Black Hat Link Building Ethics Question
-
I have taken on the SEO/Inbound duties for my company and have been monitoring some of our competitors in the market space. In June one of them began a black hat link building campaign that took them from 154 linking root domains to about 7500 today.
All of the links target either /header or /permalink/index and all have anchor text along the lines of "Windows 7 activation code." They are using forgotten forums and odd pages, but seem to be finding high DA sources to place the links.
This has skyrocketed their DA (40 to 73), and raised their mozRank, mozTrust, and SERP positions.
Originally I thought to report it to Google, but I wanted to wait a few weeks and see what the campaign did for them and if Google would catch on. I figured adding 81K links in 2 months would trigger something (honestly, if I was able to find out they were doing it then it's got to be obvious). But they have grown every week and no drop in rankings.
So my question is would you report it? Or continue to wait and see?
Technically they are not a "competitor" in the strictest sense of the word (we actually do sell some of their products as OEM), but I find the tactic despicable and it makes my efforts to raise our rankings and DA seem ineffective to people not in the know about SEO.
Interested to see everyone's responses!
Taylor
-
Old post but for anyone that feels that waiting for Google to penalize someone will take too long or not work... here's an example of a major competitor of ours getting hit on the last:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/therichest.org
It took about a year and a bit. We even offered $XX,XXX to purchase their sites, and after discovering their techniques, just waited it out to see their huge decline.
-
I'm not sure it implies harm. If a competitor doesn't pay taxes, it doesn't directly harm my company, but it is wrong and it may give them a temporary (if extremely risky) competitive advantage.
I see the same situation here. The linkbuilding doesn't directly harm my company, but it does give them a temporary competitive advantage in a manner that Google has said is wrong. Manipulating the system is breaking the rules, which is ethically wrong. It doesn't matter that it happens all the time, it doesn't matter if a legitimate or illegitimate business is doing it.
Ultimately I wouldn't necessarily report a company that wasn't paying taxes to the IRS, nor in this case am I going to report the site's linkbuilding activities to Google. But in a purely ethical sense I should. I guess that was more the question.
-
"If you knew a business was doing something wrong offline, would you report it?"
Yes, but wrong implies doing harm to another person. If people are being harmed by visiting the site, or the business isn't legitimate, that's another case altogether. I'm not sure I'd agree that using these tactics is wrong when the business is legitimate.
I certainly don't have a problem with those who want to report artificial linkbuilding; I just choose not to spend my time policing linkbuilding practices.
-
Hi Carson,
I agree I have little to gain from reporting them from a business stance. It's actually fun to watch and predict when things hit the fan for them.
But to me reporting is about keeping things right. I don't really agree with Hall or Wall. Online should be no different than offline. If you knew a business was doing something wrong offline, would you report it? You wouldn't be able to justify allowing banks to continue to fix prices because some employees might fired if they got caught, so how could you justify allowing crappy SEO tactics to continue just because some people might get hurt. Egregious example, but the point remains. On a scale of 1 to 10, link spamming may be a 1 compared to the banks 10, but that doesn't mean its not wrong.
I certainly have sympathy for innocent people who get hurt by the consequences of other's actions, intended or unintended, but that is not enough (for me anyway) to say I don't care that the wrong thing is happening.
The faster a bad tactic is made invalid, the faster people might move toward better practices, which ultimately puts less people at risk.
I guess in the end, I'm uncomfortable saying "google will take care of it without me" because I want to be part of the solution.
-
Hello,
Do not fall to the trap of reporting your competitor, spend your time in being productive by focusing on your online brand building instead, find out what are people's concerns when looking for activation codes and create beautiful content that will make you differentiate in the market. Thats how you should be spending your time. Black hat SEO refers to money making sites. Its how much you spend VS how much you make till you get caught as most people said above. This is why most of the high PR links they have are rented and not permanent and they pay $100-$200 for them to be there. He can rank temporarily (yes temporarily, he will get hammered soon - SAPE links were finished last week and took all the web sites with them) but he will be gone/sandboxerd sooner or later while you will always be there. Sustaining your ranks and reputation will benefit your business much more than a rank one on google and if your boss cant see that, maybe he should join a quick marketing course
-
Like others said that Google will eventually caught them but I have seen in my personal experience that it take a long time to get the website turn down from the SERP rankings. I have seen 1<sup>st</sup> position for a website for few money making keywords and their link generation tactics are all black hat!
