Jeffrey Hales
When analyzing your website's link portfolio, do you know how to identify an unnatural link? For the most part, unnatural links are easy to recognize, but seemingly just as often, they are not.
In this post, we will peruse the link schemes section of Google's Quality Guidelines and explain in detail what 'they' have to say regarding unnatural links. So, a bonus to those of you who've always wondered who 'they' are, it's Google! Now that you are in the know, I will also share some examples of sites that have been penalized for imbedding unnatural links.
You can find the official link schemes portion of the Google Quality Guidelines here. This article provides their definition of an unnatural link stating simply, “creating links that weren’t editorially placed or vouched for by the site’s owner on a page, otherwise known as unnatural links, can be considered a violation of our guidelines.” Can be? No. You can bet the farm on the fact that if your site violates this guideline, you will be penalized!
"Any links intended to manipulate Pagerank, or a site's ranking in Google search results may be considered part of a link scheme and a violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines.”
Seriously Google?! Any link that is created with the intention of improving your site’s ranking in the Google search engine results is considered unnatural to Google. The answer is, "Yes!" Because the Almighty Search Engine says so! Hey! It's their ball AND court, so...
In order to understand why this is the case, let’s take a look at why links are important in the first place.
By the way, if you're even remotely interested in how Google works, I recommend you check out a book by Steven Levy entitled, In the Plex. The author walks his readers through the history of Google, how it all began, and why it was a superior search engine then, comparatively speaking, as well as one that has stood the test of time. You recall names such as Alta Vista, Infoseek, Lycos and Excite? Well, they all implemented 'Information Retrieval' algorithms to determine the order in which their search results were displayed. They used metrics within their coding that looked at how often words appeared on a page as well as the presence of meta keywords, and thus, why keyword-stuffing used to be so commonly practiced and effective.
Enter a young student majoring in computer science named Larry Page. This dude not only discovered a brilliant way to improve on search accuracy with the use of hyperlinks, he named the system after himself. Pagerank! Even the dark ages of the web contained a vast amount of academic papers which often cited other articles in the form of a hyperlink. Mr. Pagerank himself realized that pages cited most often were the most important pages. He developed his system based on a simple rule. The importance of a page is determined by how many quality pages link to it. Each link is equal to a 'vote' for that particular site. So, a website with lots of votes - especially votes from trusted pages - would rank well in search engine results.
While Google algorithms today are much more complicated than in its earlier days, links remain one of the most vital factors taken into consideration.
It appears, however, that the gig is up, and Google is getting better at determining when a link is a bona fide editorial vote for a site as well as when it is simply an unnatural link. My personal opinion is that many self-made links that used to improve a site's rankings are now simply ignored by the Wonderful Wizard of Google.
I digress back to the first line of the link schemes section of the Quality Guidelines. You can clearly see why a link imbedded for the sole purpose of manipulating a site’s ranking would be considered unnatural. It is because a self-made link is not a true vote for your site, and not only will it discount your site’s Pagerank, but will cause your site to be penalized severely by the Penguin algorithm.
The guidelines continue with more specific examples of links that could be considered unnatural:
Exchanging Money for Links or Posts that Contain Links
These links are obvious examples of unnatural links, and to me epitomize people who have more money than sense. If you contact any webmaster and offer them money in exchange for placing a link on their site, that’s a clear example of an unnatural link. Others are not so obvious. I've seen instances where you can link to a high ranking page by 'donating' $5 to a software developer. Don't do it! It is very obviously a paid link and unnatural, and the Penguin algorithm looks specifically for violations such as this. However, if your company makes a donation to a local youth dance club, and they thanked you and linked to your website, this is where it becomes a matter of 'why' and 'how often'. If you have only a few links like this, you will - more than likely - fall under the radar. Don't use it as a linking tactic, or else you will run into problems. At this stage of the game in 2015, the Penguin algorithm is not affecting links like this, but if you ever receive a manual review from a Webspam team member, a large number of links like this could contribute to an unnatural links penalty.
If you're not sure on the differences between algorithmic ranking drops and manual penalties, there are hundreds of articles out there dealing with this subject alone, and I may decide to cover that at a later date as well. Stay tuned!
