Your typical blog disclosure. "We received a free product but are not financially compensated".
-
Good afternoon & Happy Friday!
I've ran into the following disclosure multiple times on different blogs. It seems to me like it would be a red flag and counter productive for both the blogger and the brand sending the samples as "free samples" are subject to google link scheming.
Am I correct? What are your thoughts on bloggers using this disclaimer in regards to SEO?
Disclosure: Some of these products were samples provided to me to try. Opinions and the choice to review are 100% my own! I was not financially compensated for writing this blog post. This post contains affiliate links.
-
Steve,
Thank you for sharing this.
-
I'm doing some competitive link analysis for a new client in the food industry right now and I've come across one of their competitors using this tactic quite extensively, and it seems to be working very well. They crush their competitors as far as domain authority. Most of the anchor text is branded (company name) but you can quickly tell that there are one or two keyword phrases that they have targeted. I can only assume that they were getting some of the bloggers to include the custom anchor text. It's definitely not overdone, so the overall link profile still looks natural.
The bloggers that they're targeted all seem to have relatively authoritative sites which I can only assume means their brand is getting a lot of quality exposure on these sites as well as referral traffic. I'd hazard a guess that the direct referral traffic and overall exposure is worth as much or more than the increase in organic rankings that they would see because of these links. None of these links were nofollow or affiliate links.
The general rule of thumb I've always espoused (with a few exceptions) is that anything that you are doing for SEO purposes should have an equal or greater benefit to you for _non-SEO _reasons. I guess that's sort of my test to see if something can be considered a legitimate white hat technique. But there's obviously still some grey area with this.
-
Amazon actually gives products to their top reviewers. Via Amazon Vine. Trick is un-biased good reviews gets you good stuff! Moz actually gives rewards too, but its actually for helping others. You could say a review kinda...helps others ya?
-
Hi
Free samples are a bit of a grey area, and in my opinion it depends on who is sending out the product and what they really want from it.
We send out quite a few products to be reviewed and we actually want them reviewing to find out what people think of them and to drive sales (if it gets a positive review). I like a link and only for the reason its easier for the customer to purchase the item, but whether that link is follow / no follow / affiliate - i don't really care. Its all about the review to build awareness of the fact we sell the products and sometimes to show the diversity of the products we sell, especially new categories.
Where it becomes and issue is when the person sending out the reviews start demanding followed links to certain parts of the sites, thee don't look natural and the only reason they are sending out the products are for SEO benefit.
Regarding your disclaimer, as someone who has sent out products I wouldn't have a problem with you putting that on there, and there was something earlier this month about vlogging now having to make it clear when they have been given free products to review.
I guess SEO isn't as White Hat and Black Hat as some claim, as this to me would be 'Grey Hat'. Plus review sites need to get there products from somewhere to review and these sites do add a lot of value to customers in the decision process of buying so I couldn't ever see Google penalising sites for either accepting review samples or sending them out - whether or not in the future the might a 'review follow' as well as 'follow and no follow' I don't know. This could be one way for the search engines to see that while the links haven't technically been paid for but are not 100% natural.
Great article here for aditonal reading on this: moz.com/community/q/soliciting-product-reviews-with-free-samples
Thanks
Andy
-
Hey,
In my experience and opinion, it doesn't reflect a linking scheme. This is a pretty common practice in both the online and offline marketing world, the disclosure is used to separate an actual review from a paid promotion.
I have never have had negative SEO results from using a disclaimer.
Just my 2 cents. Hope that helps.
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
-
"No Information Available" Error for Homepage in Google
Hi Everyone, Been racking my brain around this one. Not sure why it is happening. Basically Google is showing the "www" version of the homepage, when 99% of the site is "non-www". It also says "No Information Available". I have tried submitting it through GSC, but it is telling me it is blocked through the Robots.txt file. I don't see anything in there that would block it. Any ideas? shorturl.at/bkpyG I would like to get it to change to the regular "non-www" and actually be able to show information.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vetofunk0 -
Product URL Optimisation
Hi guys, We are currently trying to add new products to our site but we are in a quandary on what type of URL structure to pursue. For example:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | michel_8
Product Name: Aspect Exfoliating Cleanser 240ml https://www.example.com.au/aspect-exfoliating-cleanser-240ml (including the size)
VS
https://www.example.com.au/aspect-exfoliating-cleanser 1.) Which is a better URL structure based on SEO 2018 and why?
