I have made the switch from Google to Yahoo! as my default search engine. You may notice I have changed the site search function on this blog over as well.

While I think Google offers great products their ethics are wanting and I just don’t want to support them any more than I have to. There’s a good list of Google alternatives at Gevil.org if you are interested in reducing your reliance on Google.

You will notice that I have left Google Adsense up. While I take issue with some of Google’s policies I am still a businessman first. Until I find a service that comes close to pulling the same revenue I get with Adsense I won’t change that over. There’s a difference between making a protest and being stupid. Unfortunately YPN does not stack up in this arena.

However, I am happy to report that Yahoo! Search is proving to be much more reliable than Google’s. I’ve been hearing reports that Yahoo! has a higher satisfaction rate and can now see why - it just works!

While this was a personal choice for me I’d like to encourage you to try some other search engines as well. Here’s the big ones to look at:

• Yahoo!
• Live (Formerly MSN)
• Ask

There are some smaller and niche search engines you may want to try out as well:

• Clusty
• Icerocket
• Technorati
• Bloglines

The real issue at heart here for me is building the free internet I want instead of capitulating to the demands of a monopolistic empire. With more than 50% of the market share for search alone, Google is using its size to bully websites into falling in line with ‘policy’ - no matter how hypocritical the new policies are when stacked against Google’s mission statement, webmaster guidelines and public image.

My protest is a small one. I’m hopeful that this message will reach you and inspire you to try something different. If Google’s market share gets affected they will have to address their policies. I’m hopeful Google will go back to being a great service provider and their attempt to architect, engineer or police what the masses want online will stop.

Thank you for your support!

Update: Thanks to this great post by Ben, I have checked out a couple Adsense alternatives and settled on BidVertiser for now. That makes this site one big step closer to being Google-free!

Posted in Website Designers, SEOs, Business Owners, Reviews, Industry News, SEO

No Comments »

As a professional website developer from way back, I’ve used my position as an “internet professional” to promote certain products. One that comes to mind is in search where my partners and I pointed a lot of our clients, friends and family to Google.  At the time Google was revolutionary in its approach to determining relevancy. Instead of relying on the words on the page Google looked outside to see who was linking to that page. Enter Google’s greatest PR achievement: PageRank.

It wasn’t until 4 years later that I started learning about search engine optimization and by then Google had claimed about half the worldwide searches. Many of the early players had been purchased or folded and there were really only 3 SEs worth counting in the US: Google, Yahoo and MSN.

One of Google’s other PR achievements is adoption of the phrase “do no evil”. Unfortunately it is clear that Google no longer holds to that tenant.

In the course of educating others about search and pointing them to Google I have helped make Google a stronger company. And now I feel dirty and used.

Somewhere in the middle of all that Google lost their way and took me with them. For some reason it is now wrong to purchase links. And it is right to “nofollow” links. Somehow it is wrong to sell links unless I purchase them through Google, attempting to outbid my competition to get top placement above the other search results. And most important, it is wrong to discuss what I’m doing with my sites or the sites of competitors or sites I just find interesting because I may point something out that Google doesn’t like and get those sites in trouble.

Google is the Big Bad. They’ve become the internet police and the authority for ethics online. They’ve been using FUD tactics to create an atmosphere of fear and suspicion within my industry - an industry I love with some of the best and brightest people you’ll find anywhere.

Infighting has broken out. Respected individuals and companies that 6 months ago would have been happy to work together (and at no charge in many cases!) are drawing lines in the sand. Conversations are becoming secretive and muted.

I think the problem is that we’re all so invested in Google we’re not sure what to do. Many of us want to go along with whatever Google says or does because it is easier. Some of us may be paralyzed with doubt. A lot of us know that what Google has been up to is wrong but don’t know what to do.

I intend to continue to talk about websites. I intend to develop less reliance on Google. I intend to point people to Google alternatives more often. And I am changing my default search engine today. And the default search engine of my family members.

My contribution is a small one, I know. Google probably won’t notice.

But just as I had a role in building Google up maybe I can bring them down enough for them to see the light and go back to being a force for good. Maybe I can convince them that while they provide a valuable service they shouldn’t be correcting their errors  through other people’s work (nofollow) and money (paid links). Maybe I can make a difference.

If you will do these things too.

Make pages for users, not for search engines.

- Google Webmaster Guidelines Basic Principles

Posted in SEOs, SEO

4 Comments »

SEO’s are known for their great debates. Does this tactic work? Is this how the algo works? Is this how things should work or is there a better way?

Normally this is healthy and eventually resolves into better education for everyone. Occasionally things blow up and a flame-war begins.

Right now the debate is between high-profile SEOs and their perception of Google’s anti-paid-link FUD tactics. It starts with Rand noticing some likely paid links and asking questions about them while pointing out that the issue isn’t going away. In the comments, Donna says that outing those sites is bad form.

I think the problem is bigger than the ethics of possibly outing websites that may be selling links without nofollows.

The problem is fear.

Webmasters should be able to discuss the merits of websites - and their tactics - freely and openly without fear of reprisal. This is an open discussion amongst peers. What could possibly be wrong with that?

Google might slap these sites down.

Rand is afraid to link to the sites in question because his site might get penalized for “endorsing” their tactics. Donna is afraid that even naming the sites will get them penalized.

Is Google the de facto police online now? They are one of the biggest companies online with huge influence. Should all webmasters being checking in with Google to see what is considered “evil” today? Or is Google pushing well past it’s bounds?

I’ve made my position clear. What do you think?

Posted in SEOs, SEO

3 Comments »

There’s an interesting thread at SEO Refugee where the question of “Blackhat SEO” comes up. What is blackhat SEO and how can it affect your website?

Technically blackhat SEO is doing anything outside of the webmaster guidelines with the intent of manipulating the search engine rankings.

Blackhat SEO tends to bring in results faster than the normal “organic” process of whitehat SEO. It investigates exploits in the search engine algorithms to make a site perform better than average.

I think it is important to note that blackhat techniques are not illegal. Nor unethical. It’s just a short-term solution and there are appropriate uses for blackhat techniques. By short-term, I mean that a site using blackhat techniques will eventually get caught and when that happens the domain will be banned by the search engines.

A problem comes up when defining blackhat because a lot of blackhat techniques have legitimate uses. The problem is the search engines have difficulty detecting blackhat intent on a casual basis. And intent is the real indicator of whether a website is up to no good - and subject to ban - or not.

Common blackhat techniques include:

Hidden text and/or links - Or almost hidden. Use of CSS and matching colors shows the websites a site stuffed with links and content typical viewer won’t see.

Sneaky redirects - Use of javascript, meta refresh and other redirects where the viewer is supposed to arrive on one page but is instead redirected to another sales/ad ridden page.

Scraping - Generating original content based on targeted keywords takes real time and work. Blackhats usually want to keep this to a minimum so automated scripts pull content from existing websites. Advanced scripts scramble the content to make it appear unique.

Link spamming - Using automated scripts to plug links on blogs, forums and guestbooks. This isn’t as effective as it used to be because of the “nofollow” attribute and is the main reason behind Google’s nofollow solution.

Cloaking - Similar to hidden text but implemented in a completely different manner. Cloaking involves watching for the IP addresses of the search engines and displaying different content to them than to a normal viewer.

Keyword stuffing - An old school technique where the keyword density of a page is inflated. Doesn’t really work anymore especially in the meta keywords tag which is all but ignored by modern search engines.

Link farms - Building several sites that link together to artificially increase link popularity of a website.

Hijacking - Copying existing websites to rank for their content.

Referer log spamming - Pinging the website logfile in hopes the webmaster will track that URL back to the spam site.

Buying expired domains - To capitalize off their previous success.

Most blackhat websites don’t provide any real value to the visitor and that is why the search engines seek them out and purge them from their index. But as mentioned earlier there are appropriate uses for blackhat techniques.

Consider a real estate listing in a hot market. Taking the time to get that listing ranking at a level that is of value to the real estate agent just isn’t cost-effective. Using blackhat techniques that may get the site popular within weeks instead of months makes sense. But of course the site will eventually get caught and banned.

Blackhat is fine for short-term projects but should not be employed for a website geared for lasting value or long-term search engine success.

Posted in SEOs, Website Designers, Promotion, Industry News, SEO

7 Comments »

Yuri of Improve the Web recently posted that a friend of his had to come up with 20 PR6 links in 30 days to impress a new boss.

Moving the argument aside about how futile high-PR links may or may not be, the question remains: is it possible?

I’m sure it is if you have the contacts and talent for it. But I’ve never tried it. I’m usually quite happy picking up links that are easy to get or earn and the PR scores for those tend to be small… but they add up.

I’m thinking about running a contest. But it would have to be a bit more practical. What about 20 PR5 links in 30 days with a one week lead-in for planning and strategy? We could collaborate and share our wins and losses and at the end of the 30 days we should all have some great links to show for our efforts.

Anyone interested?

Posted in Link Building Articles, Link Resources

7 Comments »