In light of the Interflora advertorials debacle where do you think bloggers stand with regard to product reviews?
-
I realise the main blame fell on the newspapers for what was essentially cash for links, but a separate part of the PR push was sending flowers to bloggers who then blogged about it.
I can see that this could be construed by Google to be a breach of their t&cs, but equally it could be a legitimate action by the blogger if they are giving an honest viewpoint.
Is the Google Chrome "satchel" ad being unintentionally misleading?
If it's all down to the intention that's a worryingly grey area to be stuck in, what do you think?
-
I thought it was a nice public slap on the wrist without severely damaging a brand that probably should be on page one. It got the message out loud and clear and I would imagine that the papers are going to be much more careful.
You're right with regard to the error, but it's not the first time that the Chrome marketing team may have made an error with how they went about their business. To someone with a traditional marketing background I'm sure it seemed very innocuous, which was largely the problem with interflora anyway I suppose.
-
Tompt
To me, it is rather interesting the way that the satchel ad and several link gaining "methodologies" similar to it have worked while others do not. The beauty of an algorithm is in its lack of ability to measure intent.
Marie makes a great point with Brand as anchor text vs. keyword, but in the case of a more known company, a brand could be a keyword. At what point does a company become too large or well-known or well-branded for such tactics to become schemes versus methods? Also, if interflora was Interflora Flowers or Interflora Flower Delivery, does it revert to method or remain scheme?
I thought the Search Engine Land piece wherein they question at what point a penalty is a mere "show" of penalizing, further elucidated the problems that Google faces while trying to in some way keep it clean or level or whatever. Matt McGee added: (My italics for emphasis)
**In this Interflora case, Google’s timing has been particularly benevolent: The penalty took effect about a week after Valentine’s Day, and has now begun to be lifted one week before the UK celebrates Mother’s Day. Those are two of the most popular flower-buying holidays of the year — second and third in the US, according to AboutFlowers.com, and likely similar in the UK. **
So, was Google being strict or lenient? If it had been Robert's on time flower delivery, would I have gotten back so fast? Would I have been penalized given I was much smaller?
Great questions, but at the end of the day what is troubling is this miss IMO by Google: With the satchels, The Cambridge Satchel Co. uses a common method to "get the word out" via Google Chrome. Google brags about the success they helped Cambridge Satchel achieve. So, did no one at Google notice the conflict of interest?
Best, good question and good answer by Marie,
Robert
-
I think we need to be realistic about how enforceable this is and why Interflora got caught.
It would be extremely difficult for an automatic review/algorithm to be able to detect a review/blog post that may have involved a giveaway or a payment (ie a paid guest post).
The only reason why this was flagged and made an example of was because, after conducting a manual review likely triggered by the advertorial/thousands of exact match anchor texts on crappy link-farms, the Googler reviewing determined that they looked unnatural.
And they looked unnatural because each blogger's review linked to the site with targeted anchor text.
It's explicitly in Google's TOS, yes, but I'm willing to bet the house in saying that there's no way this would have been detected if it wasn't for a manual review, which was also triggered by something else.
Not saying we should all be doing it, by any means. But we should be realistic about how Google is going to be able to detect these paid reviews/guest posts en masse.
-
If it's as explicit as "if I send you something I require a link back" I can see that it completely breaches guidelines, but if it's sent out without that requirement, for genuine review I think you're in much murkier territory.
Should they be denied the option of linking because they received the product?
I'm just interested in the discussion, I know there are plenty of product review bloggers out there (across the whole white\grey\black spectrum) who are now wondering where they stand. From what limited contact I've had with them, many of the more hobbiest bloggers had little or no idea about nofollow anyway.
Much of the PC games industry is fuelled by review copies, and there are some truly sinful strongarm tactics going on for positive reviews over and above any links. Is cracking down on stuff like this even enforcable?
-
The quality guidelines are pretty clear that it is not acceptable to give free product in exchange for a link that carries PageRank.
People are upset with the chrome satchel ad because it shows someone who creates a product (satchels) and then in the ad sends it to well known bloggers. But nowhere in that ad does it say that she sent it in exchange for a link. I think that the main idea of the ad showing her sending the product to a blogger was to get exposure for her product. To stay within the guidelines this would be in the form of a no-followed link. The ad goes on to show that Elle Magazine heard about the great product and asked if she could make one for them.
The whole point of the quality guidelines in regards to "link schemes" is that you should not be able to self manufacture links. The reasons why links work to boost a site's rankings is because they are a vote for the quality of the site. Bought votes don't mean that the site's quality is any better than another site.
Do I agree? No. I think that those bloggers wouldn't post a link if they didn't like the product. (Well, most of them.) So I think this should be acceptable. But what I think doesn't matter.
If you've already exchanged product for links I wouldn't get too worried about it unless those links make up a large portion of your link profile. But, I think that Google is trying to cut down on any forms of link building in which you create your own link, so personally I would not use this tactic.
EDIT: I just checked out the Cambridge Satchel backlink profile and they sure do have a lot of FOLLOWED links from blogs who reviewed their profile. Perhaps the reason why this is allowed is because the links are branded as opposed to a keyword?
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
-
Best SEO Structure For E-Commerce With Products Using Multiple Categories
Hi all, I am in the process of re-structuring my e-commerce website for better SEO and user experience. I have done some keyword research and would like some advice on how best to structure my site around those keywords. For example, my site (All Things Nature) sells a brand of wooden sculptures (Woodsculp) and I would like to rank for keywords related to that brand, the brand by animal, the brand by collection and the brand by release date.
