SEO Infighting - Who Wins?
by Randall McCarley
October 4th, 2007
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?
Next Article: Where did we go wrong? Previous Article: Do you have something to say? Say it here!
October 4th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
rmc, you are absolutely correct that there is a fear issue, and that Google is asinine for using that as a tactic… but the issue of gaining material to blog about at the expense of others who don’t deserve to be hurt is of course a stand alone topic all by its lonesome.
I did like the comment you made earlier on moz about campaigning for one of the other se’s. My main problem is that I still see the original Google vision, and keep hoping against all odds that they might be able to return to it. I should just give up, but they have so much damn potential, if they ever did decide to come back to the Light Side of the Force.
October 5th, 2007 at 8:50 am
I think a lot of us hold a new hope that Google will reverse some of their policies. Until then should we look the other way or be instruments for change?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:17 am
People should remember that Google is in it for the money in the long run. Sure they talk about open source and open standards and open this and open that, but they are only open when it benefits them and are notoriously close-minded when others want to “open” Google. Google won’t publish its infamous PageRank scheme and clouds it policies in mystery, makes people sign non-disclosure agreements, etc. Of course, these are all part of being a business — which brings to mind: if Google like open source, why isn’t Google a non-profit like Mozilla? And let’s not forget that Google is first and foremost an ADVERTISING (which uses technology of the web and mobile) rather than a search company. Why was Google so eager to buy DoubleClick, and expand in to new areas of TV, print, and radio ads? Because ADS are how Google gets its money.