Blogging just to manipulate rankings?

[Gamer07]

Hi,

I have been playing with Open Site Explorer for a while and have been trying to figure out how some of our competitors could rank with "not so great" articles. I don't want to sound harsh here but some of the articles outranking us are nothing but 6 images + 200-225 words from a press release and a Video. How exactly does Google justify this by ranking them higher than a 1500 word unique article that has been written in no less than 7 days?

According to OpenSite Explorer, about the two pages compared, the difference is the number of LINKS. The sad part is, without 1 exception, all their links are coming from blog pages like *.wordpress.com *.typepad.com etc. I would have been just FINE if their links were NATURAL.

You may ask me why I assume those blogs are created by them. Because every single post on those blogs are pointing to their domain... I don't think a normal blogger would keep pointing to the same domain.

So what are we supposed to do here?

• Wait 3 months so people discover our articles and natural links will come? (It happens sometimes but then it may not...)

• Do what they do?

Sorry about the ranting but I have one question if you don't want to read the rant. Is blogging to build links, considered black hat or not?

[Gamer07]

I agree. It is very hard to find a good writer. If we can't beat them with our content, then it's all fair anyway. At least you understand why you are outranked by them.

Thanks for your answers.

[EGOL]

Good luck to you.

I think that it is very difficult to find an author who can write highly competitive content - no matter how much you pay them.

If you look at what is already on the web, ranking on the first two pages of google - that is what you need to beat.  If  the content can not beat that then I don't think that the "publish and forget it" method will work well.

[Gamer07]

Thanks for the answer again.

And it's great to hear it works in long term. Something to stay positive...

We have a very decent team of writers and we do try to pay them higher than the industry average, as I am a writer myself and I try to make them happy and give them what they deserve. (instead of investing in (or purchasing) low quality links).

best,

[EGOL]

We have got 1500 words + 15-20 high definition images + videos

Oh... thanks for adding that.   It sounds like you deserve to be winning.

The articles that you are producing sound a lot like mine.  They usually start out deep in the SERPs but over time they slowly climb the rankings.  A year later, maybe two, they are at or near the top of google for their target keywords.

It is really slow progress, but instead of spending time/money on low quality links, I allow things to happen naturally and spend my time on another article.

[Gamer07]

No sir. Not like that

Sorry I forgot to -specifically- mention about our visuals but I was trying to compare the amount of unique text on the page.

We have got 1500 words + 15-20 high definition images + videos

anyway, thanks for the answer

[EGOL]

hmmm...... you have fifteen hundred words...

They have two hundred words and six nice images and a video?

Imagine the contrast in the first impressions of a visitor...

Six juicy images and a video vs a block or black and white text.

I think just about anybody anywhere would rather watch a video and look at six nice images.

If I was you I would be buying a digital camera.

To be honest, I have the same frustrations as you do.  I can't say if their satellite blogs are making an impact.  But I think that you can make a better first impression if the visitors to your page see a big nice image above the fold and maybe more of them below.  A digital camera will  help a lot and if you don't have the topics needed  you can license some really nice images from istockphoto for not a lot of money.  I usually spend quite a bit of money getting props for images, paying someone for custom graphics.  When I add them to an article the visitor stays a lot longer and I assume that it really helps with social sharing.