When is Google going to sort their act out?
-
I work with a couple of clients in the finance and debt area. I've been doing loads of work examining the link profiles of the commercial sites at the top of the rankings and 70% of the links I am seeing are low value directories and sites obviously built for links with multiple outgoing links to completely unrelated sources! When I examine the other links their isn't enough value in them to outweigh what looks to me like very obvious and spammy low quality link building.
Why can't Google see what I'm seeing - it's so obvious? I know there are multiple factors at play but links like these should offer no value or get a site penalised (isn't that what Google tell us) but these sites still seem to be ranking because of them rather than despite them!
-
OK. Thanks for your time.
-
Above my pay grade I think.
-
Yes I agree. They certainly have a size issue. Balancing the value of things across that many web pages is only going to throw up more issues than solutions. So are they facing a losing battle with the growing size and complexity of the web and with balancing commercialness and neutrality in a way that makes it impossible to implement changes that will clean the results but jeopardise relationships with paying customers?
-
I think Google has an almost impossible task, that being to determine the quality of over a trillion web pages (and of course growing) using technology to do it, which is the only possible tactic they could use.
Looking at their recent moves, I think they are trying to get the user communities to help determine the quality of sites through the 1 + button, and the move to recognize social media signals ( and the Chrome browser changes).
I think that Google would like to reflect a non capitalistic, democratic ranking system, with safe guards for the new and smaller pages. Like our government was set up to do. And I think they are moving that direction.
The problems with this goes to the human condition. There are many who will always try and take advantage of a system (because we are capitalists at heart and that brings out the best and the worst in entities) and that Google is trying to find the balance between a capitalistic approach and a democratic approach. I don't think they can.
Ultimately the rankings are, in general today, controlled by money. Those entities that have money to spend on SEO and Internet Marketing are rewarded based on how wisely they spend that money. The results are not all that different than the old world Yellow page model. Big money, big advertisement,. first page. Limited budget,and you better find other ways to promote your service/product.
Even with the new changes, the 1+ and all that, lots of smart people will still be looking for ways to take advantage of them, and will undoubtedly find a few ways.
So all we can do, is decide what we are individually, and what tactics we will use to
to represent the side of the fence we choose to stand on.
( Bring in theme music here)
-
Thanks for your response.
I know there are multiple factors at play and for these clients we are doing social media work, PPC and email campaigns.
I'm really just surprised at often I'm seeing sites with spammy link profiles appear in the top ten when better quality sites with better (but maybe fewer) links appear further down. I starting to suspect that Google are finding it impossible to write in parameters to the algorithm which deal with sites like these without devaluing legitimate sites.
What do you think?
-
We all get to "deal" with these type situations from time to time. Your question is of course impossible to answer, but I would say you are putting all your eggs in the back link basket. If you are faced with a competitor who has a zillion low quality links, you may need to look for other traffic opportunities. SEO is ultimately about getting quality traffic to your clients site. If your client see's it as nothing more than a rankings competition, you are in deep trouble.
Using the new opportunities in Social media , as well as searching out and finding the best quality links, and building highly creative on site content ( Tips, Calculators, Cartoons, Educational video, Forums , contests) may go alot further than building links 24 hours a day.
I feel your frustration, we all do.
-
We all get to "deal" with these type situations from time to time. Your question is of course impossible to answer, but I would say you are putting all your eggs in the back link basket. If you are faced with a competitor who has a zillion low quality links, you may need to look for other traffic opportunities. SEO is ultimately about getting quality traffic to your clients site. If your client see's it as nothing more than a rankings competition, you are in deep trouble.
Using the new opportunities in Social media , as well as searching out and finding the best quality links, and building highly creative on site content ( Tips, Calculators, Cartoons, Educational video, Forums , contests) may go alot further than building links 24 hours a day.
I feel your frustration, we all do.
-
Google definitely has opportunities for improvement. They acknowledge their weaknesses and adjust their algorithms on a regular basis.
Often the sites we see at the top are only there for a short time period. The majority of the spam sites I have been looking at lately disappear in 4-6 weeks.
Also, there are widely varying definitions as to what is spam, and what sites should rank. Earlier today another member felt a site should not rank as #1 and was spam. When I reviewed the site it seems to me the page earned it's ranking and it appropriately placed in SERP based on the competition. http://www.seomoz.org/q/fishy-rank-1-google-algorithm-bug
The best we can do is learn as much as possible about how Google works, then use that knowledge to improve rankings for our sites and those of our clients. We can also report spam sites, but be careful about reporting sites as spam which are not. Matt Cutts shared the reporting account is given a sort of credit rating when they report spam. Those accounts which make false spam reports are discounted on future reports.
-
I know. Finance and debt are really difficult areas to compete.
I would try to attack it with content that professors and university departments would be willing to link to.... but the problem with that is that they don't want to link to a site with an obvious commercial purpose.
-
Hi EGOL
Yes I agree and you would think that is the case but they are ranking at the top for reasonably competitive terms and better sites are already finding it hard to compete with them.
I'm totally up for the challenge but that's not really my point. This is not an isolated example I see sites using these practices ranking high for a range of keywords in Google. I can't write algorithms but I know the things I would be looking for if I did and these sites would be obvious to me. I can't believe that Google don't know and can't do anything - so what's happening then?
Thanks.
-
If these sites have such spammy link profiles then they should be really easy to beat!
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
-
What does google think about legit link exchanges where one is follow and one is no follow?
