Reporting paid links (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Development] >> Search Engine Optimization and Web Business



Message

_gail -> Reporting paid links (4/25/2007 8:10:05)

I don't fully understand what this is all about. Does Google expect website owners to report paid links? Thank so much.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/

gail



Mojo -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/25/2007 11:20:57)

There has been a lot of talk about this lately. Once again, Google is trying to dictate how webmasters must build and design their sites. Personally, I believe this is all just a diversionary tactic by Google designed to scare people into being obedient little drones. If your site is not advertising that it takes money for links - how can it be determined if a link is paid or not?

Overall, I think Google will get what they want. There are a *lot* of people that believe that Google is capable of all they claim so they will not buy or sell links. There are also people that somehow equate Google with the Internet. These people will do anything asked by Google for the greater good of the Internet - as if Google was *not* a for profit business that squeezes every cent from other peoples hard work.

As long as people buy into what Google is demanding it will make it much easier for those of us who don't allow our business interests to be determined by another business.

If Google ever does apply penalties to sites that were reported to have bought or sold links then I predict this will be the biggest dark side tool ever developed. Even a better weapon that the DMCA.



_gail -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/25/2007 13:17:49)

Thanks Mojo!

What does it mean when when they speak about whether links should being followed by spiders or not? I have a few paid and unpaid text links at my site (plus text-link ads). Am I supposed to be doing something special; if so and I don't, will I get penalized by Google?

gail



Mojo -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/25/2007 23:32:48)

Nofollow is a two year old tag that was originally supposed to be used by blogs to lessen blog spam. Google said they would not give any link credit to a site linked with the nofollow tag. The strange thinking that came up with this figured that if *all* bloggers would put the nofollow tag in *all* links - then blog spam would end overnight. For many obvious reasons this didn't work for blog spam, but Google is now using it to to try and improve their search results by altering the way webmasters use links on their own sites. Maybe that was their plan all along - get a worthless tag accepted into the community by claiming it would eliminate spam and then slide it over to paid links once everyone was familiar with it.

Here are a couple of links to read more. There are many, many sites that have discussed this issue - rel="nofollow"

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/01/preventing-comment-spam.html
http://linkcondom.com/




_gail -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/26/2007 13:53:45)

So is anyone making any changes to their site yet, or should we "wait and see?"

Are the choices, use no-follow text or don't accept paid text ads?



jaybee -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/26/2007 16:21:26)

Ignorance is bliss. Accordingly, I didn't just read this thread and have no idea what you're talking about. [;)]



Mojo -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/26/2007 17:16:57)

Exactly...



_gail -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/26/2007 17:18:02)

What did you read? Was it written by me? I didn't know I was talking about anything other than unsharp mask and jpegs.

Thanks, jaybee! [:D]



caz -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/26/2007 17:52:34)

Possibly a storm in a teacup, but the impression I got was that Google is trying to dictate to webmasters under the guise of improving the precision of search results. But Google's Adsense income will not be affected - or, have I got that wrong? ( Very likely I have because SEO is magic to me; just like electricity [;)] )



Reflect -> RE: Reporting paid links (4/27/2007 7:39:58)

They can tell me what I cannot do with my site. I can choose to ignore it as...it is my site. I think if you do not get blatant and state PR as the reason you will be OK. There are other SEs out there. There are also PPC/PPI/etc. listing I can do on those SEs, in other words vote with my money.

Take care,

Brian



_gail -> RE: Reporting paid links (5/12/2007 11:43:09)

So, the page rank of pages on lots of sites have dropped recently? Is it because they are using text link ads?

As it relates to my original question, should people add a rel=nofollow attribute to all paid links?

Thanks, gail




Mojo -> RE: Reporting paid links (5/12/2007 18:50:02)

define: rel=nofollow

1. means you don't trust the site you are linking towards
2. you don't trust the page where the link is located
3. Google would like all paid links to be wrapped in the nofollow

So, to answer your question - if you use nofollow you will be admitting one of the three options I just mentioned.

Since I don't link to pages I don't trust and I control all my sites content and trust all of my own pages I will not be using nofollow in that context. In addition, I have a tendency to bristle when another FOR PROFIT company tries to dictate how I run my businesses. Following that logic I will not be using nofollow just to help Google run their business.

Where will I use nofollow? On occasion I may link to a story where I don't like the author or the site. In these few situations I may use nofollow to avoid sharing any of the link juice - if in fact that is what Google does.



Asiadeep -> RE: Reporting paid links (6/5/2007 12:49:46)

I personally think that google or specifically matt cutts is making a bit whoo-ha about it all. Although I have noticed quite a few directories fall in PR I think that is because of a recalculation of PR internet wide, you know...the bell curve thing.

I think if google does indeed try and implement a algorithm to check for paid links then all hell is going to break loose. Its basically akin to shooting themselves in the foot. This is because their search algorithm are still factor in heavily the weight of links and if you mess around with that its rocking one hell of a big boat.

If you do a cost benefit analysis the risks of messing around with the algorithm that turned you into a multi-million dollar company just isn't worth the benefit. The benefit is a fairer internet that isn't, mediocre search results with definately more spam just like when altavista was the biggest around years ago and probably slightly more adwords revenue. I don't see adwords going through the roof as people will move to other search engines (yahoo, msn) and use their products instead.

Really I can't see how it will benefit them in the short to medium term to try look for paid links using an algorithm



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.078125