Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.
That’s not only a poor Scrabble score but we also couldn’t find any results matching
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.
Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.
But what's that I see on PC Mag category pages? Surely they're not selling links for SEO reasons are they? Let's investigate.
John Dvorak's argument
- What SEO is: "tricking Google or Bing or Yahoo into ranking your particular Web site higher than the competition."
- The problem SEO causes: "the horrid results of certain searches ruin the enduser experience. Try and find the best cell phone deal on the Internet. Do it by using a search engine. Every hit is some commercial site trying to sell you something."
- Why he's angry: "The results hardly ever link to a PC Magazine comparative review or any objective analysis. Just faux reviews and fake objectivity leading you to some product for sale."
So what's PC Mag doing then ...?
I'm not going to dissect his article. Let's concentrate on one point. It's true that SEOers of a certain nature try to influence the results by buying links using the anchor text that they want to do well for (so if you want to do well for cheap digital cameras, you pay other sites to link to you using the term "cheap digital cameras").
So what is this I see on some of PC Mag's pages?
These are keyword rich links with no nofollow on them. Have the sites they link to paid for them? Who knows. It doesn't look good, though, does it Mr Dvorak?
One final thing ...
One of his complaints was that PC Mag weren't appearing in the results. As SharkSEO pointed out on Twitter, this might be because PC Mag doesn't really cover cheap cell phone deals as its own on-site search shows.