Content Development | | nb2e4fg
Examples of keywords could be: Brand by Animal: Woodsculp Dogs, Woodsculp Cats, Woodsculp Elephants
Brand by Collection: Woodsculp Pets, Woodsculp Safari
Brand by Release Date: Woodsculp Christmas 2023, Woodsculp Summer 2022 I would create each of these keywords as a category so that they can be found by a search engine and by users. I would then structure as follows: All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp by Animal -> Woodsculp Dogs
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp by Animal -> Woodsculp Elephants
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp by Collection -> Woodsculp Pets
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp by Collection -> Woodsculp Safari
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp by Release Date -> Woodsculp Christmas 2023
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp by Release Date -> Woodsculp Summer 2022 The only problem with this structure is it would take more than 3 clicks (4) for the user to reach a product. How critical is this for good SEO and user experience? Would I be better off getting rid of the ‘Woodsculp by Animal’, ‘Woodsculp by Collection’ and ‘Woodsculp by Release Date’ categories? Structure would look as follows: All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp Dogs
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp Elephants
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp Safari
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp Christmas 2023 The only thing with this is there would be a lot of categories under the brand name which might make it more difficult for search engines and users to logically follow. Would I be better off getting rid of the brand category and replace them with the keyword categories? Structure would look as follows: All Things Nature -> Woodsculp by Animal -> Woodsculp Dogs
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp by Animal -> Woodsculp Elephants
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp by Collection -> Woodsculp Safari
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp by Release Date -> Woodsculp Christmas 2023 This would organise things more logically but I would then lose the brand category (and the potential of the brand keyword ranking?) Would I be better off choosing one main keyword to use as a category and then use tags for the other categories? Categories: All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp Dogs
All Things Nature -> Woodsculp -> Woodsculp Elephants Tags: Woodsculp Safari
Woodsculp Christmas 2023 The next issue I have is that I have products which could fall under several different categories. A product called Elijah Elephant, for example could fall under Woodsculp Elephants, Woodsculp Safari and Woodsculp Summer 2022. In previous e-commerce sites I have never assigned multiple categories to one product (I instead have used tags). Is it good practice to organise products under multiple categories for an e-commerce site? Thanks in advance for any help and advice.0 -
How can i improve my blogger
hi, i have been using blogger for many years now but i have not really been using it to its full advantage, basically because i am not sure how to use it. I would like to know what i could do with my blogger to make it better and for it to stand out. at the moment i just use it to promote part of an article but want it to look nicer and more professional here is my blogger http://showbizgossipandnews.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/michael-jackson-family-angry-that.html any advice on this would be great as it is a shame to let it go to waste
Content Development | | ClaireH-1848860 -
SEO advice needed regarding Bookmark Sites
Hi all We have recently employed a SEO company. They have written some blogs and promoted the blogs on up to 20 bookmark sites. On each bookmark site the text is the same. Will Google class this as duplicate content? Is this a good idea? Any advise would be appreciated, thanks.
Content Development | | Palmbourne0 -
Matt Cutts on Advertorials on May 29th
Just saw this video in which Matt Cutts talks about "Advertorials" on the net as apposed to "Editorials" (Content where one is paid, the other is not) Thought there was some interesting points in the video, but as obvious as it gets Google is cracking down on this HARD! You can see it and smell it 🙂 Google News joined the bandwagon as well Matt Says @ 45 Seconds "but it basically means that someone gave you some money rather than you writing about this actually because you thought it was interesting or because you wanted to" I pay writers to write for me, do they like what they are writing about? No. They do it because I pay them, but they write very well and provide great content that gets shared naturally and socially (soturally - I just made up a new word :)). Anyways yes I may place links in those articles that point to other sites, but nothing in the aspect of paid advertising. Just that it relates to the content. I'm just curious how far the rabbit hole goes on this one...
Content Development | | cbielich0 -
Site Content Review Please!
I m looking for someone who can review my site and let me about quality of content on my site. Can anyone suggest / know who I can talk to about this ? Nick
Content Development | | orion680 -
Blogger Outreach - have you used this service before?
Hi, Has anyone used blogdash.com before? It says it has over 100,000 blog owners registered, which does sound good but when you look at the sites own social following its very poor and when you start to dig a little deeper you can find blog owner profiles like this: http://www.blogdash.com/blogger/ari-herzog First view, you think Ari Herzog has signed up to Blog Dash and you can pitch him content for blogs such as Huffington Post and Mashable, took about 10 seconds to realise he isn't actually part of the network as the yellow box is asking him to signup if he ever finds that page. Has anyone used this service? I can imagine 2% out of the 100,000 are actually members who have signed up.
Content Development | | activitysuper0 -
Issues with copying online forum reviews on own website
Apologies- I asked a similar question the other day but did not word it as clearly as possible. We are looking at having a text box of 'What customers say' on our product pages using reviews written about us online (to remain factual) and wanted to know if this created any issues relating to search engines finding matching content on two separate websites? Will this have any SEO implications as effectively we are 'plagiarising' the content in the eyes of the bots even though it is just customer opinion of our own products right? Thanks in advance.
Content Development | | jannkuzel0 -
Blogger - Multiple partial duplicate content and canonical
In Blogger, have at least three pages produced for each post - main post, archive and tag - each has their own canonical tag - are these considered duplicate content by Google? Not sure the best way to handle this.
Content Development | | holdtheonion0