In light of the Interflora advertorials debacle where do you think bloggers stand with regard to product reviews?
-
I realise the main blame fell on the newspapers for what was essentially cash for links, but a separate part of the PR push was sending flowers to bloggers who then blogged about it.
I can see that this could be construed by Google to be a breach of their t&cs, but equally it could be a legitimate action by the blogger if they are giving an honest viewpoint.
Is the Google Chrome "satchel" ad being unintentionally misleading?
If it's all down to the intention that's a worryingly grey area to be stuck in, what do you think?
-
I thought it was a nice public slap on the wrist without severely damaging a brand that probably should be on page one. It got the message out loud and clear and I would imagine that the papers are going to be much more careful.
You're right with regard to the error, but it's not the first time that the Chrome marketing team may have made an error with how they went about their business. To someone with a traditional marketing background I'm sure it seemed very innocuous, which was largely the problem with interflora anyway I suppose.
-
Tompt
To me, it is rather interesting the way that the satchel ad and several link gaining "methodologies" similar to it have worked while others do not. The beauty of an algorithm is in its lack of ability to measure intent.
Marie makes a great point with Brand as anchor text vs. keyword, but in the case of a more known company, a brand could be a keyword. At what point does a company become too large or well-known or well-branded for such tactics to become schemes versus methods? Also, if interflora was Interflora Flowers or Interflora Flower Delivery, does it revert to method or remain scheme?
I thought the Search Engine Land piece wherein they question at what point a penalty is a mere "show" of penalizing, further elucidated the problems that Google faces while trying to in some way keep it clean or level or whatever. Matt McGee added: (My italics for emphasis)
**In this Interflora case, Google’s timing has been particularly benevolent: The penalty took effect about a week after Valentine’s Day, and has now begun to be lifted one week before the UK celebrates Mother’s Day. Those are two of the most popular flower-buying holidays of the year — second and third in the US, according to AboutFlowers.com, and likely similar in the UK. **
So, was Google being strict or lenient? If it had been Robert's on time flower delivery, would I have gotten back so fast? Would I have been penalized given I was much smaller?
Great questions, but at the end of the day what is troubling is this miss IMO by Google: With the satchels, The Cambridge Satchel Co. uses a common method to "get the word out" via Google Chrome. Google brags about the success they helped Cambridge Satchel achieve. So, did no one at Google notice the conflict of interest?
Best, good question and good answer by Marie,
Robert
-
I think we need to be realistic about how enforceable this is and why Interflora got caught.
It would be extremely difficult for an automatic review/algorithm to be able to detect a review/blog post that may have involved a giveaway or a payment (ie a paid guest post).
The only reason why this was flagged and made an example of was because, after conducting a manual review likely triggered by the advertorial/thousands of exact match anchor texts on crappy link-farms, the Googler reviewing determined that they looked unnatural.
And they looked unnatural because each blogger's review linked to the site with targeted anchor text.
It's explicitly in Google's TOS, yes, but I'm willing to bet the house in saying that there's no way this would have been detected if it wasn't for a manual review, which was also triggered by something else.
Not saying we should all be doing it, by any means. But we should be realistic about how Google is going to be able to detect these paid reviews/guest posts en masse.
-
If it's as explicit as "if I send you something I require a link back" I can see that it completely breaches guidelines, but if it's sent out without that requirement, for genuine review I think you're in much murkier territory.
Should they be denied the option of linking because they received the product?
I'm just interested in the discussion, I know there are plenty of product review bloggers out there (across the whole white\grey\black spectrum) who are now wondering where they stand. From what limited contact I've had with them, many of the more hobbiest bloggers had little or no idea about nofollow anyway.
Much of the PC games industry is fuelled by review copies, and there are some truly sinful strongarm tactics going on for positive reviews over and above any links. Is cracking down on stuff like this even enforcable?
-
The quality guidelines are pretty clear that it is not acceptable to give free product in exchange for a link that carries PageRank.
People are upset with the chrome satchel ad because it shows someone who creates a product (satchels) and then in the ad sends it to well known bloggers. But nowhere in that ad does it say that she sent it in exchange for a link. I think that the main idea of the ad showing her sending the product to a blogger was to get exposure for her product. To stay within the guidelines this would be in the form of a no-followed link. The ad goes on to show that Elle Magazine heard about the great product and asked if she could make one for them.
