The Blurry Lines Of Google’s Paid Links Policy

[snakeair]

I'm not all the way done reading this one but taking a little break from it. Long blog post btw.

As you probably know, Google isn’t a fan of people paying for links that pass PageRank. It’s considered to be a manipulation of search results and a violation of Google’s quality guidelines, which are the focus of Google’s Penguin update. It’s interesting that there seem to be exceptions to the rule, such as a directory like Best Of The Web, which has users pay for their sites to be considered for links.

Update: BOTW has gotten back to us since this article was published. Please see President Greg Hartnett’s comments toward the end of the article.

Perhaps more interesting is that some similar directory sites, which aren’t necessarily in clear violation of Google guidelines seem to be getting penalized, or at the very least drawing the ire of unhappy webmasters looking to get their link profiles cleaned up after receiving messages from Google.


Google recently launched a PageRank update, and many directory sites saw their PR plummet. Best Of The Web, meanwhile, has managed to maintain....

Continued at: http://www.webpronews.com/the-blurry...policy-2012-05

I know everyone has a strong opinion about paid links. Take a look at the blog post before commenting on it please.

[Brave7]

Google duplicated the directory DMOZ for years and it did bother them at that time.

The rush from webmasters asking directory owners to remove their links is a sign of panic, personally I will not waste my time doing that.

IMO since the last 3 years Google declared war against webmasters, because they are perhaps not interested to expend their data centers. What they want are the best sites following their criteria, their choices coincides from the time they exit the China market, so they are focusing on the US and Europeen markets.

[robjones]

The article answered its own question
Hard to see why the guy bothered to write the article when he included Matt Cutts video addressing it {his second on that topic}... and the video makes the answer very clear. Cutt's videos clarify questions that would take pages to cover in the TOS {and Lord knows we dont need longer TOS}.

+ YouTube Video

Do we REALLY want Google to hit harder than they have?
The gist of the blog post was "Why doesn't Google slap THEM?" Seriously now, are we really gonna ask Google to be MORE restrictive? Seems counterproductive. They've explained why they dont consider it link-selling.

Incidentally, worth re-mentioning Greg's answer pointing out that the majority of the sites in the dir are gathered by editors, not submitted. A lot of excellent editors put time into building categories by gathering sites not submitted. Not the same as a directory built entirely on commercial submissions.

[Brave7]

It’s obvious that the reason one would want to be listed in this directory is SEO. It’s not because people are going to the directory to search for businesses. It’s an SEO strategy

From what the author said, it is pretty obvious that directories are for SEO. I don't use directories anymore, the best are too expensive for me and the small are duplicating their db, so I never submitted my site to 50% of them.

Honestly I have seen that little directories once you submitted your site, 6 months later they put adsenses, so that what they are really made for. If Google was serious about the directories intergrity, they shouldn't allow them an adsenses account at the first place.

Like anything else, when people abuse it, the rules are tighten.

[snakeair]

Originally Posted by Natural Elements

From what the author said, it is pretty obvious that directories are for SEO. I don't use directories anymore, the best are too expensive for me and the small are duplicating their db, so I never submitted my site to 50% of them.

Honestly I have seen that little directories once you submitted your site, 6 months later they put adsenses, so that what they are really made for. If Google was serious about the directories intergrity, they shouldn't allow them an adsenses account at the first place.

Like anything else, when people abuse it, the rules are tighten.

I don't submit to directories that much as i keep forgetting to add this into my marketing tactic's. lol

I do agree that slapping up adsense on directories is just a waste of time for the small unpopular directories. I'm sure they make a few cents each week. If the directory is very popular and well maintained, having 1 of 2 blocks of adsense is OK for additional income if it's a free directory. Directories with huge adsense blocks in bad locations get on my nerves.

I agree with what Greg stated in the blog post. If he would of never responded, i'd prolly not post this blog post on the forum. BOTW is a well respected directory in my own opinion. Although i won't submit as that is my beer money.

[Brave7]

Originally Posted by robjones

Do we REALLY want Google to hit harder than they have?

This morning I checked some SERP and saw many of us (little retailers and little manufacturers) going down deeper. If we are not on the first top 10 positions, it is almost impossible to sell our products.

It doesn't matter how Google hit us hard if we aren't in the top 10. So actually for me Google can hit whatever they want, it is not going to change.

After several weeks since Panda and Penguin update, I am still find domains with no contents ranking high, crappy sites, and the relevancy is extremely poor.

The hyper duper user experience on Google is very questionable

[martz45]

Originally Posted by Natural Elements

After several weeks since Panda and Penguin update, I am still find domains with no contents ranking high, crappy sites, and the relevancy is extremely poor.

The hyper duper user experience on Google is very questionable

I would like to add that Google makes page 1 to those sites that are complete copycat particularly with content and design. What makes them differ from the original is that they are Exact Match Domain. EMD's are more ranking higher even with crappy content.