What are the chances of an infographic penalty?
-
Suppose that you created a great infographic and the embed code included an exact match link. For example: This infographic was created by Shoestore, a leading provider of speed boosting shoes. If the infographic is embedded on 100 domains with an anchor text link (and say you previously had 100 linking domains) is there a risk of penalty for too many exact match links in a short period?
-
I would use "brand +Broad Keyword" as anchor text and in my opinion you should be safe but seo is a art not a science so do what you feel comfortable with.
-
Yes, I agree.
Unfortunately, google helped to create almost all of the problems in SEO.
Hopefully, some of this stuff can be rolled back without destroying everything and everyone.
-
Yes, I agree. Some great responses here from EGOL, Click2Rank and Alan. You could essentially use your brand as the safest approach.
-
Matt Cutts has been talking about cracking down on overoptimized websites. In my opinion, a good way to attack that is to eliminate the value of anchor text.
-
I agree with Click2Rank and EGOL
- Now that we know what we think we know about google.
It used to make perfect sense to use the keywords that match what you want to be known for, but the game has changed a lot in the past year.
For the case of providing something that others will use, hopefully in large numbers, the domain name seems like a better option.
Some webmasters may have a standard they use, and they will stick to it whatever you do, but you are probably better off using the domain name, with or without the www. - whichever way you do it on your site, and any variations from that will be out of your control.
If you have an exact match domain name, here is where it will help you.
Another option could be the name of your site. For example a shoe store whose domain name is easyfitshoes.com could use "Easyfit Shoes." I don't see how google could have a problem with that. Anyone else got ideas about this?
-
I would not add a link with an exact match anchor text. My domain would be the anchor text.
-
while only 100 links is unlikely to generate a keyword specific penalty, using an exact match that way is definitely not best practices SEO, as it's so blatant. Its this exact kind of abuse of the reason for having anchors that has caused such a mess in our industry and forced Google to find new and continually ever increasing ways to punish sites.
So it's best to avoid this tactic altogether.
- Alan Bleiweiss
C2R Director of Search Services
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Disavow data for non-manual penalty
I'm working on cleaning link profile for a client. He has lots of crappy links pointing to his site. I tried to contact site owners so that they remove those links. No go for the most part. Since it's not a manual penalty, there's no need to specify when exactly I tried to contact those site owners, add emails to my disavow file, etc. It's my understanding that it's OK to just add domains to Google's disavow tool to submit because there was no manual action and it won't be checked by a human being. Would that be the right way to go?
Link Building | | vitaliykolos0 -
Backlinks from archived content? SEO penalty?
I'm curious, if I go to webmasters and suggest a change to an article in their archives (convincing them that the new link offers more value to their readers), how would Google look at that? It seems to me that if a two-year-old article all of a sudden gets a new link, it might look fishy, and might even bring penalties with it. Thoughts?
Link Building | | JABacchetta0 -
Site received penalty, Traffic restricted to 3-4 visits/hour
Dear all We received a penalty notice at webmaster tools 2 months ago, in that stated "your pages violate our quality guidelines" and "contain some inorganic links to your site". Ours is a Coupon website and tried to follow all quality guidelines given in webmaster central. Also we tried to identify and remove spam kind of links and still we are working on that. Suddenly from yesterday website traffic restricted to 3-4 visits/hour, but website main keyword SERPs are not changed much and still ranking at good positions. my question if any website is under manual penalty, it's traffic will be restricted by Google???. Every link we build manually and not gone for any paid links or reciprocal links. But the sites given some links as sitewide, example we tried to get a back link & submitted url at once only, but it was showing in webmaster Total links 468 and linked pages 1. Can any one please explain, how it can happen?. We are trying to remove these spam kind of links, but from directory owners response is a bit disappointing, kindly any one suggest that, will Google Disavow tool help in this regard and how much time it will take to nullify the links?. Kindly help us..Thanking you all in advance
Link Building | | Shashidhar.SEO0 -
How Would Google Approach Devaluing Infographic Links?
How do you think Google would go about devaluing infographic links? Suppose the infographic image itself is not hyperlinked to the creator's site but there is a paragraph that mentions the creator and links to their site. How would Google distinguish the infographic creator's link from other external links on the page?
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
Should you avoid links from infographic sites?
Suppose you have an interesting infographic that you are promoting. Should you be cautious about having it published on sites that only publish infographics? Do you think these sites pass any link value?
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
How long to recover from manual spam penalty?
If anyone doesn't think that spam sabotage is possible, here is proof. In February we received a suspicious spammy link notice and penalty from Google. We did several things to try and fix the problem including getting old links from not very relevant sites removed and submitted, and were denied, reconsideration twice. On the advice of Billy here on the forum, we went through the bottom end of our inbound links through OSE and found about forty domains that had linked to us and were purely trash sites full of link spam. We filed another reconsideration request listing every one of these sites along with dates we tried to contact the site owner (almost always impossible) to delete links to our site and two weeks later we received a note back that the manual penalty had been lifted. My question now is, from your experience, how long does it take to notice a recovery from this penalty? This experience also has me concerned that site sabotage is actually pretty simple when you can plant garbage links from 40 sites, many of which are the same with different urls, and get someone penalized on Google.
Link Building | | IanTheScot0 -
Best way to promote an infographic
What are the forums views on the best way to promote an infographic? Other than tweeting to fans, sharing on facebook and using stumbleupon - unless anyone's got some great tips for getting the most out of these? Thanks
Link Building | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
My first infographic, how to make it exceptional
Hi, I'm creating an infographic for nlpca.com We're thinking of doing it on "What is NLP?" This is the most common question, and "What is NLP" it's a small but good search term There's not a lot of statistics if we do "What is NLP?", but there are drawings about the different parts of NLP. What recommendations do you have? I still need to go through all of our competitors' info and look at the content of competitors and make sure we've got the right topic Thanks.
Link Building | | BobGW0