Response: Authority Link Building, What and How

It is amazing the mythology which abounds in the field of Internet marketing. Take for example a recent article written by a company called LinkBuilderz which was entitled "Authority Link Building! What and How". In this article, the author explains that you will be "amazed with the results" if you drop links into Wikipedia. Problem is, the author is evidently ignorant of the fact that Wikipedia links are nofollowed and therefore do not pass any PageRank or link juice. Click for full article on authority link building.

The LinkBuilderz article is yet another example of the type of misinformation which individuals are putting out there regarding search engine optimization. As the search marketing industry rapidly expands, more and more unqualified individuals and firms are jumping on the bandwagon and selling snake oil, both to the detriment of the web user's experience as well as their clients.

So called "authority" links cannot be obtained by spamming Wikipedia. My philosophy is this: the only way to obtain quality, relevant, inbound linkage is through the creation of rich content to which site owners will naturally want to link. Content can take many forms, it can be blog content, videos, product pages, reviews, audio clips, and the like. If you are creating useful content which provides value to the end user, the links will come.

The LinkBuilderz article is premised entirely upon the myth that Wikipedia spam will provide "amazing results" in the search engines. While there may be some residual value in direct link traffic from links residing within the Wikipedia domain (assuming that they are not promptly deleted by wise Wikipedia editors), there is zero value in terms of passing PageRank or "link juice". This is because external Wikipedia links contain the rel=nofollow attribute which informs Google that the link is to a third party site which is not trusted by Wikipedia. The premise that an "authority" site such as Wikipedia will pass its authority (i.e. trust) to a third party site via an external link is not only false, but the exact opposite is true. Nofollow indicates the site is not trusted! The nofollow attribute was developed specifically to combat this sort of link spam, which has historically been prevalent on blogs, forums, and yes, Wikipedia. Nofollow allows site owners to provide users with the ability to contribute content without the angst associated with link spam bleeding link juice away from the site or causing the site to inadvertently link to a "bad neighborhood".

It seems that dispelling SEO mythology is a never ending ordeal. Reputable SEO firms will never advise placing links within Wikipedia for the purpose of increasing search engine rankings. It is important for the consumer to understand that when considering various SEO firms, if it sounds too good to be true it is. If your SEO firm does not propose creating content and promoting that content as a link building strategy, you should steer clear.

Matt Foster is the CEO of ArteWorks SEO, a full service search engine optimization firm.

Read more!

Paid Link Pain of Google's Iron Fist

Google has come down hard on paid links. Don't believe me? Just ask sites like washingtonpost.com, forbes.com, and many other high profile sites that have just had their page rank reduced by two to four points. Are you still considering hiring that SEO firm that offers "paid text links" or "paid ad buys" as part of their strategy? I hope not.

Google staff began talking about an upcoming shakedown on paid links several months ago. One of the reasons for the shakedown is that paid links are not true, natural links, and therefore shouldn't qualify as "voting" links for the purpose of transferring PageRank. Google prefers to have sites naturally linking to each other, as natural linking is the more reliable way to ascertain the relative importance of a site. In the past, Google has come down on FFA or "free for all" linking schemes, link exchange schemes, link farms, and appears to discount reciprocal linking (link trades or link swaps). Now their target is paid links.

Google is not against paid links per se. Conspiracy theorists aside (who believe Google is trying to end all advertising on the Internet except through their own AdWords service), Google is not stupid and they know that there are legitimate advertising reasons for purchasing links from quality sites that would be good sources of qualified traffic to your site. However, the problem is that people were (and still are) purchasing paid links not for advertising or traffic purposes, but rather to artificially inflate their link popularity.

Google came out this summer and said that all paid links should be identified as such or risk a penalty. Specifically, it has been suggested that paid links should utilize the nofollow attribute, which is an attribute in the linking code of a site which tells Google the link is not intended to transfer PageRank. Use of this attribute clearly identifies the link as "non-voting", and solves the problem.
However, many sites ignored Google's warning. Then, in the fourth week of October of 2007, Google slammed down its iron fist. Some very high profile sites, including many in the search engine optimization industry, were hit hard through reductions in PageRank of several points. These were sites such as washingtonpost.com, forbes.com, searchengineguide.com, suntimes.com, and seoroundtable.com. Additionally, many high profile blog sites were hit. The one thing that all of these sites have in common is that they sold text link ads, and did not employ the nofollow attribute.

This served a dual purpose - it served as disincentive for the site owners to continue selling paid links absent a nofollow attribute, as well as a disincentive for link buyers to buy links from these now low PageRank sites.

Rumors in the SEO industry are that the buyers of these paid links could be the next to be hit. So buyer beware. If you are shopping for SEO, avoid any firm or strategy which offers a "paid link buy", "text ad purchase", or anything similar. You do this for a few reasons: first, the links will likely be worth nothing (for SEO purposes), either through use of a nofollow attribute or low PageRank.

Additionally, you could be putting yourself at risk as the link buyer. Finally, any SEO firm offering this service obviously does not know anything about SEO, and as such any of their purported search engine optimization services are suspect.

How can you protect yourself? If you are a seller of links, use the nofollow attribute. If you are a buyer of links, don't do it for SEO purposes, or you will be sorely disappointed. If buying a link makes sense for your business (i.e. the link will be a good source of qualified traffic), then do it. If you expect it to improve your positioning in the engines, however, you are misguided in your efforts.

About the Author: Matt Foster is the President of ArteWorks SEO, a top 3 search engine optimization company in the world. For more information, please visit www.arteworks.com.

Read more!