Hi Experts! Here is my Question for you. I am doing a link exchange in a legit way to increase sales for my site and my associate's site. My associate just wants a sales increase and no link juice. He has a very low DA so I want to give him a no follow link. Is it suspicious of fishy that I give a no follow link and receive a followed link in return? Please let me know how to proceed, I don't want to take any changes. Can you tell me the best way to proceed with this link exchange? Thanks
Link Building | | Ruchy0 -
Does google flag bad back links
where would we go identify the links that are bad is there a way to get a list of each individual link not just the site and number from the site
Link Building | | CostumeD0 -
Links Removed from Site but not Google Webmaster Tools
I have a new client who has been fighting to get past an unnatural links penalty. One of the biggest reasons behind it was that they paid to get a followed link/ad on a blog network, well this ad ended up being a site wide link which ended up giving them thousands of back links within a few days. After getting the owner of the blog network to remove the link i manually spot checked a handful of pages and used screaming frog to crawl looking for a link referencing their site. From what i can tell they are all gone. However they are still in Google Webmaster Tools as well as Google's index and it has been a couple months since they have been removed. Does anyone have any advice on getting them removed from Google's entities even though they are already off of the website? Thank you in advance,
Link Building | | kchandler
Kyle0 -
Why Would Google Webmaster Tools State More Links Than Details Show?
I am trying to clean up links. I've gone into webmaster tools and it reports that I have 216 links from a particular domain. When I click thru to get details it reports all the links point to 1 page, then when I click on that page it only reports 1 inbound link. The links are coming from a directory site which appears to have been penalized. OSE doesn't report any links from this domain. Should I be overly alarmed? How can I determine what is correct, and whether I should take action (the site wants to charge me to remove each url). Thanks in advance. Alan
Link Building | | rmsmall0 -
Google disavow DMOZ/ODP spam sites?
Hello Looking into links to my one of my sites (over 10 years old) I've found that along with some bad spammy links, around 80% of my inbound links are from directories that are exact copies of ODP. Should I be concerned about / asking for removal / disavowing these links? Normally I would be trying to get rid of low quality links like this, but since they are ODP clones I'm not sure it's worth the effort. The sites openly state that their data is from ODP (Open Directory Project), but does this mean Google ignores them? I could spend my whole life swatting these links. Thoughts? Edit: I'm hoping for suggestions that specifically reference the ODP clone site situation. I did not create these links, I guess I should have made that more clear.
Link Building | | droo0 -
5th failed Google reconsideration attempt, can you help? (are scraper/related news sites the issue?)
(sorry for the long question - I thought it would be useful to give the background!) I am really struggling a Google's reconsideration request for my site, and although we thought we had removed almost all the 'bad' backlinks I am still getting no-where... We are really wanting to focus on building our brand, and establishing our site as an authority but this penalty is really holding us back. The latest response from Google: There are still many inorganic links pointing to your site. At this point, we believe we’ve evaluated these links appropriately, and no further action from us is required. In order for your site to have a successful reconsideration request, we will need to see a substantial, good-faith effort to remove the links, and this effort should result in a significant decrease in the number of bad links that we see. We do not recommend that you submit another reconsideration request until you have been able to make a good amount of progress. Once you’ve been able to get the links removed, please reply to this email with the details of your clean-up effort. My Website: http://bit.ly/KXg8y1 History: This is a new domain - approx 6 months old Old domain received a Google links warning We decided to start a new website, launch a new brand and start from the beginning We 301 re-directed the old domain so we didnt lose customers We then got a Google links warning for the new site We assumed this was related to links from the old site and so removed the 301 redirect on the 20th August Our old sites links still show in Google webmaster tools Reconsideration History 1st re-consideration request: Explained the 301 redirect had been removed, assured we would now be focussing on high quality content/brand building and after 2 weeks received a standard message to say that still had inorganic links 2nd Request: Went through the new sites links (using open site explorer, AHREFs, SEO Majestic and GWM) and removed those we identified as low quality (mostly directories built by an SEO company we had started working with). We complied a spreadsheet with all the links in it (including 301 redirect links) and explained which had been removed, webmaster contact details etc. We also uploaded our template email and screenshots showing contact with webmasters. 3rd, 4th and 5th Request: We went through the new site links and were able to remove a few more links which were thin or could be seen as inorganic, and the end result is that apart from 6 links we have removed all those we have identified as inorganic. Links The old site had some pretty poor links We have done no paid linking, no blog networks, no spammy web 2.0 sites on this site. We've added good quality content to our blog, focussed on social media, published an infographic, and are committed to long-term brand building The links mostly come from guest blog posting. An SEO company (who told us they were 100% content based) built some directory links - but 99% of these have been removed There are some links from Scraper/related news sites (ones that have related blog posts or scrape images etc) Press releases which were picked up and re-published (some of these include anchor text) My Question/s: Do you think Google is still seeing the links from the previous 301 redirect in Google webmasters and including these still? Are these scraper/related post sites causing the issue? (organic links - but some dubious sites) Are sites re-publishing our press releases causing the issue? (organic links - but includes some anchor text I really appreciate your time on this one, I have tried really hard to identify and remove links, but am now struggling! Many Thanks
Link Building | | twhite0 -
Which is the best link building method after Google penguin update & why?
We are currently offering our client pre penguin these activities for link building: Local listing Directory submission bookmarking article submission blog comment guest post business review squidoo lens Forum posting infograhics My questions is which is the best link building method and is there any activity that is redundant now. thanks
Link Building | | conversiontactics0 -
Would notifying visitors that they can put text link ads on your site destroy you in terms of Google?
I am debating buying this product for Joomla on that note: http://www.jv-extensions.com/content/_/joomla-extensions/jv-contentlinks-r52 Would you advise for or against this purchase?
Link Building | | Uramark1