I guess Google look in to these areas after the penguin refresh and turn down the websites accordingly which seems to be a long time in my opinion! I guess Google should consider taking quick action in this regard!
Your request as a single source might not help much but yes if many people complain against the website tactics there is a strong chance that Google take action within less time! (just a practical thought ... no evidence about it!)
Hope this helps!
-
Hi Taylor,
As others have said, a site building so many links with aggressive anchor text is going to get caught and penalized eventually: probably on the next Penguin refresh, if not sooner. We see this a lot in some of the spammier SERPs where churn-and-burn tactics like this are still the norm. What often escapes notice is that a lot more SERPs used to be covered in spam - "insurance" was horrible, for example - but they are now filled with legitimate brands. Eventually (though not soon, at this rate) there will be little space left for these tactics as sites providing real value move in and solidify their positions.
As far as the morality goes, I suppose it depends upon your moral philosophy. Everyone has an opinion on reporting spam, but let me instead ask you some questions: What do you have to gain by reporting the competitor? Will a report make your business thrive? Does reporting them make the web better for users? Could the competitor learn about it, and turn a spam attack (that probably won't work) on you?
Personally, I'd ignore it and focus on my own business. I have almost nothing to gain by taking others down. In fact, I might be better off if they continue doing cheap tactics while I build a real business. I may eventually fill out a WMT report on them if I was second to them in dozens of SERPs. I wouldn't feel bad about it, either, if it made the web a better place. Here are some other opinions:
http://joehall.me/seo-outing-is-immoral/29/
http://www.seobook.com/media-literacy-seos-or-why-seo-outing-bad
Rand has a discussion about it here:
http://moz.com/blog/aaron-wall-and-i-debate-the-open-discussion-of-webspam
-
That's a good response Alex. Short term or long term game. Need to keep reminding ourselves of that.
-
Anything with "Windows 7 activation code" will eventually get hit by Google whether you decide to report it or not. It might take a day, week, month, year but Google will eventually find their links spammy and do something about it. That's really the gamble with black hat. How long will it take Google or someone to kill the project? The idea with blackhat though, is you burn the domain or burn whatever the project is once it's no longer profitable. If you plan on working on the same brand for a long time, whitehat is really the only way to go.
They'll see a short boost now, but once they get hit, it'll be a huge hassle to fix everything.
-
Can you post their url?
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
-
White hat or black hat?
There seems to be very differing opinions on what is good practice (white hat) and what is not (Black hat) and I'm not sure which way to lean (although my inclinations are slightly to the white). I'm starting a business offering a service and see ranking position 1-3 in the serps as my key to success. I'm creating good and useful content on my site and without much effort beyond on page seo have reached page 4 google for a few choice keywords. I feel that with a small number of links to a few of my pages i can reach page 1 and here is where my dilemma begins. With a bit of investment in some software (£400-600 for 3 different products) I can start Tiered linkbuilding (in a black hat way) and get results quickly but potentially risking my site in the eyes of google. I've been doing a little outreach to gain links in a whiter way but not had much success yet. I'm keen to keep with the whiter side but see progress as slower. Am I wrong? Can i build a robust link profile in a white hat way rapidly? Are there any quick wins i can gain to give me confidence? Why is white hat better than black hat? All wisdom, experience, guidance and humour gratefully received.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | roadhaulageservices0 -
Weird Links Should I Disavow?
I have noticed some weird backlinks in Google Search console and Referals for Google Analytics. For example a reddit page I have never commented on or been on has referred over 900 visitors. The page has no relevance to my site whatsoever, when I check the source code I cannot see the link, so perhaps its been removed. Also seeing links in Google Search Console from sites that are just domain name for sale type pages, and sites/pages that don't seem to exist anymore, or which redirect to others. All of these links have disappeared as well, nothing in source code . And numerous pages that used to link to 404's on my site, many domain name for sale type pages, another which makes my bitdefender plugin go crazy. And seeing common referral patterns in Google Analytics, i.e. numerous /try.php pages on different domains that presumably used to link back but which now redirect to another site. I cannot say there are thousands of these, but I guess they are causing more harm than good. My instinct is to I go through all the links I can and disavow, the link types described above, but am I safe to do so? And is it a good idea or a waste of my time? NB: I haven't built any of them.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | GrouchyKids1 -
How to dismantle a link building scheme?
