- 41
- Sphinn It!
Posted By: rafiq 107 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.searchenginejournal.com)
Category: Link Building
7 Comments
7 Comments
Save the date for:
SMX Local & Mobile - San Francisco, CA (July 24-25) See the agenda, and register now!
SMX Sao Paolo - Brazil - (Aug. 7-8)
SMX China - September 23 & 24, 2008
SMX Stockholm - September 23 & 24, 2008
SMX East - NYC - (Oct. 6-8) Registration is now open.
SMX London - November 4 & 5, 2008
Comments
Does anyone still use reciprocal links???
Many do, Sana and it works to an extend when done with the right sites.
It works if you use it sparingly and carefully and it's not the main link building method.
The advice given in the article (interlinking your own sites with care, trying to look natural) is useful in the light of Google's twisted thinking, where "natural" equals "absolutely spontaneous, totally uninfluenced by self-interest".
It is wrong in every other sense. Interlinking your sites is natural in any form. It's natural even if you do it on the same day for all your sites. It's natural if you do it through sitewide links.
Unfortunately, in terms of search engines, and especially Google, "natural" is the new "artificial".
I just wrote an article on Link Cancer, you may want to read it.
http://sphinn.com/story/36266
Ah, Ann, I loved reading your earlier works, but this one lets you down.
1. Recip links - not good in a network theory world. It's an invitation to devaluation. Link exchanges just aren't a strategy worth considering IMO because the benefits are minimal, the investment of time is high, and the potential costs are also high.
2. Interlinking - if done for human users - fire away anyway you like. But for SE's. needs to be done with care and consideration. Careless interlinking carries potential dangers. "Fish in a barrel" comes to mind.
A lot of link dev work is actually not so much about developing links as much as managing risk - if you are going to interlink sites, it needs doing in such a way as to minimise risk, rather than look to short-term SE benefits.
Also, I didn't notice anything about linking sites by related topics, IP ranges, or settings up groups, pyramids, etc.
@Brian - of course we can endlessly go into details and guidelines that are numorous. You are right on almost all points... What you are missing is the purpose of the original post - to show what's natural in a simple natural language. The more details I would have mentioned, the more far away I would have been from my main aim: an easy to read naturally sounding post.
I wasn't looking at a marketing side either (yeah, being a search marketer, I still sometimes look at the other side of the medal).
I was not suggesting 'careless' interlinking and reciprocal linking, or ways to automate the process, or ways to make it look smart (aka pyramids) - my only purpose was to point out that if these links appear naturally, it is fine, because that's the essence of the Internet...
It was tempting indeed to list some practical techniques (different IPs, etc) but then that wouldn't at all any more be natural approach - simply because that would be techniques.