Until sometime back, the main source of getting information on paid links was human. In other ways, Google relied a lot on people or webmasters reporting suspicious links to them and further “looking into the matter”.
However, the problem here was that people could:
- Mislead the search engine even for genuine links
- Lot of paid links could go unnoticed
- Human intelligence in web space cannot be completely relied on (Yeah! It’s true that man made technology, but man can’t really track everything that’s on the web because it’s too vast and too advanced.)
Enter That Google Algorithm That’s Set To Make All The Possible Difference:
- It shall monitor black hat SEO
- It shall monitor back door linking
- It shall monitor hidden linking
However There Are Questions Arising Due To The Change:
1. Are advertising links incorrect / invalid?
Because, while using the Google service of adwords, what we are actually doing is using paid links. So, does that mean that it’s okay for Google’s adwords links to be present on the web but not a case where one website owner pays another website to allow the links of his website to be published on the page? As Google adsense is using javascripts to display links and ads, they’re not directly or indirectly helpful for SEO. Such types of links (using javascripts – infolinks is another good example) are definitely not wrong practice.
The major problem here is that the very purpose of having a advertising and marketing link is to get more traffic and improve page rank. However, with the new algorithm, the purpose may be defeated as Google shall view such a link as a “paid link”.
2. The other major concern is competitor sabotage.
This is a concern that has been quite prominent since the beginning. For instance, one company that wants to sabotage it’s competitor’s site can easily get paid links to link to his competitor’s website and on the other hand, can report it Google as a “suspicious link”.
Google will have to form stronger norms to regulate linking, back linking and link building. The algorithm will have to be strong enough to check unnatural links but at the same time, there needs to be a clear cut and well tested way to check the authenticity of reports.
Nevertheless, reports say and state that there shouldn’t be problems as long as the buying and selling of links is organic and natural. The problem arises when people let money come in the way of these network building methods on the internet. It’s like paying someone for writing a testimonial for you; getting them to endorse you in a way that you wish to be talked about. Now, all though this may look good on your profile, it isn’t going to work in improving your popularity.
Also, it’s interesting to note that paid links may only get you a ranking on SERP (and only for a brief period before the search engine finds out); it still may not win people over to your site. So, why not work in a way to win people as well as SEO? Should work better for your business!
About the guest author: Author is a blogger and loves to write about technology. Read more about Motorola ES400 and RFID encoders and many other tech products on her website.
This is a unique article published on SEO Desk with exclusivity.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Special Offers
Understanding SEO eBook
Learn how to increase your traffic and so your profits!
Learn how to attract the right traffic and analyze their behavior to convert more and more visitors into buyers!
Get People To Find You Easily, Attract Traffic and Become Famous.
ONLY 16.00
Twitter
Technorati
StumbleUpon
RSS
Warrior Forum
Facebook
Twitter: ajacwebdesign
says:
I’m curious to see how they are going to deal with the potential sabotaging of sites. There was the big ado regarding the nuking of Dan Theis’ sites after he made some comments that angered the black hat SEO guys out there. Seems like they should just take these links that they deem as dirty and not count them at all as opposed to having them be a negative.
It would seem prudent on Google’s part to base there ranking algorithm on multiple factors as opposed to just one or two. In my opinion this is what Google already does. This is why it is impossible to “Google bowl” an established site like MSN.com which has a massive pool of diversified backlinks as well as age authority and social authority.
Unfortunately this kind of algorithm leaves newer sites out in the cold so to speak as they do not have the authority or backlink diversity to protect themselves from unscrupulous “bowlers”. But I suppose from Google’s point of view the benefits of such an algorithm out-weigh the costs. “You gotta crack a few eggs…” right?
Google added a new section to webmaster central today entitled “report paid links”. How anyone other than me or quite possibly my book keeper know whether a link is paid or not is very questionable, but let’s dig just a little deeper shall we.