Link Blog

There has been a very interesting thread in WebMasterWorld forum regarding the link selling and purchasing practices, Does Google Reward Backlinks Buyers & Sellers? The entire thread was inspired by a post from Matt Cutts blog, "Tell me about your backlinks".

In Mr. Cutts blog he elludes to the fact that Google is getting better at identifing when backlinks have been purchased. Now, this has sparked a big debate in WMW. People on both sides of the fence, "Oh yes Google knows" and "Oh no they don't".

A poster who goes by the handle whitenight made the most sense to me. Basically, their point was that an algorithm is a mathematical measurement, that means that all an algorithm can do is tally metrics that are input. Naturally, the metrics are written by humans, but the only things they could really do to automatically spot paid-for links is to look for things like, "Sponsored" or "Advertisers". Oh, by the way, if you are using tiltes such as these to denote your paid advertising for text links, you would be wise to reconsider. Title tags like that greatly diminish the value of your text link.

"As a "SEO/SEM/Web Marketing specialist" your primary "ethical" interest should be to your clients, not to "be in good standing with the folks of search engines"

Just as Google's primary "ethical" concern is to make money for it's shareholders, not keep webmasters "in the know" or even be honest with them.

Once you come to grips with these realities, it's a lot easier to "figure out" what MC, GG, or Adam is saying and reading between the lines.

Until such time as I hear MC say buying backlinks is "black hat" AND see it posted on their website guidelines page, AND see big name companies (like Yahoo!) losing rankings with obvious bought links, then it is in a SEO specialist's interest to inform their client of potential consequences.

The words of MC should always be taken with a grain of salt as it is not his primary "ethical" interest to look out for webmasters or their sites.

As I've mentioned before, MC says alot of things that Google isn't able to mandate or police their own guidelines.

Sure I keep an eye out for proof (the SERPS) that indeed the new algo is penalizing or rewarding for said behavior. But I most certainly do not take MC's word at face value. It is not in my clients' primary interest to do so.

You shouldn't be scared to pursue link purchases, especially if they are providing benefits of referral traffic as well as improved search engine placements. On Matt Cutts blog he mentions two sites that were purchasing backlinks. Did the sites get penalized? Were they removed from Google's index? No, there placements dropped, nothing a few more quality links couldn't rectify. Of course, Matt can't recommend that these companies BUY more links, but he did tell them to gain more backlinks - just don't pay for them.

The catch is the fastest way to replace those links is by purchasing new ones from other trusted sites. It seems so strange to me that this act is not considered advertising. Essentially, that is all link purchases are, another means of advertising. Maybe we should all change the way the we look at link purchases, because wether the purchase is for referral traffic or improved search engine placements, the bottom line is they are purchased for more exposure. That's just my two cents.

Until Next Time,
Happy Linking,
LinkQueen