What are the chances of an infographic penalty?
-
Suppose that you created a great infographic and the embed code included an exact match link. For example: This infographic was created by Shoestore, a leading provider of speed boosting shoes. If the infographic is embedded on 100 domains with an anchor text link (and say you previously had 100 linking domains) is there a risk of penalty for too many exact match links in a short period?
-
I would use "brand +Broad Keyword" as anchor text and in my opinion you should be safe but seo is a art not a science so do what you feel comfortable with.
-
Yes, I agree.
Unfortunately, google helped to create almost all of the problems in SEO.
Hopefully, some of this stuff can be rolled back without destroying everything and everyone.
-
Yes, I agree. Some great responses here from EGOL, Click2Rank and Alan. You could essentially use your brand as the safest approach.
-
Matt Cutts has been talking about cracking down on overoptimized websites. In my opinion, a good way to attack that is to eliminate the value of anchor text.
-
I agree with Click2Rank and EGOL
- Now that we know what we think we know about google.
It used to make perfect sense to use the keywords that match what you want to be known for, but the game has changed a lot in the past year.
For the case of providing something that others will use, hopefully in large numbers, the domain name seems like a better option.
Some webmasters may have a standard they use, and they will stick to it whatever you do, but you are probably better off using the domain name, with or without the www. - whichever way you do it on your site, and any variations from that will be out of your control.
If you have an exact match domain name, here is where it will help you.
Another option could be the name of your site. For example a shoe store whose domain name is easyfitshoes.com could use "Easyfit Shoes." I don't see how google could have a problem with that. Anyone else got ideas about this?
-
I would not add a link with an exact match anchor text. My domain would be the anchor text.
-
while only 100 links is unlikely to generate a keyword specific penalty, using an exact match that way is definitely not best practices SEO, as it's so blatant. Its this exact kind of abuse of the reason for having anchors that has caused such a mess in our industry and forced Google to find new and continually ever increasing ways to punish sites.
So it's best to avoid this tactic altogether.
- Alan Bleiweiss
C2R Director of Search Services
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
-
Is There Value in Disavowing Links if you there is No Google Penalty?
I have just started using Link Detox to determine if our clients have links/domains pointing to their sites that could be harming them in organic search. In a few cases 7%-9% of links have been flagged as a high priority to be disavowed. I would be interested in your opinion on the following: If your site does not have a Google penalty is there an advantage to disavowing pages that have been flagged as high risk? When I go to those pages they look spammy and have no real value other than an inbound link. If a client acquires another website/company and that website is now 301 redirected to the client's site, would "high risk" inbound links from the acquired company cause a problem for my client? A client has taken down content from their site that was completely unrelated to their current business. Is there a benefit in disavowing those links to the old content that are deemed by Link Detox as being high risk? Thank you, Rosemary
Link Building | | RosemaryB2 -
Is there any Penalty for building in bound inks too quickly?
I was speaking with someone today who was spreading out their link building because they were afraid that getting too many too quickly would incur penalties from Google and Bing. Is this a real thing? I have always been under the impression that if they are high quality links and directories that there was no limit to how many you could add other than the limited availability of the high quality links and directories themselves. I would appreciate some input on this.
Link Building | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Manual penalty & long tail
Hi guys, one of our websites has received a partial manual penalty from Google, visible in our webmaster tools panel. That website was SEO-ed poorly via external agency, using very old-fashioned, spammy solutions. We have X keywords that are filtered (drops in rankings such as 2 -> 48), and X keywords that our website still ranks well for (stays top 3, etc). Question: after we remove all the traces of SEO implemented by previous SEO manager (so we remove some bad stuff from the web, and disavow the rest of bad stuff through webmaster tools), we expect drops in positions for keywords that were previously filtered (because not many links, if any, remains). How will that process affect our previously not-filtered main and long tail phrases? We wonder if there's a point in removing that manual penalty. Our website still receives solid portion of organic traffic, because Google didn't penalized all of our phrases supported by bad SEO. Any tips or suggestions as to what path should we take from here? Mind you, this is an e-commerce website. We fear that removing the penalty will result in removing most of the existing organic traffic, and our sales will suffer tremendously.
Link Building | | superseopl0 -
Backlinks from archived content? SEO penalty?
I'm curious, if I go to webmasters and suggest a change to an article in their archives (convincing them that the new link offers more value to their readers), how would Google look at that? It seems to me that if a two-year-old article all of a sudden gets a new link, it might look fishy, and might even bring penalties with it. Thoughts?
Link Building | | JABacchetta0 -
Site received penalty, Traffic restricted to 3-4 visits/hour
Dear all We received a penalty notice at webmaster tools 2 months ago, in that stated "your pages violate our quality guidelines" and "contain some inorganic links to your site". Ours is a Coupon website and tried to follow all quality guidelines given in webmaster central. Also we tried to identify and remove spam kind of links and still we are working on that. Suddenly from yesterday website traffic restricted to 3-4 visits/hour, but website main keyword SERPs are not changed much and still ranking at good positions. my question if any website is under manual penalty, it's traffic will be restricted by Google???. Every link we build manually and not gone for any paid links or reciprocal links. But the sites given some links as sitewide, example we tried to get a back link & submitted url at once only, but it was showing in webmaster Total links 468 and linked pages 1. Can any one please explain, how it can happen?. We are trying to remove these spam kind of links, but from directory owners response is a bit disappointing, kindly any one suggest that, will Google Disavow tool help in this regard and how much time it will take to nullify the links?. Kindly help us..Thanking you all in advance
Link Building | | Shashidhar.SEO0 -
How is it possible that Interflora can bounce back from a Google penalty so quickly - is that normal?
As far as I understand it Interflora was removed from Google organic search results on February 20th. I guess no one knows for sure why they were delisted other than Google but I have heard theories such as giving flower bribes to bloggers in return for links 🙂 How sweet - and placing paid follow links inside advertorials within local newspaper sites. Whatever the reason for their de listing it seemed Google must have wanted to send out a strong message since even a branded search wasn't ranking. Fast forward 13 days to today and I now see Interflora ranking not only for their brand but also for flower delivery London etc etc... How is it possible that they managed to get back in the SERPs so quickly? Is it normal to get a penalty and be back up and running at position 1 in less than 2 weeks? Is that normal for a penalty? I was under the impression that being caught gaming Google to the extent where they delisted you was something far more serious and had much longer term repercussions?
Link Building | | Clicksjim0 -
How Would Google Approach Devaluing Infographic Links?
How do you think Google would go about devaluing infographic links? Suppose the infographic image itself is not hyperlinked to the creator's site but there is a paragraph that mentions the creator and links to their site. How would Google distinguish the infographic creator's link from other external links on the page?
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
Should infographic relate to the niche?
There's been a lot of talk about using good infographics for natural inbound links and I'm curious if they should be related to the niche or can be just about anything? I mean I know it makes no sense to have a fun page about cats if you're selling cooking dishes online but I want to hear some input. What do you think?
Link Building | | cgman0