My team performs SEO only in the real estate space. While doing some research recently we came across a semi-elaborate link building scheme by one of our competitors. This SEO firm built a dummy real estate resource site with lots of general content, nofollow links to brands (e.g. NYT, Fannie Mae etc.) for validation and links for high-valued keywords pointing to their clients' sites. Basically the whole site is a clever front to help their clients rank. Still, it seems to be working for them (at least for now), which I'm guessing is due to lack of strong competition and the site being quite old. Oh, and they also charge to become "affiliates" on the site, i.e. paid links disguised as non-paid. I reported the scheme via the Search Console. Anything else we could do? Have any of you had experience dealing with this kind of link scheming before? Any guidance is appreciated. Thank you!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | willthefrench0 -
About link building in 2015?
I don't think we still can use the same link buildings tools of years ago. So, how relevant is this article (from 2009):
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | nans
http://moz.com/blog/17-ways-search-engines-judge-the-value-of-a-link Or is there any update? Nancy1 -
Should I disavow this Link?
I am trying to clean up my link profile to get rid of a partial penalty and am not sure to do with one of the links to my site http://www.seoco.co.uk The link is 100% organic and has come from a foreign language site that published an infographic that I did: http://www.clasesdeperiodismo.com/2012/12/23/la-evolucion-de-las-redes-sociales-este-ano-en-una-infografia/ The thing is that in the link to my homepage they have used the anchor text SEO as opposed to my company name. I have already sent them an email and asked them to change the anchor text but they haven't responded so I am guessing they probably wouldn't respond to a removal request either. Should I disavow it?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Eavesy0 -
Footer links VS Page links - Which one is best?
Hello all 🙂 I was wondering if someone could advise me on a link building question. If you wish to create a couple of landing pages for different locations with anchor text link building etc is it better to have a page like this web site here: http://www.acorncommercial.co.uk/commercial-property/development-sites/ or quick footer links like this web site here?: http://www.robertholmes.co.uk/ (click on quick links at the bottom). I would like to know if there is a difference from an SEO perspective or if they are considered black hat. Your advise would be much appreciated! Yiannis
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | artdivision0 -
How fast should I make links
I have an eCommerce site. I like to review 100 of my products on Squidoo. There will be 50 lenses each lens will review 2-4 products. Each lens will link to each product review and one link to website URL. at the end of the project I would make around 200-250 links to my site. How should I extent the work. Should I do it within a month? of course I will do my other link buildings along with this task Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | giftbasket4kids0 -
Thought on optimising the perfect keyword location link
My site works a bit like a directory, so say I have a page called "Ice Cream Vendors" - on that page I would talk a bit about Ice Cream Vendors, then I will have a list of Ice Cream Vendor Locations. My list of locations can be quite big depending on the product and the amount of locations they occur in - when you click a location, it goes to a page showing all "ICeCream Vendors" in that location. So Currently I will have a table on the page a bit like this: ICE CREAM VENDOR LOCATIONS
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | James77
New York
Miami
Las Vegas This is all perfectly nice, simple and usable - BUT it is not producing perfect keyword links - for perfect keyword links the list should be like this: ICE CREAM VENDOR LOCATIONS
New York Ice Cream Vendors
Miami Ice Cream Vendors
Las Vegas Ice Cream Vendors Now I have my perfect anchor links - BUT it looks rediculous and is NOT user friendly. So What do I do?
1/. Build it for users and not have perfect anchor links, and loose in SEO?
2/. Build a perfect SEO links and make it less usable and looking spammy? OR 3/. Deliver the search engine the perfect SEO links, and the user the userfriendly version? In this I mean I could do the following:
SE's (and screen readers I think would see):
ICE CREAM VENDOR LOCATIONS
New York Ice Cream Vendors
Miami Ice Cream Vendors
Las Vegas Ice Cream Vendors Users would See
ICE CREAM VENDOR LOCATIONS
New York
Miami
Las Vegas Now in my view I am doing nothing wrong - I am mearly giving the user the most userfriendly version and I am giving the SE more information on the link, that the user doesn't need. So - In my view I am doing something that is honest - but what are your thoughts?? Has anyone tried to do this? Thanks0