Exchanging Goods/Services for Links, Sending Someone “Free” Product in Exchange for Writing About it to Include a Link
This is a tactic many businesses have used in the past in order to gain a link and Pagerank. I strongly advise against this practice as do many other SEO professionals. If you love a product, write about it. Period. This is part of the quality guidelines that is extremely tricky for many to decipher because after all, if you send me a product and I decide to write about it, aren’t I vouching for your website? Certainly, that link counts as natural, right? Not according to Google. It is not naturally earned as it was procured by you offering me an incentive. I have seen more than a few examples of this type of link scheme leading to unnatural links penalties.
I've heard about large brands sending free products to several hundred 'mommy bloggers'. Of course, they were encouraged to write about the product, and in most cases this resulted in a followed link that passed Pagerank. Several hundred contextual blogs about your brand is definitely going to make a positive influence on your rankings. But, because those links were procured by receiving goods, Google deems them unnatural. This nationally recognized brand received an unnatural links penalty and had to contract the help of a professional to remove them.
That is a process many site owners are finding themselves in the middle of these days. It begins by removing spammy links from low quality directories and bookmarking sites, but the penalty may not be lifted until you address all of your unnatural links. Unnatural links are certainly not illegal, but if you want to stay under Google’s radar, this is the type of link that you must either 'disavow' or 'nofollow', so that it will pass Pagerank. You have to ask yourself, "Is this is a link that I would want if it were nofollowed," then you will not only have your answer, but also gain an understanding as to why the link was created in the first place. Remember, links that are self-made with the intention of improving a site’s Pagerank are unnatural in the all-seeing eye of Google.
Partner Pages (Cross-Linking)
The vernacular concerning partner pages is something that mysteriously appeared in the Quality Guidelines of October, 2012. This portion of the guidelines is difficult to interpret as well. Let’s say that I own a car dealership, and I have a resource page on my site where I recommend certified mechanics, paint and body shops, auto insurance agents, and so forth. Some of those professionals might also list me on their official partner page as well. Is this against the quality guidelines? Probably not, but this type of link is plain ol' good business, right? Before you know it, you're cross-linking with friends' businesses, your favorite eateries, and now it’s starting to resemble a linking scheme. A general rule of thumb I would adhere to if I even did create a partner page on my site, and vice versa is to only imbed links that I would want even if search engines and their rules didn’t exist. It's alright to have a few reciprocating links as long as they are relevant to your own product(s) and service(s), and as long as they are links that I would still want even if they were to be nofollowed at a later date.
I won't go into great detail about the following. I will just let you know that purchasing fans from sites such as fiverr, and automated linking from them are nothing but a penalty waiting to happen. Don't!
Text advertisements that pass PageRank
These are very similar to paid links. If you’ve purchased advertising on a site, in order to stay within the quality guidelines, your ad needs to contain a nofollow tag. I’m completely baffled as to the specificity of the guidelines stating “Text advertisements". I would be surprised if Google considered a followed link from an image ad as a natural link.
Advertorials is yet another example of a paid link. An advertorial is “an extended newspaper or magazine text advertisement that promotes the advertiser's product or services or special point of view, but resembles an editorial in style and layout.” (dictionary.com) Advertorial links used to work very well, and helped improve a site’s ranking. Often, these links are placed PR news sites in exchange for payment. If you’ve got links like these, they should be nofollowed and/or removed if you want to remain within Google's Quality Guidelines.
It is difficult to determine where Google draws its line between low and high quality directories. Most of us that perform link audits will agree that a link in dmoz.org is an ok link because Dmoz is known as a directory with very high editorial standards. A Yellow Pages directory link or a Better Business Bureau link is okay as well. When you start talking local newspaper business directories, the lines start getting blurry. Personally, I would stick to directories more closely related to your own niche. I have heard directory listings are acceptable to Google if the directory has an editorial process (e.g. submissions that are not auto-approved, and said directory has their full contact info published on-site). Google won't tell us - exactly - what makes a directory low or high quality. When trying to decide whether Google could consider a directory an unnatural one, you must - again - consider whether this link is one that would have been executed even if search engines didn’t exist. If you can honestly say whether or not a link was imbedded with the intention of increasing your PR, it’s probably good to go. However, it is very difficult for most webmasters to remain objective and concise about these decisions. After all, neither is Google.
There are many more instances within the guidelines (as I hope you will check them out for yourself), but the bottom line is this: Google wants your site to enhance the user experience! If it does that, and you don't violate the linking guidelines (if that's really even possible), you will be okay with Google and your customers! To me, that's a win-win.
Please contact me with any questions or comments you may have at: jhales4957@gmail.com ... Talk to you soon
No comments:
Post a Comment