Sphinn - PageRank changes: Digg Favorites Slapped By Google

143
Sphinn It!

PageRank changes: Digg Favorites Slapped By Google

Went Hot: October 24, 2007 - 8:27 am
Posted By: Wiep 619 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://andybeard.eu)
Category: Google SEO

"For a company such as Google with a stock price based extensively on anticipated growth and public sentiment, it doesn't take a huge swing in goodwill to have a dramatic effect on valuation. Google has just slapped their biggest fans."

Most of the websites that got hit have been selling direct links, but network cross linking also seems to be an issue...

21 Comments

Who Desphunn This (0)

Comments

from tappingcreativity 619 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Again, why link-based punishments will be nearly impossible to pull off correctly.

from JohnWeb 619 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Very interesting. Find any squeeky clean ones that don't follow the pattern yet?

from AndyBeard 619 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

I thought Forbes, pointed out by Wiep, but they have links to "Best Credit Cards"

from Wiep 619 days ago #

Votes: 1 | Vote:

+ -

"Find any squeeky clean ones that don't follow the pattern yet?"

NewScientist.com and Space.com both went from a PR7 to a PR5

from JohnWeb 619 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Interesting...that may be pointing to a stock split or currency devaluing on their part then. Perhaps there were too many PageRank 10's up there at the top so they had to shuffle the requirements.

from bartimus 619 days ago # - show/hide this comment

Votes: -1 | Vote:

+ -

Google created the PageRank monster and now they are tearing it down. I am sure they have something bigger, better and safer in the works.

from Jill 619 days ago #

Votes: 5 | Vote:

+ -

Is there actually any proof that showing a lower PageRank on the Google Toolbar actually has any real life consequences?

I would guess that it's just a visual thing, in which case it's perfect for Google since websites often sell their ads based on the visible toolbar PageRank.

But is it affecting rankings, traffic or conversions (other than where link selling is concerned)???

from chriswinfield 619 days ago #

Votes: 1 | Vote:

+ -

Good post. Misleading title. I think it's way beyond "Digg favorites" as you can see....

from Skitzzo 619 days ago # - show/hide this comment

Votes: -1 | Vote:

+ -

It doesn't really matter whether it affects anything or not (from everything I've ever read or heard it's usually a snapshot from a couple months back). Google made PageRank (even toolbar page rank) matter because it's the only visable cue they give us as to a site's value. They promoted PR as a tool to measure a site's value and by doing this, they've just downgraded some of the biggest sites on the web.

I'd expect Matt Cutts to make an appearance soon saying they screwed up and they'll roll things back. Even money though that they tried this out to see how much of a backlash they'd get and to instill just a little bit more fear, uncertainty, and doubt into the hearts and minds of link sellers everywhere.

from crimsongirl 619 days ago # - show/hide this comment

Votes: -1 | Vote:

+ -

"For a company such as Google with a stock price based extensively on anticipated growth and public sentiment, it doesn't take a huge swing in goodwill to have a dramatic effect on valuation. Google has just slapped their biggest fans."

Oh, please. Google is supposed to bend the rules for certain sites that are their "biggest fans"? Google got trusted by providing the best search results. The secret of their success since 2000 has been superior results. This blogger is suggesting they should help out certain sites now?

Anyone involved in SEO knows toolbar PR is highly dubious. It has unfortunately become a metric of site quality and is the currency traded by link brokers. Google would do their users a favor by eliminating visible PR to throw a monkeywrench into the sorry purchased link market.

"to instill just a little bit more fear, uncertainty, and doubt into the hearts and minds of link sellers everywhere."

If that's their strategy, I say: good for Google.

from Skitzzo 619 days ago # - show/hide this comment

Votes: -2 | Vote:

+ -

Oh for crying out loud, Crimsongirl, what rules are these sites breaking? Did you read the list of sites? Forbes, Washington Post, Problogger, Copyblogger, and on and on. Get a grip on your naive love affair with Google for long enough to realize they screwed the pooch on this one.

I'm not even going to get into your comment on link sales.

@ bartimus, have you met crimsongirl? I think you two would be a great match. I'm sure Google will release their "bigger, better, safer" something right after they figure out how to base their rankings on something other than links. (read as, not any time soon)

from toprank 619 days ago #

Votes: 3 | Vote:

+ -

This cracks me up.

from AndyBeard 619 days ago # - show/hide this comment

Votes: -2 | Vote:

+ -

So how many sock puppets does Google have on Digg?

Buried :(

from TimDineen 619 days ago #

Votes: 2 | Vote:

+ -

If they are really (by hand) targetting public sites to slap so that they'll attract attention to these penalties, then they'd have received a more optimal amount of publicity if they had timed this for during the SMX Social last week.

from andreawasik 619 days ago #

Votes: 1 | Vote:

+ -

I suspect that Forbes is/was selling links:

http://sphinn.com/story/4184

They have changed what they are linking to in the "Resources" section of the page since I referred to in that posting. They are now linking to internal "Resource" instead of to external sites, which they were linking to using such anchor text as "mortgage rates".

In my opinion, this is all good. After all, Google wants to return the absolute best search results to its users. If it's being gamed, the users may not be getting as good of a search result as they might get if there were no attempts at manipulation. Pretty simple, in my opinion.

from crimsongirl 619 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

"Oh for crying out loud, Crimsongirl, what rules are these sites breaking? Did you read the list of sites? Forbes, Washington Post, Problogger, Copyblogger, and on and on."

Forbes sells pages. I've seen them ranking for sites unrelated to Forbes magazine coverage. The ranking pages are sponsored by my competitors. Do I want Forbes punished for this? Yes!

My main enemies aren't sites that sell links. I just don't like people who buy links and then rank higher than me in the SERPS. I would like the purchased link economy to disappear ASAP.

from SEMSpot 619 days ago # - show/hide this comment

Votes: -2 | Vote:

+ -

Sadly enough crimsongirl the selling of links will not go away anytime soon. At worst it will be moved from the mainstream life to more underground affiliations to where not just anyone can buy proper links that actually will improve your website.

from AndyBeard 619 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

As far as I know Weblogs Inc doesn't sell links, but Yahoo does

AOL's blogs have just been given a massive penalty by Google - no penalty for Yahoo

Google and every other large site has massive interlinking

from Wiep 619 days ago #

Votes: 2 | Vote:

+ -

"As far as I know Weblogs Inc doesn't sell links"

Those "sponsored links" didn't have a nofollow tag until this morning...

from karacoatta 619 days ago #

Votes: 2 | Vote:

+ -

I like Aaron's quote. I agree the title is misleading.

from AndyBeard 617 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Just to let you know, the post has now been updated 6 times with feedback from those hardest hit, and also a link through to a podcast with Aaron from B5 discussing it with One By One Media