Navigating The New Rules - Clarification on NoFollow Usage
-
I posted some of this elsewhere but would like feedback from some of SEOMoz community.
- An author. Lets say she has a book out on Relationship Advice.
Lets say her book was even called Relationship Help, Advice and Tips.
She promotes it for years on her website and implements an affiliate program to get wider reach. Affiliates link to it by the name of the book. One day she even gets a mention or two on a few Yahoo editorial type pages that reviewed said book. A few other very big name websites also link to her and even link to her (without her asking) to her domain no less and make the link say simply Relationship Advice. The links were in the body of the pages. Again, these were unsolicited reviews that she did not even ask for.
In the old world - that was ok - in as much as unharmful to her site. In the new world she's toast.
She has taken down the book pages she worked 7 years to build up. I don't even think that will help. People linked to her website and put "relationship Advice" in the links because that's what she gave and was an expert at. She didn't ask for those links.
2) A large well known web directory that many have heard of - choose to charge for inclusion into their directory. BUT - you can get a free link if you include some code on your website. A reciprocation that is well known.I have read many many articles and posts by many people over the years on this - and as far as I can tell that reciprocation model for free submission was OK.
As long as directories didn't have search functions that served search results that were biased to paid link submissions they seemed to be ok. In terms of the free submission - I read a post way back by Matt that said as long as the directory wasn't asking for the reciprocal link in addition to charging for the submission - that was OK.
So, scoot forward to 2012. Said directory has hundreds of thousands of links to it - due tot he reciprocal code that was on many of the free links.
The code on the websites that got free links obviously promotes the directory by putting the main keyword in the link. ie "Web Directory".
In this new world - is this OK ?
That's what they do. They are after all a web directory?
The company in scenario 2 with hundreds of thousands of links all saying virtually the same phrase - with the vast majority of the backlinks being from generated reciprocal links for free advertisers in its directory - they are doing FINE. Not hurt at all.
The small business owner / author in scenario 1 - who had unsolicited natural links coming to her with anchor text detailing something she did and was an expert at - has gone from the SERPS.
Should the company in Scenario 2 - that COULD DO something about the anchor text in the reciprocal links back to their website - now change the recip code so that it just says their brand name instead of "web directory" ?
Should the author - if she ever regains from this hell - now have some kind of policy clearly stated on her website - that if any person is ever to link to her website ever again - they MUST only link to it with her name in the anchor text - and never link up words she is an authority on? How can she prevent that?
- So now is it up to the advertiser or the publisher to ensure we are all safe?
If small business person Billy Bob inquires about a paid link on a website and the publisher dosn't tell him that the link may hurt his site and he does not not request a NOFOLLOW on it (because he is just a clueless business owner) - are they (the publishing website) liable for Billy Bob's site tanking if it does?
Or is it the advertiser's job to be aware of all said issues - because I know the vast majority of Billy Bob's wouldn't be.
How long has everyone got to "get in line"?
There are many in the search community offering paid links on their websites in "Sponsored Links" sections - without the use of NOFOLLOWS and i don't see any devaluing of their advertisers websites.
If rules are rules let everyone play them. Getting sick of the hypocrisy. I aim to get to Journeyman though just so I can get a DOFOLLOW link on this site
Incentives eh!
Carlos
- An author. Lets say she has a book out on Relationship Advice.
-
I agree, Google is being even more vague than usual on this one. Funny that you mention the Journeyman link... I posted this question right before reading yours. I'll think you'll get a kick out of it. Same basic premise... WTF do we now? The answer is always the same though, in a couple of months we'll have enough research and analysis to have a good understanding of the update, at which point Google will change it again. Gotta love gettin paid to play a game
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
After you remove a 301 redirect that Google has processed, will the new URL retain any of the link equity from the old URL?
Lets say you 301 redirect URL A to URL B, and URL A has some backlinks from other sites. Say you left the 301 redirect in place for a year, and Google had already replaced the old URL with the new URL in the SERPs, would the new URL (B) retain some of the link equity from URL A after the 301 redirect was removed, or does the redirect have to remain in place forever?
Technical SEO | | johnwalkersmith0 -
Strange URL redirecting to my new site
Hi all, I recently relaunched a site on a brand new URL - www.boardwarehouse.co.uk. I've spent the last couple of weeks building some backlinks as well as developing a basic content strategy. We've started ranking for a few of our less competitive keywords which is great, however there's a strange site which either redirects or is mirroring our content. I'm at a complete loss as to what's causing this to happen and what i can do to stop it. On the attachment - my content is top and second. The fourth result is the offending site. Any help/ advice would be most helpful! Thanks in advance, Alick 0BSyNn6
Technical SEO | | Alick3000 -
What's the rules on overly dynamic URLs ?
Developer says "Overly-Dynamic URL. Developer says that this is the hardest and complex part. It will be possible to change all of the search criterias to use ( / )
Technical SEO | | stewbuch1872
But in this case each of the pages will be indexed and every time listing gets added, content will get changed. Which for example Google will start blocking what is the best way to address this and will google block as suggested ? thanks0 -
I need to know more clearance on rel=canonical usage than 301 redirects ?
Hi all SEOmozs, As we all know purposes of rel=canonical , I have a query to ask that If we don't have any possibility to use 301 redirects on a domain , can it be really right to use rel=canonical on an old domain to let search engine to treat those all pages should be not priority where the domain we are being promoted in the market to list up instead that. I found this interesting Matt Cutts video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJK5Uloy76g where he has told or cleared the point very nicely, yes we can use it if there is no possibility in your older domain or pages. So here i am asking the same to know more detailed clarity on this so that i can be more confidence on it. I have been seeing issues in my domains where old one domain comes than new domain why with new domain contents, and can it be really very good to bring new domain with **rel=canonical without using 301 redirect :
Technical SEO | | Futura
Old : kanin.com (leaving) New : kangarokanin.com (promoting) Where i might have not used yet the rel=canonical in old domain, will be going to use it soon , after finishing this discussion.** Regards,
Teginder Ravi tcSnN.jpg tcSnN.jpg dGd34.jpg0 -
Best way to host new product?
Hi guys We are launching a new product, the web pages are being built by a 3rd party and fall outside our current CMS. We're considering either hosting it on 1) sub domain 2) folder within existing site (although will be tricky to implement) or 3) a different URL altogether. What would you say is the best for SEO? Many thanks in advance.... Nigel
Technical SEO | | Richard5550 -
Creating new website with possible Url change (301 involved?)
Hi, I am currently getting a web designer to upgrade my website. I have built lost of links to my internal pages, should I get him to 301 redirect example.com/about.html (old) to example.com/about (new) OR Is there any need for this once the page doesn't change to example.com/about-us? Thank you in advance 🙂
Technical SEO | | Socialdude0 -
Can leaving up old web pages no longer accessible through my site navigation hurt my rankings?
My firm recently overhauled a client's website. As part of the project, we gave the content a new structure, eliminating certain pages and creating several new ones. However, I just found out that some of the "old" pages (the ones we supposedly eliminated) still appear in the Google SERPs. Somehow, the client - who handled the coding - let these pages remain live even though they can no longer be accessed through the site navigation. This seems like something that could hurt the client's SEO rankings, but I want to make sure before contacting the client and suggesting they take down the old pages. Can anyone confirm my suspicion?
Technical SEO | | matt-145670