homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.207.53
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

    
Spam site question and problem.
How to get something done?
mgpapas

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 9:00 am on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

One of my competitor sites has a 1 pixel wide marquee on the bottom of his page containing 419 words that don't even come close to making any sense other than being virtually every keyword and phrase someone could possibly look for in my relatively high profile field.

The site also uses adsense which whos policy states.
Site may not include:
Deceptive or manipulative content or construction to improve your site's search engine ranking, e.g., your site's PageRank
and:
"Do not load pages with irrelevant or excessive key words."
"Avoid hidden text or hidden links."

I have emailed google numerous times over the course of the past year. I have also had friends email as well both pointing out the spam in term of google search and adsense policies and have gotten no response nor has any action been taken.

His site and mine are both authority sites and with terms I have actually optimized my site for I am generally ahead of him in serps but for terms I have not spammed as he has I am always behind.

He also has a hacked extreme dm tracker on his site (making the linking image 1x1 pixels) and from that I am able to see that he gets more than double the traffic I do, all of it from all those spammed terms.

He has no placement on yahoo or msn search (apparently they don't reward this type of spam) but he doesn't need it since as I said he gets plenty of traffic from google.

The apparent lack of concern expressed by google is very frustrating and has me thinking lately that maybe if I can't beat him I should join him.

Any input on how I can get google's attention or opinions as to why I have gotten no results from my reports would be appreciated.

 

Brett_Tabke

WebmasterWorld Administrator brett_tabke us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 1:17 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

ya look around the threads here. This type of spam is dealt with in the google algo. The site is not ranking based on any of that stuff... it is probably hurting it due to penalties...

As we tell all such cases that are reported ... go back to building a killer site and above all else - get quality links.

BeeDeeDubbleU

WebmasterWorld Senior Member beedeedubbleu us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 1:23 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

You are probably right Brett but this does not explain why Google fails to take any visible action in the vast majority of these cases.

The fact that they invite spam reports then repeatedly fail to do anything about them causes a lot of frustration.

Brett_Tabke

WebmasterWorld Administrator brett_tabke us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 2:59 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Ok, if you haven't figured it out yet, here is how google works with "spam".

a- building great algo, push out with new index, and let simmer online for 2-6 months.
b- take in spam reports as they come in and analyze.
c- hand tweak index to address only the most problematic results.
d- build new filters and exceptions to work with broad range of problem sites reported in b.
e- remove all hand tweaks (aka: hand checkins)), push new algo/index online, and allow new filters in D to go to work.
f- go back to A.

Notice the process rarely includes manually addressing spam, and even if it does, those hand tweaks are later removed. The primary Google Update goal is to address spam in the algo and not to muck around with labor intensive and messy hand checks. eg: more pure core programming code and less special case exception based spaghetti code.

BeeDeeDubbleU

WebmasterWorld Senior Member beedeedubbleu us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 4:36 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

I appreciate that but for the record, here's what Google says ...

If your Google search returns a result that you suspect is spam, please let us know using this form. We investigate each report of deceptive practices thoroughly and take appropriate action when abuse is uncovered. At minimum, we will use the data from each spam report to improve our site ranking and filtering algorithms. The result of this should be visible over time as the quality of our searches gets even better. In especially egregious cases, we will remove spammers from our index immediately, so they do not show up in search results at all. Other steps will be taken as necessary.

So I suppose it's a question of what they define as egregious. I would have thought that the technique described above would have come into that category but clearly they don't. So perhaps Mgpapas is right about "if you can't beat them join them".

For my own part, I'll keep the old white hat on. ;)

Brett_Tabke

WebmasterWorld Administrator brett_tabke us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 5:09 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

hidden text is not eggregious in the least. it may even been just for their own site search engine and have zero to do with other search engines.

There are millions (billions?) of pages of text, links, and other stuff hidden around the web. Google is not going to deal with that by banning them on a one-off basis.

Lorel

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 6:01 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

I have reported sites to Google Spam and Google Adsense several times. Here are some recent examples:

EXAMPLE #1:

Using the intitle command in Google for a client site a hijacker site comes up with redirects to another page on hijacker site. However Google's cache shows another page on hijacker site with the complete text from client site on that page plus another list of all their keywords plus the keyword and description meta tags filled with keywords (competing for the client's own home page's keywod rank). That page linked to another page with Google Adsense on it, i.e., some kind of cloaking going on here because the page was not generally visible due to the redirect. And they did this to everone on their site.

I reported that site to Google spam plus Google adsense. This site showing up in Client's inurl search was gone within 4 days although the site is still indexed in Google (all pages are supplemental so it's not going to be ranking well).

Example #2 &#3

I searched for inurl for my own site and found 2 sites, one with a 302 redirect to one of my pages and the other a javascript redirect to my site. I reported them both to Google spam as deceptive redirects and they both disappeared from the inurl search shortly thereafter. One site is now indexed as URL only but the other is still there.

None of the above sites are affecting my or my client's site now.

So, while Google may not deindex a site for dishonest practices Google (in my experience) often does prevent it from harming the site it is attacking (and usually within a week).

