<?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: Ann Widdecombe undergoes odd makeover &#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/ann-widdecombe-undergoes-odd-makeover/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/ann-widdecombe-undergoes-odd-makeover/</link>
	<description>Where to find Malcolm Coles, reviews, and tips on how to do things I couldn&#039;t do.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:22:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jaamit</title>
		<link>http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/ann-widdecombe-undergoes-odd-makeover/#comment-8116</link>
		<dc:creator>jaamit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/?p=4067#comment-8116</guid>
		<description>One of google&#039;s finest results! I&#039;d like to think that widdecombe probably googles herself daily and is faced with that image :) - will there be a rant from her in whatever crappy newspaper gives her a column complaining about how Google is broken and she&#039;s going to be suing for defamation? Trust me widdecombe, that is the most flattering pic of you you&#039;ll ever see :)

Interesting case because it gives an insight into google image ranking factors.  Some great insights from David above.  The only think I would add (apart from &lt;a href=&quot;http://twitter.com/jaamit/statuses/9476093808&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this theory&lt;/a&gt;) is that a direct link to an image file is probably a very strong signal to Google - after all who links to an image rather than embeding it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of google's finest results! I'd like to think that widdecombe probably googles herself daily and is faced with that image <img src='http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  - will there be a rant from her in whatever crappy newspaper gives her a column complaining about how Google is broken and she's going to be suing for defamation? Trust me widdecombe, that is the most flattering pic of you you'll ever see <img src='http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Interesting case because it gives an insight into google image ranking factors.  Some great insights from David above.  The only think I would add (apart from <a href="http://twitter.com/jaamit/statuses/9476093808" rel="nofollow">this theory</a>) is that a direct link to an image file is probably a very strong signal to Google - after all who links to an image rather than embeding it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David  Burgess</title>
		<link>http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/ann-widdecombe-undergoes-odd-makeover/#comment-8115</link>
		<dc:creator>David  Burgess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/?p=4067#comment-8115</guid>
		<description>You can see how much &#039;relevance&#039; value this strap line text passes here. If you search for &#039;Ann Widdecombe Photograph&#039;, you get this picture of her with some lovely goats.

http://images.google.co.uk/images?um=1&amp;hl=en&amp;tbs=isch%3A1&amp;sa=1&amp;q=ann+widdecombe+photograph&amp;btnG=Search&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;start=0

The image doesn&#039;t have photograph in the filename, neither does the alt. The only reference to Photograph on the page is in the text appearing withing the &#039;caption&#039; class beneath the image. It seems the Guardian + the caption text does have some serious clout.....or perhaps it&#039;s just the goats ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can see how much 'relevance' value this strap line text passes here. If you search for 'Ann Widdecombe Photograph', you get this picture of her with some lovely goats.</p>
<p><a href="http://images.google.co.uk/images?um=1&#038;hl=en&#038;tbs=isch%3A1&#038;sa=1&#038;q=ann+widdecombe+photograph&#038;btnG=Search&#038;aq=f&#038;oq=&#038;start=0" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.co.uk/images?um=1&#038;hl=en&#038;tbs=isch%3A1&#038;sa=1&#038;q=ann+widdecombe+photograph&#038;btnG=Search&#038;aq=f&#038;oq=&#038;start=0</a></p>
<p>The image doesn't have photograph in the filename, neither does the alt. The only reference to Photograph on the page is in the text appearing withing the 'caption' class beneath the image. It seems the Guardian + the caption text does have some serious clout.....or perhaps it's just the goats <img src='http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David  Burgess</title>
		<link>http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/ann-widdecombe-undergoes-odd-makeover/#comment-8114</link>
		<dc:creator>David  Burgess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:37:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/?p=4067#comment-8114</guid>
		<description>There is a description underneath the main image which says &#039;Friar Tuck gets nicked for Robin ... a still from Ann Widdecombe Versus (ITV1)&#039;. The image just before it in the markup has an alt of Ann Widdecombe and so I guess that G has deemed that because these have been referenced together on such an authority site, big G deems that Ann Widdecombe and Friar Tuck are related and relevant. The span has a class of &#039;caption&#039; too which could add weight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a description underneath the main image which says 'Friar Tuck gets nicked for Robin ... a still from Ann Widdecombe Versus (ITV1)'. The image just before it in the markup has an alt of Ann Widdecombe and so I guess that G has deemed that because these have been referenced together on such an authority site, big G deems that Ann Widdecombe and Friar Tuck are related and relevant. The span has a class of 'caption' too which could add weight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin Brown</title>
		<link>http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/ann-widdecombe-undergoes-odd-makeover/#comment-8113</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:17:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.malcolmcoles.co.uk/blog/?p=4067#comment-8113</guid>
		<description>Unfathomable, then again image results tend to be rather more difficult to make much sense of - have virtually given up trying to optimise for them</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfathomable, then again image results tend to be rather more difficult to make much sense of - have virtually given up trying to optimise for them</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
