Climate of fear in the world of SEO
-
There certainly appears to be a certain climate of fear about backlinks at the mo, and not without reason.
I was wondering why Google moved from simply discounting links to punishing site owners for their backlink profiles, many of which were built up when the risks of punishment weren't there?
I mean, I could send them the names of at least 1,000 sites in linkfarms / blog rings - you name it. I'm sure most of us on here could do the same.
Responding to the whims of Google is such a waste of time and resources. Why doesn't Google simply choose a direction and stick with it? What is their strategy exactly?
-
Some great feedback here - firstly, thanks EGOL - I'm focusing 100% on content on a new site. Should be interesting - and that's a good point re: vandalism. I am concerned with the consequences of negative SEO / scrapers, clones, etc., though. Would be so good to be able to cut nasty incoming links in some way (I can but dream...) Love that saying too Donnie!
Good points there Marie - yes I get plagued by that stuff too - I'm beginning to wonder whether many of these comments are more about hoping some lunatic will click on the link than about manipulating SEO though.
To be totally honest, I wouldn't mind if Google laid down specific rules for linkbuilding. We advise that site owners should only proactively build no more than 10 links/page from relevant sites. The rest should be generated naturally. Something far more specific than we have at the moment.
And thanks Arpeggio. A very good point indeed. I agree.
-
The more advanced technology and logistics etc. becomes the further away human accountabilty becomes. I think thats a major challenge in the modern day in general.
-
I think the latest changes made by Google are accomplishing exactly what Google wants. They want website owners to stop "building links" and instead make the best possible site that gives the user the best possible information.
If they simply discounted links then many people would still go on building them "just in case" they helped. I mean, everyone knows that nofollowed comment spam is very unlikely to be helpful, but I get thousands of crap automated comments on my blog each month that are killed by Askimet, so people are still doing it.
But by building a culture of fear around links they've managed to get a lot of people in the SEO world saying, "Man! If I keep building links I could get a big penalty and my site could tank." The result? People stop building links.
Now, there are some links that are not a bad thing to build and this is the scary thing. People will be afraid to get ANY links to their site and that's not right. I know of someone who got the Better Business Bureau to remove all links to their site because they thought it could look unnatural. That is a good link
-
Thanks
-
"Give the people what they want and Google will give you to the people"
Thanks... that's a great saying!
-
I was wondering why Google moved from simply discounting links to punishing site owners for their backlink profiles, many of which were built up when the risks of punishment weren't there?
Google finally realized that merely "discounting" the links was resulting in a continued vandalism of blogs and forums as linkbuilders deposit their rubbish.
Why doesn't Google simply choose a direction and stick with it? What is their strategy exactly?
I think that they have "stuck" with their use of links for way too long.
Responding to the whims of Google is such a waste of time and resources.
A method to try would be to place 100% of your effort into building content and allow the links to slowly build on their own. This will start very slowly but will build to a rate that reflects the value of your content.
-
They want to give users the best results possible, by ensuring that their SERPs are not easily manipulated they can ensure a better overall user experience.
My saying has always been:
"Give the people what they want and Google will give you to the people"
Its quite simple.. they want sites that have a natural link profile and a great user experience (bookmarked, linked to, or shared)
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
-
Multiple sub-category of the same name ? does that effect SEO
Hello, If I have multiple sub-category of the same name ? does that affect SEO for example I have the following category structure? domain/bmw/series5/2006.html domain/bmw/series5/2007.html .. etc domain/bmw/series3/2007.html domain/bmw/series3/2006.html ..etc domain/Acura/cl/2006.html domain/Acura/cl/2007.html .. etc I do use canonical url because I may have the same product in multiple categories but my question does google penalize me because I have the same (year) url key for multiple categories even though I use canonical url ? do I have any advantage in masking them filters vs sub-category from SEO point of view ? specially my goal is to have different meta title and meta description for each sub category ?
Algorithm Updates | | LKCservicesINC0 -
38% of SEOs Never Disavow Links: Are you one among them or the other 62%?
Hi all, Links disavowing is such a advanced tasks in SEO with decent amount of risk involved. I thought many wouldn't follow use this method as Google been saying that they try to ignore bad links and there will be no penalty for such bad links and negative SEO is really a rare case. But I wondered to see only 38% SEOs never used this method and other 62% are disavowing links monthly, quarterly or yearly. I just wonder do we need to disavow links now? It's very easy to say to disavow a link which is not good but difficult to conclude them whether they are hurting already or we will get hurt once they been disavowed. Thanks Screenshot_3.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
More pages or less pages for best SEO practices?
Hi all, I would like to know the community's opinion on this. A website with more pages or less pages will rank better? Websites with more pages have an advantage of more landing pages for targeted keywords. Less pages will have advantage of holding up page rank with limited pages which might impact in better ranking of pages. I know this is highly dependent. I mean to get answers for an ideal website. Thanks,
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
SEO Value for Visitor Comments on WordPress Blog
Hi all, I was wondering what SEO value, if any, there is from user comments on my WordPress blog. A lot of them seem to be from bots or incredibly generic. So I guess, aside from possibly adding to the 'trust' factor and the possibility of facilitating a potential relationship with another relevant website, is there any value here? I can't wait to hear from you all!
Algorithm Updates | | maxcarnage0 -
What was the biggest challenge you faced as an SEO in 2012?
As an SEO (in-house, freelance, consultant, agency, entrepreneur) what was the biggest challenge you faced in 2012? Please be as specific as you can, and let us all know what you are doing to overcome this challenge in 2013. For me personally I would have to say the biggest challenge I had to deal with was Google+ Local. Obviously Google is putting a lot into G+L, but it has been so messy and at times I have just thrown my arms up in the air. Especially when it comes to multi-state locations and losing reviews.
Algorithm Updates | | clarktbell0 -
SEO updates and rank changes
We have been updating page titles and meta descriptions for a client (not changing ANY links and the content we are replacing is "fluff," no major keywords or any relevant information) yet in the past few weeks, rankings have plummeted. I used the SEOMoz grader to check and make sure we have the keywords in there, in the right places for the updated page source info, and we're getting A's yet for those same keywords, the website is nowhere to be found. For example for the phrase "organic t shirts," we get an A for this page: http://greenpromotionalitems.com/organic-t-shirts.htm but when searching organic t shirts, no Green Promotional Items... Ideas?
Algorithm Updates | | laidlawseo0 -
SEO Test: Domain Hyphenation [Update]
In May I announced test results for domain hyphenation but after a 3 month followup the results have changed and the hyphenated domain now wins on what seems to be the first link instance advantage. I was unable to discover any other factors which may have influenced this test but if anyone has any ideas I would like to hear about it. Here are the details of the SEO test and revealed URLs.
Algorithm Updates | | Dan-Petrovic1 -
TOP 3-5 SEO Blogs
I am wondering if you can help me start with the top three to five SEO blogs. I have been really enjoying and getting into learning more about SEO and it is becoming really fun as it becomes less overwhelming. A few days ago there was a question about great SEO blogs. And everyone provided a great list. I bookmarked all of them, but in reality I won't be able to go through them all and really get what is being presented. My question is what would be the best 3-5 to start with? Eventually I will go through them all but experience can help me get on the right track. Thanks for the suggestions
Algorithm Updates | | fertilityhealth0