I received an email the other day, which caused me some significant concern. It was a request, which came out of the blue, asking me to consider to be paid for featuring certain content on my personal blog.
For me, this is a very unwanted and somewhat scandalous approach and I sincerely hope other bloggers feel the same way. If you think about it, it is a very seedy means to encourage independent people who take the time to blog about subjects they care about, to succumb to the incentive of money.
How many times have you sat through an SEO
presentation and heard 'it’s all about links, and one link from the BBC
is worth more than 1,000 low level directories.'
Google relies on media links to calculate PageRank, a gauge of website
authority. These links bring order to search results, which is why
everyone uses Google, which is why they make so much money. Brands
therefore need media links to achieve SEO success in Google, which is fair
But what do media owners get for providing the authority map
behind Google’s meteoric rise? Plummeting advertising revenues as Google hoovers up the lot. This
seems a bit of a kick in the teeth, but what can they do about it?
Every two years, SEO consultancy and publisher SEOmoz publishes a Search Engine Ranking Factors report that details which ranking factors some of the world's top SEOs think are hot and not. The latest Search Engine Ranking Factors report was published in August.
I spoke with Rand Fishkin, CEO of SEOmoz, about the 2009 Ranking Factors report, the dilemma of paid links and how social media is changing SEO.
Paid links have been and still are a popular SEO technique and it's not hard to understand why: they promise instant gratification to those who can't wait for results. Unfortunately, paid links are not in favor with search engines for obvious reasons and those who employ them today do so at significant risk.
As the importance of social media becomes more apparent to businesses both large and small, it's no surprise that the desire for instant gratification is rearing its ugly head in the form of 'paid friends'.
At the SMX Advanced conference in Seattle this week, Google's Matt Cutts revealed that Google has implemented two changes that may have an impact on your SEO efforts.
It looks like insurance aggregator Gocompare.com may once again have been hit with a Google penalty, as it is currently not ranking on the search engine's organic results for its own brand name.
A search on Google UK for 'Gocompare' returns only third party sites on the first page, and you have to go all the way down to page six of the search engine to find the official site.
My post yesterday about Google's paid links smack down sparked quite a discussion and a bit of debate.
Good points were made all around on all sides of the debate.
Google has a major problem relating the identification of paid links, but I believe it has an even bigger problem relating to the definition of 'paid links', and the very term itself.
Econsultancy’s Patricio Robles wrote about this earlier today so I don’t want to cover too much old ground, but I do want to comment on the difference – or similarity – between paid and commercial links.
I've discussed the nofollow attribute several times lately.
The bottom line: Google doesn't like paid links and regardless of whether or not one agrees with Google's stance, the use of nofollow with paid links is a best practice worth implementing.
In a recent post, I discussed the use of the nofollow attribute as an SEO best practice.
In a guest post on SEOmoz, Distilled.co.uk's Will Critchlow suggests the opposite: nofollow is dying.