The whole point of the quality guidelines in regards to "link schemes" is that you should not be able to self manufacture links. The reasons why links work to boost a site's rankings is because they are a vote for the quality of the site. Bought votes don't mean that the site's quality is any better than another site.
Do I agree? No. I think that those bloggers wouldn't post a link if they didn't like the product. (Well, most of them.) So I think this should be acceptable. But what I think doesn't matter.
If you've already exchanged product for links I wouldn't get too worried about it unless those links make up a large portion of your link profile. But, I think that Google is trying to cut down on any forms of link building in which you create your own link, so personally I would not use this tactic.
EDIT: I just checked out the Cambridge Satchel backlink profile and they sure do have a lot of FOLLOWED links from blogs who reviewed their profile. Perhaps the reason why this is allowed is because the links are branded as opposed to a keyword?
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
-
Duplicate product description on the same page
Hello, I've got a really simple a basic question : is it an issue to put an excerpt of a text at the begining of a page, with a "jump to full text" link at the end of the excerpt ? So the first part of the text will be duplicated. A solution would be to hide a part of the text and reveal it with a "read more" button, but we don't want to do that, we want users to be able to read the full text just by scrolling + we want to put an excerpt "above-the-fold" content It's a product page. A second question : we've got duplicate content between our brand category pages, and the related product page, because the presentation text of the brand is shown on the product page + on the brand category page (it's presentations of distilleries, so it's a valuable content for the customer, we want to show it directly on the product page). Do you think it's a big issue ? Or maybe we can think : "ok, there is plenty of other text on those pages, so it won't matter" ?
Content Development | | Colage1 -
Two pages for, essentially, the same product.
My client currently has a page on their website that advertises one of their products. The product in question is manufactured by someone else but branded by my client. Recently, the manufacturer have released their own version with their own branding which is available to the public. My client has decided that they are going to stock both their own version and the manufacturers version of the product to avoid losing any sales. This have left us with trying to find the best way to add the new product to the site without it competing with my clients own product in search engine results. We want the page to be indexed so that people searching for the manufacturers product can still find it on our site but at the same time we risk cannibalisation and essentially having two pages with what will essentially be the same content. Does anyone have any ideas for a suitable solution? I am unsure whether we should create a new page for the new product or whether we should somehow incorporate the new product in to the existing page.
Content Development | | BallyhooLtd0 -
Need suggestion to place longer content on products category page
Hi All, I wanted to place longer content on products category page, Currenty I am showing product listing first and then small description at the end of listing.I don't want to add longer content either bottom or top. I want to make two tabs at the top of each category pages like Products | Informtion In Product section (after clicking on it) I want to display all products listing & in Information tab (after clicking on it) 2-3 paragraphs of webpage content but I'm afraid If I will place the content in this way Google won't index content and my purpose of adding webpage content to target long tail keywords won't fulfill. Please suggest me if you have any better idea & let me know what I am going to do would be good or not in SEO perspective. Thanks
Content Development | | Alick3000 -
I work on a uk decorating website with five of our own bloggers all of which reside on the home page of the website on their own separete blogging urls as sub domains - is this a good idea or would google not like this from an seo point of view?
Should blogs that are part of an overall content site be on separate sites and link in or is it ok to promote them as content on the home page of the site and take users off to their own url to view the site. Is this good practise for seo?
Content Development | | Pday0 -
Finding Guest Bloggers
Does anyone have good tips for finding someone who can do guest blogging for me? I don't have the time to track down good blogs to post on.
Content Development | | kadesmith0 -
Using Google Blogger
Hi, On my website I have a specific blog section, which like most people is linked to Wordpress. I have been advised that to achieve better SEO its also a good idea to use Google Blogger, because it will link back to your website from Google. Obviously we don't want to submit the same articles to Google blogger or else that would be duplicated, but is this something that could benefit and is anyone else doing this? Thanks!
Content Development | | Pulsar0 -
Will using online forum reviews create duplicate content issue?
We are looking at having a text box of 'What customers say' on our product pages using reviews written about us online to remain factual and wanted to know if this will create duplicate content issues? Thanks in advance.
Content Development | | jannkuzel0 -
I have created 2 blogs for a client as they have 2 domains (1 for their core business, and 1 for a product). I want to use the same content on both blogs. What is the best way to set this up so there are no ranking or duplicate content issues?
We are pushing SEO for only one of the domains, therefore I would like one to be dominant. We will be sending the blog post via email to their database, therefore each blog needs to have the same content. Thank you!
Content Development | | MarketingResults0