2.) Is there any merit in removing the size from the URL key with the aim of attracting more traffic? Keen to hear from you guys! Cheers,0 -
"noindex, follow" or "robots.txt" for thin content pages
Does anyone have any testing evidence what is better to use for pages with thin content, yet important pages to keep on a website? I am referring to content shared across multiple websites (such as e-commerce, real estate etc). Imagine a website with 300 high quality pages indexed and 5,000 thin product type pages, which are pages that would not generate relevant search traffic. Question goes: Does the interlinking value achieved by "noindex, follow" outweigh the negative of Google having to crawl all those "noindex" pages? With robots.txt one has Google's crawling focus on just the important pages that are indexed and that may give ranking a boost. Any experiments with insight to this would be great. I do get the story about "make the pages unique", "get customer reviews and comments" etc....but the above question is the important question here.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
Product Category Subcategory hierarchy
Hi all, I am developing an ecommerce store and would like some advice on the Category / Product URL structure for SEO purposes. Products have many options Products belong to a sub-category. Sub categories belong to a category There will be a maximum of 500 products in the database. 1. http://shop.com/{category}/{product_slug}?{product_option} Flattened with query string option http://shop.com/apple/iphone-5s?model=32gb&colour=white 2. http://shop.com/{category}/{subcategory}/{product_slug}?{product_option} // Hierarchical with query string option 3. http://shop.com/{category}/{product_slug}/{product_option} 4. http://shop.com/{category}/{subcategory}/{product_slug}/{product_option} 5. http://shop.com/{category}/{product-slug} http://shop.com/apple/iphone-5s-32gb-black Option 5 seems best to me, however I am also worried about duplicate content between pages. http://shop.com/apple/iphone-5s-32gb-black http://shop.com/apple/iphone-5s-64gb-black http://shop.com/apple/iphone-5s-64gb-white The above 3 examples will all have very similar content. And if I use canonical url tag, which product page would I refer these pages to? At least with Option 1 I can use the canonical tag to tell search engines that pages with get parameters can point to the non get parameter version. In addition to Option 5, should I create a http://shop.com/{category}/{subcategory} page? That way Option 5 item canonical tags can point to that page. e.g. http://shop.com/apple/iphone-5s which would contain product summary detail with product options listed on the page? Am I missing something here or can anybody provide a better solution?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MangoMM0 -
Rel="canonical" and rel="alternate" both necessary?
We are fighting some duplicate content issues across multiple domains. We have a few magento stores that have different country codes. For example: domain.com and domain.ca, domain.com is the "main" domain. We have set up different rel="alternative codes like: The question is, do we need to add custom rel="canonical" tags to domain.ca that points to domain.com? For example for domain.ca/product.html to point to: Also how far does rel="canonical" follow? For example if we have:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlliedComputer
domain.ca/sub/product.html canonical to domain.com/sub/product.html
then,
domain.com/sub/product.html canonical to domain.com/product.html0 -
REPOST: How much does "overall site semantic theme" influence rankings?
Hello everyone on the new cool Moz! I've optimized sites before that are dedicated to 1, 2 or 3 products and or services. These sites inherently talk about one main thing - so the semantics of the content across the whole site reflect this. I get these ranked well on a local level. Now, take an e-commerce site - which I am working on - 2000 products, all of which are quite varied - cookware, diningware, art, decor, outdoor, appliances... there is a lot of different semantics throughout the site's different pages. Does this influence the ranking possibilities? Your opinion and time is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjs20101 -
Product discontinued
Hi there, We have ranking top 3 for a competitive keyword, however the product linked to that keyword has just been discontinued, normally if we have alternatives to this product I would keep this page live and direct users to those alternatives products. What is best practice here? keeping the page live and telling users that this product has been discontinued and offering a helpline number? or just removing the page all together? (404) Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Paul780 -
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? or this is like a good example by google
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? Or this is like a good example shown by google. We are cleaning our links from Penguin and dont know what to do with these ones. Some of them does not look quality.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0