So I would encourage everyone to send in Google Spam and Google Adsense violations. Usually when you find a site with Spam you will also find Google adsense on the site.

BeeDeeDubbleU

WebmasterWorld Senior Member beedeedubbleu us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 8:42 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

hidden text is not eggregious in the least. it may even been just for their own site search engine and have zero to do with other search engines.

Really? Come on Brett are you serious? What are the chances of that? I think this is this is the first time I have heard hidden text being defended and in the highly unlikely event that this is true it is still against Google law.

"Trying to deceive (spam) our web crawler by means of hidden text, deceptive cloaking or doorway pages compromises the quality of our results and degrades the search experience for everyone. We think that's a bad thing. "

Google is not going to deal with that by banning them on a one-off basis.

Then they are going to continue to cause frustration and bad feeling amongst the people who are good enough to waste their time reporting this. I am well aware that they champion the algorithmic method of finding spam but they are not being realistic if they expect people to do this when there is no real prospect of it being dealt with.

Basic spamming techniques like this were around before Google was born. They have had years to sort it out and they have not done so. If they are unable to deal with it automatically they should have the courtesy to do so manually when people take the time to tell them about it.

My 2p.

Bewenched

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 8:47 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

google has stated that spam requests are taken more seriously if you submit them from your sitemaps login.

Jon_King

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 8:55 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

>>there is no real prospect of it being dealt with.

The 'dealt with' is very real. Just not one by one.

Again - Your reports guide development of the algo, not one by one spam removal.

[edited by: Jon_King at 8:56 pm (utc) on Aug. 11, 2006]

colin_h



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 9:09 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Brett_Tabke

IMHO Google should, without reserve, ban all sites that use any form of hidden keywords. This should include those sites that cram their cheats into <DIV> sections that are only 2 pixels wide etc. Anyone who has content on their site that is not for the benefit of their reader is a spammer and should be banned. It bothers me that someone of your stature within this community should defend their actions.

Col

mgpapas

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 9:10 pm on Aug 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

ya look around the threads here. This type of spam is dealt with in the google algo. The site is not ranking based on any of that stuff... it is probably hurting it due to penalties...
As we tell all such cases that are reported ... go back to building a killer site and above all else - get quality links.

As I stated I can see the traffic the site receives and whatever type of algorythym you say is it is being dealt with by isn't working.

I can assure you his the has no "pong game widget" has no one linking to him for "pong game widget" or 100's of other terms for which he gets 1000's of hits daily. Hits that can ONLY be attributed to 419 words of hidden text which is 75% of his content. The site is also #1 for "teen wiGDet" a fairly common misspelling and one that is repeated 3 times in the hidden text.

When you do the search any of those terms they show up highlighted in googles cache (of course you have to click show text only version) and the hidden text is the only conceivable reason he would get hits for those terms.

I put a geo tracker type of thing on my site awhile ago and the alt was "my space something" within a day or two I was getting hits for "my space widgets"

I have no doubt that if I added 417 slighly related keywords to the bottom of my page (hidden or not) like yahoo, search engine, etc etc etc I would get traffic for "yahoo widgets", "search engine widgets" and so on.

The problem is I thought that wasn't a legitimate seo strategy and that I could get totally banned from Google.
If that is not the case and the worst I can expect is possibly a slight loss in some algo It's definately worth the risk. I can always remove it if it's hurting.

I have better links, better page rank, and FAR better content than this competitor site the one thing I have which apparently is a negative is morals.

One final word, Brett_Tabke I think you should save your canned answers for situations where they are relevant which they might be IF we were talking about a level playing field.

Brett_Tabke

WebmasterWorld Administrator brett_tabke us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 4:55 am on Aug 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

> Your reports guide development of the algo, not one by one spam removal.

That is the best summation of the actions we have seen for many a year.

> and the hidden text is the only conceivable reason he would get hits for those terms.

easily could be linking with anchor text back to those pages. Google doesn't show all links with the link command. Go to yahoo.

If you know how you are getting bet by such simpliest 1997 seo spam, then why are you not beating them with a quality site and links?

mgpapas

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3042354 posted 12:08 pm on Aug 12, 2006 (gmt 0)

If you know how you are getting bet by such simpliest 1997 seo spam, then why are you not beating them with a quality site and links?

Do you work for google or are you such a google appologist that you refuse to the the truth. I told you (if you bothered to read my post) that I am beating him for the terms I don't spam in a 417 word hidden marquee.

As I said I know every single hit he gets due to having access to his stats tracker he has no backlinks with anchor text related to any of those terms.

No one would put an obscure backlink like "green tomatoes widgets" on their site but he gets hits for those terms because they are in his spam.

As I said the only way to beat spam like that without doing the same is for them to be removed, despite how much you want to believe that algo's are taking care of the problem I can assure you they aren't.

My sites compete very favorably with many high profile sites with big budgets (who optimize fairly) I'm not an seo noob when I say the hidden text is the reason for additional traffic that site receives it is a fact not an opinion.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved