For more than ten years, business owners have asked me some version of the same question: “Do likes, shares and tweets help my Google rankings?” Many of them were told “yes” by someone selling social packages. The idea did not come from nowhere. It started with one interview in December 2010, when Google and Bing both admitted they used some social data in ranking.
That interview became the origin story of the “social signals” debate. People quoted it for years, often without reading what was actually said. Let me explain, in plain words, what Google and Bing confirmed, what they did not, how Google walked it back, and what social media really does for SEO today.
In brief: Google used some Twitter data, in narrow ways, for a short window. It never said Facebook likes were a ranking factor. And the special Twitter access ended in 2011. You can see where this fits among other changes on our Google algorithm updates timeline.
The 2010 social signals confirmation at a glance
This was not an algorithm update in the usual sense. Nothing “rolled out” on a certain day. It was a confirmation of how both engines were already using social data. Here is the short version.
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| When | Early December 2010 (Search Engine Land interview) |
| Type | Public confirmation of existing signals, not a named update |
| Who asked | Danny Sullivan, then editor of Search Engine Land |
| Confirmed by Google? | Yes, in written answers to his questions |
| Confirmed by Bing? | Yes, in more detail than Google |
| What was used | Links shared on Twitter, the authority of the person sharing them, and links from public Facebook fan pages |
| What was not used | Private Facebook wall data (neither engine had it) |
| Who was affected | Mostly real-time and news results; only limited effect on normal web results |
| Status today | Google says it does not use like or follower counts; its Twitter firehose access ended in 2011 |
Moz's old update list (then SEOmoz) recorded it simply as “Social Signals, December 2010”, as noted in Search Engine Land's round-up of documented Google updates. That label made it sound bigger than it was, which is part of why the myth grew.
What Danny Sullivan asked Google and Bing
In late 2010, Sullivan noticed that both search engines talked a lot about “social search” but never said clearly whether social activity changed normal rankings. So he sent both companies a list of direct questions and published their answers side by side in What Social Signals Do Google & Bing Really Count?.
His questions were sharp and practical. In simple terms, he asked:
- If an article is retweeted or mentioned on Twitter, does that count as a signal beyond normal links?
- Do you calculate how authoritative a Twitter user is?
- Does a link carry more weight depending on who tweets it?
- Do you track links shared on Facebook, on personal walls or fan pages?
- Do you calculate the authority of Facebook users?
- Does a Facebook link carry more weight depending on who shares it?
This format matters. Because the questions were specific, the answers were specific too. That is rare with search engines, and it is why the article is still worth reading today.
What Google and Bing actually said
Both engines said “yes” to the first three questions. Bing said it looked at the social authority of a user, including how many people follow them, and that this added “a little weight” in regular results and much more in its separate social search. Google said tweeted links were used in organic and news rankings.
The most quoted line came from Google, on whether it measured the people doing the sharing:
“Yes we do compute and use author quality.”
— Google, quoted by Danny Sullivan in Search Engine Land, What Social Signals Do Google & Bing Really Count?
But read the rest of Google's answer. It said it did not know who people were in real life, that author authority was separate from PageRank, and that it was used mainly in the “Top links” part of Google Realtime Search. It was used only in limited situations in ordinary web search.
Here is how the answers compared:
| Question | Bing's answer | Google's answer |
|---|---|---|
| Tweeted links as a signal | Yes, adds a little weight in regular results | Yes, in organic and news rankings |
| Authority of the tweeter | Yes, and linked to real identity for known public figures | Yes, “author quality”, but without knowing real identities |
| Weight depends on who tweets | Yes | Yes, mostly in Realtime Search “Top links” |
| Facebook links | Public posts and fan pages only | Fan pages treated like tweets; no personal wall data |
| Facebook user authority | No, it could not see enough data | Same approach as Twitter, but no wall data |
So the honest summary is this: both engines used Twitter as a quality and discovery signal, and both had very little Facebook data. Neither said “more likes equals higher rankings.”
Why Twitter mattered more than Facebook in 2010
The reason was access. Links on Twitter carried a nofollow tag, which is a small piece of code that tells search engines not to pass ranking credit through a link. But Sullivan explained that both Google and Bing received Twitter's “firehose”, a full live feed of public tweets, where those links did not carry the tag. So in theory, some link credit could flow.
Twitter also suited real-time search. When news broke, tweets showed it first. Google had launched Realtime Search on December 7, 2009, and it relied on that Twitter feed. Our post on Google's 2009 Real-Time Search launch covers that product in more detail.
Facebook was different. Most Facebook activity was private, shared only with friends. Google told Sullivan it had “no personal wall data from Facebook.” Bing put the problem very clearly:
“We don't get things only shared with friends, so we don't know how authoritative you are on Facebook.”
— Bing, quoted in Search Engine Land, What Social Signals Do Google & Bing Really Count?
Bing also said it used Twitter to check quality. If the same link was shared on both networks, it was more likely to be treated as real. Even then, Bing said its new Facebook data was not used in its ordinary web search.
Display data versus ranking data: the detail most people missed
Sullivan also pointed out a difference that SEO sellers later ignored. Some social data was only shown to searchers, not used to rank. Google's “Shared by” counts next to news stories and Bing's planned Facebook Likes display were for display only.
This is an important habit to build when you read any search news, even today:
- Seeing something in the results is not proof it affects rankings. Review stars, share counts and author photos can appear without moving a page up.
- A signal used in one product is not a signal everywhere. Realtime Search and normal web search worked differently.
- “We use it” is not “it is a big factor.” Google said its use in web search was limited.
- Access can disappear. A signal that depends on a partner's data can vanish when a contract ends.
I see the same mistakes now with AI search features and new SERP elements. If you want more examples of how update stories get distorted, read our list of common myths about Google algorithm updates.
How Google walked it back: 2011 to 2021
The confirmation had a short shelf life. Here is what happened next, in order.
July 2011: the Twitter deal ends. Google Realtime Search went offline on July 2, 2011, “after the deal with Twitter expired,” according to Wikipedia's Google Real-Time Search entry. Without the firehose, Google lost its special view of tweets and their links.
January 2014: Matt Cutts says no. Google's then head of webspam said in a video that Facebook and Twitter pages are treated like any other web page, and that Google does not use like or follower counts. Search Engine Land reported that Google “does not give any special treatment to Facebook or Twitter pages,” and that Cutts said the team had put a lot of engineering time into Twitter data before being blocked, in its write-up of the Cutts video. He also warned that identity data on social sites can go out of date, which makes it risky to rely on.
2015 to 2021: repeated denials. Search Engine Journal collected the statements in its review of social signals as a ranking factor. John Mueller said in 2016 he would use social links to add value for users, “not in the hope that they improve rankings.” Gary Illyes said in 2017 that the idea of search engines ranking you better because of social was “BS”. In 2021 Mueller replied simply: “Sorry, we don't use likes as a ranking factor.”
| Year | What Google said or did | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| 2010 | Confirmed tweeted links and author quality, mostly in Realtime Search | A narrow, real-time use, not a general factor |
| 2011 | Twitter deal expired; Realtime Search went offline | The main data source disappeared |
| 2014 | Cutts: no special treatment, no like or follower counts | Social pages are just web pages |
| 2016–2017 | Mueller and Illyes: social links do not improve rankings | Share for people, not for Google |
| 2021 | Mueller: likes are not a ranking factor | Same answer, eleven years later |
Why correlation studies kept the myth alive
If Google kept saying no, why did so many people keep believing yes? Mostly because of correlation studies. Many studies over the years found that pages with lots of shares also tended to rank well.
The catch is simple. Popular pages get shared, and popular pages also earn links, mentions and clicks. Shares and rankings move together because they have the same cause: a page people actually want. That does not mean one causes the other.
Let me give you an example. Imagine a bakery publishes a guide to sourdough starters. In this example, it gets 2,000 shares on Facebook. Fifteen food bloggers see it there and link to it. Two months later it ranks on page one. A correlation study would record “2,000 shares, high ranking.” But the ranking came from the fifteen links and the quality of the guide. The shares only helped people find it.
That is the honest role of social. It is a distribution channel. It puts content in front of the people who might link to it, search for your brand or come back later.
What social media does for SEO now
Social activity is not a direct Google ranking factor today. But social still matters for search in a few real ways. I suggest you think of it like this:
- Discovery and links. Shared content reaches journalists, bloggers and creators who may link to it. Links are still a core signal.
- Brand searches. People who see you on social often search your name later. That shows up in your branded traffic.
- Your brand results page. Social profiles often rank for your brand name and help you control what people see.
- Search inside social apps. Many people now search directly on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube and Pinterest. That is a separate kind of SEO, covered in our guide to social media SEO.
- Freshness. Social chatter is often a sign that a topic is hot right now, which ties into how Google treats fresh queries. See our post on the 2011 Freshness Update.
For the off-page side in beginner terms, our free lesson on off-page SEO beyond links explains how mentions, reviews and social fit together.
A simple plan for using social to support search
Here is how I would use social media if my goal was better search visibility, not vanity numbers:
- Pick one or two platforms where your customers and industry writers actually spend time.
- Share your best, most linkable content there: original data, useful guides and strong opinions.
- Reach people who link, such as journalists, bloggers and partners, not only customers.
- Track links and branded searches in Search Console and your link tool, not likes.
- Keep your profiles complete and consistent so they rank well for your brand name.
- Review every quarter which posts led to links, mentions or branded searches, and do more of that.
If you want help building that kind of program, our social media management team works alongside our SEO team for exactly this reason.
One more historical note. Google's next big social experiment came a year later with Search plus Your World in January 2012, which pushed Google+ into results. That also faded. Around the same time, Google was cracking down on low-quality content with Panda 2.0 in April 2011, a much more lasting change.
Questions people ask about the 2010 social signals confirmation
Did Google really confirm social signals as a ranking factor in 2010?
Partly. Google told Search Engine Land in December 2010 that it used tweeted links and a measure of author quality, mainly in Realtime Search and only in limited cases in normal web results. It never said likes or follower counts were a general ranking factor.
Do Facebook likes or shares help Google rankings today?
No direct effect. Google has said since 2014 that it does not use like or follower counts, and John Mueller repeated in 2021 that likes are not a ranking factor. Shares can still help indirectly by getting your page seen and linked.
Why did Google stop using Twitter data?
Google's special access to Twitter's full stream ended when their deal expired, and Realtime Search went offline on July 2, 2011. Matt Cutts later said Google had put a lot of engineering time into the work before it was blocked.
Should I still put social sharing buttons on my site?
Yes, if your readers use them. They make sharing easier and can bring visitors, but add them for people, not as an SEO trick.
Where social fits in your SEO plan this year
The December 2010 interview is a good lesson in reading search news carefully. Google and Bing did use some Twitter data, but in narrow ways and for a short time. Likes and follower counts were never the shortcut many people sold.
So use social for what it is good at: getting your best work seen by people who can link to it, search for you and buy from you. Measure links and branded demand, not likes. If you want a plan that connects your social activity to real search results, get in touch for a free quote or see how our SEO services work.
Google updates around the same time
Before this update:
- The DecorMyEyes Update (December 2010): Google Demotes Merchants Who Treat Customers Badly (Dec 2010)
- Google Instant (September 2010): Search Results as You Type (Sep 2010)
After this update:
- Google's 2011 Scraper (Attribution) Update: Protecting Original Sources (Jan 2011)
- Panda Update Google – A Complete Guide (Feb 2011)
Or browse every Google update on one timeline, newest first.
Sources for this social signals history
- Search Engine Land: What Social Signals Do Google & Bing Really Count?
- Search Engine Land: Matt Cutts on Facebook and Twitter pages
- Search Engine Journal: Are social signals a ranking factor?
- Wikipedia: Google Real-Time Search
- Wikipedia: Timeline of Google Search
- Search Engine Land: Major Google updates documented
