News Source: http://searchengineland.com
Published: Sep 23, 2008 - 04:22 pm
Story Found By: tomcritchlow 1236 Days ago
Category: SEM
10 Comments
Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.
News Source: http://searchengineland.com
Published: Sep 23, 2008 - 04:22 pm
Story Found By: tomcritchlow 1236 Days ago
Category: SEM
10 Comments
Upcoming Conferences
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
- SMX West - Feb. 28 - Mar. 1, 2012
- SMX Munich - Mar. 27-28, 2012
- SMX Toronto - Apr. 25-26, 2012
- SMX Sydney - May 1-2, 2012
- SMX London - May 15-16, 2012
- SMX Advanced Seattle - June 5-6, 2012
- SMX Paris - June 7-8 2012
- SMX Melbourne - Aug. 2012
- SMX East - Oct. 2-4, 2012
- SMX Stockholm - Sept. 15-16, 2012
- SMX Social Media Marketing - Dec. 2012
Latest News From Marketing Land
- Marketing Day: February 10, 2012
- Report: iPhone, iPad Now Drive More Web Traffic Than Mac OS
- Drawing Out Your Affiliate Program Marketing Plan
- Is Yahoo About To Make Another Big Mistake — With Its Display Ad Business?
- Google Analytics For The Enterprise: Perception & Reality
- - See more news at Marketing Land -
Upcoming Webcasts
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
- The Inside Scoop on Automating and Optimizing Your PPC Campaigns - February 21, 2012
Latest News From Search Engine Land
- Google’s Recent Domain Registrations: Labs, Screenwise & AdWords
- Google AdWords Gets Shared Lists To Eliminate Duplicate Data Entry
- SearchCap: The Day In Search, February 10, 2012
- Now, Mitt Romney Has A Santorum-Like Bing & Google Problem
- Search In Pics: Google Sugar Cube, Yahoo Valentines & Chrome M&M’s
- - See more news at Search Engine Land -
Comments
I think the key element to this whole argument is in making Google’s rules clearer (which I think means I come down on the side of Graywolf). After all, I can envisage situations where products are being given to bloggers and it WOULD induce a google penalty therefore where do you draw the line?I agree that you shouldn’t get a penalty for distributing products for the viral marketing rather than the links but at the end of the day it’s pretty difficult to tell the difference (and the algo certainly can’t tell the difference yet).
I like the practice (as does Ciaran, it sounds like) - especially in terms of influencing influencers, but I agree with Tom that a lack of clarity is the biggest problem here.If paid links are bad (as G clearly thinks they are), then it seems to me you can cross that line with things that aren’t cash money - paying with "stuff". I am wary of using the "feels OK" test as many situations where you might buy links "feel OK" to me (e.g. as advertising / for traffic).
We heard a lot about this at BlogWorld this past weekend. Apparently many bloggers have been getting free products to blog about. Everything from Cameras to Cars (which they got to keep). I’ve been missing out. :)
So c’mon @mattcutts care to shed a little light on the products for posts issue? For me it seems the same thing as paid posts but the blogosphere who rallied so hard against paid posts seems a bit more receptive to products for posts.Do I really have to go thru the trouble of starting a posts for products service before we can get an official opinion?
I give a girl money to sleep with me and it is prostitution.I buy a girl a fancy gift and she sleeps with me because she likes the gift and it is just like most evey other relationship.Could it be that easy?
"Do I really have to go thru the trouble of starting a posts for products service before we can get an official opinion?"Michael, I feel that if you began such a service, it would fall out of a certain search engine’s favour rather quickly ;) In fact, there’s a new business idea: Want to have a practice banned? Bring Graywolf the specs. he’ll start a service. Instant-black list!
I think the distinction is implicit.If I say to a blogger "you can have this carton of cigarettes if you link to me" there is a clear transaction going on there. That’s (ever so slightly) different to "you can have this carton of cigarettes, and if you do decide to, here’s what I would prefer the link to look like"I agree that in practice there is often very little difference between the two, but Google has to be able to draw the line somewhere. And if they come out and say the the latter is ok, then the practice would pick up which would reduce their relevency.
That’s (ever so slightly) different to "you can have this carton of cigarettes, and if you do decide to, here’s what I would prefer the link to look like<div></div><div>The thing is that I’d argue, not so much for risk of offending Google as offending the blogger, that if what you’re after is conversation and coverage, that you shouldn’t even mention how you want a link to look. Hugh McLeod, who did an amazing job at this sort of thing for vineyard Stormhoek never, I’m sure, told people what sort of link he wanted: he just sent people the wine and said "We’d love to know what you think"<div></div><div></div></div>
@janecopland I feel there’s been a double set of rules one for SEO’s and one for everyone else for a while, so far google has been able to dodge the issue ... but doesnt mean I’m giving up trying :-)of course my new service wouldn’t require links for any product gifts your recieve ... of course you dont have to be a google engineer with a PHD to figure out that after you take 1 or 2 gifts and don’t blog about them it’s pretty unlikely you’ll get another ... really am i going to have to go this route to get google to answer and clarify things it’s ridiculous but I’ll do it if I have to ...
Something from off line to ponder and relate to this...The other day I was watching an interview of the Zagat founders. They said in the interview that they often get food that they didn’t order (as in "try this, you’ll like it") when restaurants discover that they are in the house. They also receive service that is not the normal standard because of their fame as well. They said something about other reviewers having the same issue. They can’t get an objective feel for how service and food is when the restaurant knows who they are serving to. Not only do the revierws receive the best in food/service, but items come from outside of the menu, they aren’t charged for food, and all the other lengths that restaurants go to. It is not that the restaurant is implicitly saying "write about us" (or inversely, "don’t write bad things about us"). But I think it obvious, that the goal is to influence the influencer in some fashion. If you know that they are a writer, they most likely outcome is that they will write, no? And a favorable review is worth morth than a few dollars of service/food.