
TL;DR

Google resolved two indexing incidents in August without providing public details. John Mueller confirms that the company does not systematically communicate about every short-lived malfunction. For SEOs, this means developing their own monitoring tools since Google won't always be transparent about technical issues affecting indexing.

What you need to understand

What indexing incidents were observed in August?

Two distinct events disrupted Google indexing: the first on August 10, the second on August 15. The first incident was resolved "quite quickly" according to Mueller, without specifying an exact duration. The second is described as "very short," suggesting a resolution in just a few hours at most.

These incidents typically manifest as sudden fluctuations in indexed pages, temporary disappearances of pages from the index, or massive crawling issues. For an e-commerce site with thousands of pages, this can result in a sharp drop in organic traffic for a few hours—until indexing normalizes.

Why does Google stay so quiet about these malfunctions?

Mueller states that Google does not systematically communicate about every short-lived malfunction. This position is likely due to a concern over unnecessarily alarming webmasters for minor technical incidents. Let's be honest: if Google were to communicate about every micro-incident in its infrastructure, the informational noise would be unmanageable.

The problem is that the definition of "short-lived" remains completely subjective. For Google, a few hours may seem negligible. For a site generating €100,000 in daily revenue, even two hours of indexing failure represent a significant loss. This perception asymmetry creates legitimate frustration among SEO practitioners who often discover these incidents through their own monitoring tools rather than through official communication.

How do these incidents practically affect a site?

The symptoms vary depending on the nature of the incident. Some webmasters have reported temporary mass de-indexing, while others experienced an inability to index new pages via Search Console. In some cases, pages technically remained in the index but no longer appeared in search results for their usual queries.

The complete recovery duration often exceeds that of the incident itself. Even after the technical resolution on Google's side, it can sometimes take 24 to 48 hours for indexing to fully stabilize. Sites with a limited crawl budget or a complex architecture generally take longer to return to their normal indexing levels.

  • Google does not systematically communicate about short-lived indexing incidents, creating a gray area for SEOs
  • Incidents can last from a few hours to a day, with residual effects lasting an additional 24-48 hours
  • Manifestations include temporary de-indexing, crawling issues, and disappearances from SERPs
  • Independent monitoring becomes essential as Google transparency cannot be relied upon to anticipate or understand these events
  • Sites with complex architecture or limited crawl budgets experience longer and deeper impacts

SEO Expert opinion

Is this non-communication stance defensible?

From a purely operational standpoint, one can understand Google's logic. Their infrastructure handles billions of daily inquiries—communicating about every micro-technical incident would create more confusion than clarity. However, the threshold for severity at which they deem it necessary to communicate remains completely opaque.

But this position raises a fundamental issue of accountability. When an e-commerce merchant loses €50,000 in revenue due to an incident deemed "very short" by Google's criteria, they are entitled to an explanation. The power imbalance is glaring: Google unilaterally defines what warrants communication and what does not, without public criteria or accountability.

What does this statement reveal about the reliability of Google indexing?

Mueller implicitly confirms that indexing incidents are frequent enough for Google to have an established non-communication policy regarding those considered "minor." This is an indirect admission that Google indexing is not the perfectly stable system one might imagine for infrastructure of this scale.

In practical terms? SEOs must integrate this reality into their planning. If you launch a strategic product or publish time-sensitive content, there is a non-negligible risk of an indexing incident on the D-day. [To be verified] : Google has never published statistics on the actual frequency of these incidents — we are navigating completely blind on this point.

What data is missing for a clear view?

Mueller's statement is deliberately vague on crucial points. No definition of "short-lived." No figures on the number of affected sites. No information on the technical nature of the incidents—data center problems, software bugs, deployment errors?

This opacity hinders any serious risk analysis. A professional SEO must be able to assess the likelihood and potential impact of an indexing incident to properly advise their clients. Without reliable historical data, we are reduced to empirical observations—and this is frankly insufficient for a service that controls 90% of global search traffic.

Warning: Never rely solely on Google tools (Search Console, Status Dashboard) to detect indexing issues. Their reporting is incomplete and often lags behind real-world situations. Invest in third-party monitoring tools that track your indexing in real-time.

Practical impact and recommendations

How can you quickly detect an indexing incident on your site?

The first line of defense is automated monitoring of your index. Set up daily alerts on the number of indexed pages using the site: operator or better, using dedicated tools like OnCrawl, Botify, or Screaming Frog Spider. A drop of 10% or more from one day to the next should trigger immediate investigation.

Also monitor your positions on strategic queries hourly if your budget allows. Indexing incidents often manifest as sudden disappearances from the SERPs even before Search Console signals anything. For highly seasonal sites or those dependent on specific events, this responsiveness can make the difference between a minor incident and a business disaster.

What should you do if you detect an indexing problem?

First step: verify that the problem is indeed coming from Google and not from your side. Check your robots.txt, noindex tags, server errors, your sitemap. If everything is clean on the technical side, consult the Google Search Status Dashboard—even though it is not exhaustive as we've seen.

If the incident seems widespread and doesn't originate from your infrastructure, document the impact precisely: screenshots of indexed pages, position exports, server logs showing Googlebot activity. This data will be useful to

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

Google prévient-il toujours quand il y a un problème d'indexation majeur ?
Non. Google ne communique que sur les incidents jugés suffisamment importants selon ses propres critères, qui ne sont pas publics. De nombreux incidents affectant des milliers de sites ne font l'objet d'aucune communication officielle.
Combien de temps dure généralement un incident d'indexation Google ?
Les incidents qualifiés de « courts » par Google durent de quelques heures à une journée maximum. Cependant, les effets résiduels (récupération complète de l'indexation) peuvent persister 24 à 48 heures supplémentaires après la résolution technique.
La Search Console signale-t-elle tous les problèmes d'indexation en temps réel ?
Absolument pas. La Search Console a souvent un délai de reporting de 24 à 48 heures et ne remonte pas systématiquement les incidents côté Google. Elle reste utile pour diagnostiquer les problèmes côté site, mais pas pour détecter les dysfonctionnements de l'infrastructure Google.
Faut-il resoumettre ses URLs via la Search Console pendant un incident d'indexation ?
Non, c'est généralement contre-productif. Si l'incident est côté Google, forcer des resoumissions massives peut aggraver la charge sur leur infrastructure. Attendez la résolution de l'incident avant toute action corrective.
Comment distinguer un incident Google d'un problème technique sur mon site ?
Vérifiez d'abord votre robots.txt, balises meta, erreurs serveur et sitemap. Si tout est propre côté technique et que d'autres sites rapportent des problèmes similaires au même moment, c'est probablement un incident Google. Les forums SEO et Twitter sont souvent plus réactifs que les canaux officiels.
🏷 Related Topics
Domain Age & History Crawl & Indexing AI & SEO JavaScript & Technical SEO Social Media

🎥 From the same video 49

Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · duration 55 min · published on 21/08/2020

🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →

Related statements

💬 Comments (0)

Be the first to comment.

2000 characters remaining
🔔

Get real-time analysis of the latest Google SEO declarations

Be the first to know every time a new official Google statement drops — with full expert analysis.

No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.