Sphinn - Paid posts are the devil incarnate according to search engines

36
Sphinn It!

Paid posts are the devil incarnate according to search engines

Went Hot: December 30, 2007 - 3:24 pm
Posted By: AndyBeard 290 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.yackyack.co.uk)
Category: Google SEO

"If you knew of a blogger who was part of a system that was paid by an advertiser to write reviews about a product or service that you knew would contain nofollowed links to the core advertiser, yet was allowed to link out to other content to enhance, support or compare the position of whatever it was that was being discussed then wouldn’t you try and use this knowledge? Furthermore, if you were an advertiser that understood the game, then again what would you do too? Would you seriously just sit idly by and not use that knowledge to help your cause?"

8 Comments

Who Desphunn This (0)

Comments

from Halfdeck 289 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

"Paid posts are the devil incarnate according to search engines"

And Google is the devil incarnate according to webmasters, so what else is new?

from SlightlyShadySEO 289 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

@HalfDeck:
Your very own statement is what's new ;-)

Remember, not so long ago Google lived in relative harmony with webmasters. Remember when Slashdot/Digg would have articles up that would mention Google violating it's own "do no evil" rule, and people would jump to Google's defense?
I'm still weighing out where I'm going to appear in that whole exchange. I'm leaning towards "Google is neither good nor evil, it's a business", but damn if it hasn't been hard to maintain that middle ground lately.

from Halfdeck 289 days ago #

Votes: 1 | Vote:

+ -

"Remember, not so long ago Google lived in relative harmony with webmasters."

IMO that's because webmasters for a while believed they could have the cake and eat it too. They believed they could sell links and also make money off Google traffic. Now they're being told they can't have it both ways. No one enjoys giving up money.

My position on this is simple; using inflammatory language will not further the paid link discussion. Google is far from perfect, but comparing Google to the gestapo or terrorists, for example, is only going to piss Googlers off to a point where they will be more aggressive than ever. Google's TBPR penalty is a response to our claim "you suck at detecting paid links." The penalty basically said "yeah, we can detect your paid links, and next time it won't be just a slap on the wrist." Google made sure the big dogs took the hit as well, so people couldn't claim Google only went after the little guys.

In short, marketers in the SEM community are fueling the fire when the battle is better fought under the radar. Why the constant "Google-baiting?" More traffic, more RSS subscribers, more authority links, as Andy Beard figured out after publishing his TBPR penalty blog posts back in November. I'm probably the only one that did not link to his post. We are digging our own graves or else smashing our head repeatedly against a brick wall.

Also, as I've said elsewhere, Google will listen to voices of reason and constructive criticism; that's a more effective strategy than this irrational mudslinging that's been going on in the SEOsphere all throughout 2007.

from SlightlyShadySEO 289 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Ah, my aplogies.
I didn't realize you were speaking out against inflammatory language regarding this.

from AndyBeard 288 days ago #

Votes: 2 | Vote:

+ -

Halfdeck I was certainly covering the topic well before the October / November PageRank downgrade, in fact I have covered this as a core topic on my blog for over a year - it is one of the prime reasons I started my blog, to get some of the grey areas clarified.

I do try to keep the tone of my posts civil and containing constructive elements, though some of my commenters get carried away.
If I wanted to write content purely for more RSS readers I would just pump out newbie posts and lists. It takes far less work, and gets far more links per post.

I actually gained very few new subscribers from the blogstorm in October depite the increased traffic, and certainly not in proportion to how many I gain from a good social media or seo post.

I have never purchased a link in my life, I am not a supporter of paid links for SEO purposes, which is probably where my coverage and Michael Gray's differ so much, though on the surface they might seem similar.

from graywolf 288 days ago #

Votes: 3 | Vote:

+ -

I'm a supporter of Google (and everyone else for that matter) minding their own business and not telling other people how to run their lives and businesses. If people are doing things that mess with Google business model, Google needs to solve that problem on its own with its own time and financial resources, not run a fear mongering campaign scaring people into compliance.

from pcunix 287 days ago #

Votes: 3 | Vote:

+ -

Halfdeck says Google will "listen to voices of reason and constructive criticism".

Really? You can't comment at http://adsense.blogspot.com. Any email you get from them specifically says that you can't reply to it.. Matt Cutts, the "unofficial" commentator an all things Googly seems to duck and weave and be very unresponsive.. I've sent in responsible and non-critical suggestions to Google on more than one occasson and gotten no response. I've asked direct questions in comments at Matt Cutts blog and been ignored..

Now maybe I'm wrong: maybe Google really does listen. But it sure doesn't feel that way way down here on the Long Tail. My impression of Google is extreme arrogance and little concern for any voices but the very loud ones..

I do book reviews in part of my site. Because I've done hundreds and hundreds of them, publishers send me books to review.. free. Does that taint my reviews by Google's rules? I don't know, and I don't think they are going to tell me.

Sometimes I get software and hardware to review also - not as often as I get books, but it happens. Are those "paid" reviews? Again, I don't know, but I'm going to be cautious and use "nofollow".

from okidoodoo 287 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Don't any of you get it?

It is very naive and in the marketing world even worse for anyone to think that powerful entities like Google are either good or evil,
While you debate over sometimes pointless topics ..the machine is in hiding, discussing, planning, burning books and bridges, with it's eye on you, watching you, anticipating your every move.
Gear up and get ready for the future, stay on top!
Read, listen and learn!.

Happy New Year!

:)