Are link exchanges good or bad?
November 17th 2006 17:44
Text Links – The good, the bad, and the downright ugly
Jessicca had a few questions over on the Blogging Tips pages so I decided that instead of trying to answer her in a comment that I would go ahead and post about here.
The question raised was about making search engines "mad" using spam like linking schemes and black hat SEO in the way the links are (or are not) presented. My answer isn't professional, but I'll go ahead and take a stab at it.
For years and years the internet ran on a algorithm similar to that of Orble, only it was much more behind-the-scenes in the past as opposed to today. Search engine pioneers such as Google looked at links from one page to another as if were a vote. The websites with the most "votes" would rank higher almost on links alone.
For a while it worked, and in theory I think it was a grand idea. But money came into play and where there is money there will be corruption. It didn't take long for black hats (people who do bad, bad things to manipulate search engine results) to figure out ways to generate millions of visitors by cheating the system. It was at this time that links started being looked at in a whole new light.
When it all first began, links were 100% organic and authentic. Chances were that if you got a link to your website from somebody else, you actually deserved it. Unfortunately that changed when people started buying links, selling links, trading links that have no benefit and don't match the content of the page it is on, hiding links using css and on and on.
Over the last couple of years these money hungry webmasters have slowly but surely put a serious strangle hold on search engine results and users have suffered greatly because of it. There for a while Google was badly losing the battle against spam and sites that aren't worth anything were tricking millions upon milllions of searches into visiting their pages for the purpose of clicking on ads.
The good news is that Google seems to have put a harness on the beast and things appear to be getting slightly better as we progress. The folks over at Google have been brainstorming on ways to streamline the Algo and stop putting so much weight on links, and I think it's working. The results are getting a little better with each new day.
What changes did Google make? Well no one knows for sure, but watching the industry dip and bob during search engine index updates points us to a few key findings.
- Sites that participated in mass link exchanges (meaning they have more than ten pages loaded with nothing but links) took a hit
- Sites that have a lot of links from unrelated sites took a hit
- Sites that are not gaining links through natural means took a hit
- Sites that link to unrelated sites or pages took a hit
This may not be the same for a lot of users, but I've actually watched each of these scenarios unfold.
The best advice at this point is to give yourself patience and use common sense when it comes to links. If you have a bird site, don't link to a car site. If someone asks you to exchange links, make sure their site has similar keywords and a common theme. Only link to pages that actually contain unique and valuable content, don't link to useless spam like sites.
You're not necessarily going to get "penalized" for making a bad link decision, but I'd be willing to bet that if you don't follow these simple steps someone else is going to beat you in the results.
Now inbound links are VITAL in ranking well, but you want to get them the right way. As mentioned above, try to stay away from link exchanges. Buying inbound links is a bad idea and spamming blogs and other php sites is an even worse idea. Just don't do it. Please?
The best inbound links out there are links that you didn't ask for or even know you were getting. These are links that are usually found in the middle of a page, surrounded by good quality, unique content (search engine food). You get these links because you provide information for others and when they find it they'll talk about it. The search engines are getting a lot smarter about this sort of thing and they now know what a good organic link is, as well as one you got but didn't deserve.
Jessicca, I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any other questions and I'll try to answer them if at all possible.
-Eric
Jessicca had a few questions over on the Blogging Tips pages so I decided that instead of trying to answer her in a comment that I would go ahead and post about here.
The question raised was about making search engines "mad" using spam like linking schemes and black hat SEO in the way the links are (or are not) presented. My answer isn't professional, but I'll go ahead and take a stab at it.
For years and years the internet ran on a algorithm similar to that of Orble, only it was much more behind-the-scenes in the past as opposed to today. Search engine pioneers such as Google looked at links from one page to another as if were a vote. The websites with the most "votes" would rank higher almost on links alone.
For a while it worked, and in theory I think it was a grand idea. But money came into play and where there is money there will be corruption. It didn't take long for black hats (people who do bad, bad things to manipulate search engine results) to figure out ways to generate millions of visitors by cheating the system. It was at this time that links started being looked at in a whole new light.
When it all first began, links were 100% organic and authentic. Chances were that if you got a link to your website from somebody else, you actually deserved it. Unfortunately that changed when people started buying links, selling links, trading links that have no benefit and don't match the content of the page it is on, hiding links using css and on and on.
Over the last couple of years these money hungry webmasters have slowly but surely put a serious strangle hold on search engine results and users have suffered greatly because of it. There for a while Google was badly losing the battle against spam and sites that aren't worth anything were tricking millions upon milllions of searches into visiting their pages for the purpose of clicking on ads.
The good news is that Google seems to have put a harness on the beast and things appear to be getting slightly better as we progress. The folks over at Google have been brainstorming on ways to streamline the Algo and stop putting so much weight on links, and I think it's working. The results are getting a little better with each new day.
What changes did Google make? Well no one knows for sure, but watching the industry dip and bob during search engine index updates points us to a few key findings.
- Sites that participated in mass link exchanges (meaning they have more than ten pages loaded with nothing but links) took a hit
- Sites that have a lot of links from unrelated sites took a hit
- Sites that are not gaining links through natural means took a hit
- Sites that link to unrelated sites or pages took a hit
This may not be the same for a lot of users, but I've actually watched each of these scenarios unfold.
The best advice at this point is to give yourself patience and use common sense when it comes to links. If you have a bird site, don't link to a car site. If someone asks you to exchange links, make sure their site has similar keywords and a common theme. Only link to pages that actually contain unique and valuable content, don't link to useless spam like sites.
You're not necessarily going to get "penalized" for making a bad link decision, but I'd be willing to bet that if you don't follow these simple steps someone else is going to beat you in the results.
Now inbound links are VITAL in ranking well, but you want to get them the right way. As mentioned above, try to stay away from link exchanges. Buying inbound links is a bad idea and spamming blogs and other php sites is an even worse idea. Just don't do it. Please?
The best inbound links out there are links that you didn't ask for or even know you were getting. These are links that are usually found in the middle of a page, surrounded by good quality, unique content (search engine food). You get these links because you provide information for others and when they find it they'll talk about it. The search engines are getting a lot smarter about this sort of thing and they now know what a good organic link is, as well as one you got but didn't deserve.
Jessicca, I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any other questions and I'll try to answer them if at all possible.
-Eric
| 81 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Adrienne
Comment by Eric
Mal Gadget
I'm planning on posting some great traffic tips starting next week. Stay tuned!
-Eric
Comment by Vimal
Yes, fake link exchanges if they are not genuine is one of the easiest ways to sink to the depths of the search engines' Mariana Trench. Now that won't be a pretty good sight.
Btw Cibbuano, one of the Orble staff has written an article related to traffic in his blog. Go to his blog here. And look under the recent posts category for the articles related to traffic. May be Adrienne can have a look at it before Eric has the time to come out with his tips.