|Link Building According to Bing|
Discusses Penalties and Real-World Link Building Techniques
| 4:35 pm on Nov 23, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Bing's official blog posted an article about link building [bing.com] that discusses a number of issues. It's a far ranging article that includes a little about how Bing analyzes links in addition to recommendations of how to acquire links. Some of these tips make sense although some left me scratching my head. You judge for yourself. :P
Here are some interesting points, but I suggest you read the entire article. In this part, Bing encourages webmasters to contact one another, something I think Google has stopped recommending on their official webmaster pages.
|You contact webmasters of other, related websites and let them know your site exists... That, my friend, is the essence of link building. |
A word about relevance and rank scoring:
|Relevance is important to end users... If there is a clear disconnect, the value of that inbound link is significantly diminished, if not completely disregarded. |
A non-green-pixel definition of an authority site for those who are hooked on Google's toolbar:
|Authority sites |
Sites that possess great content, that have a history in their space, that have earned tons of relevant, inbound links - basically, the sites who are authorities in their field - are considered authoritative sites.
Things to watch out for when link building:
|Going unnatural |
The number of inbound links suddenly increases by orders of magnitude in a short period of time
Many inbound links coming from irrelevant blog comments and/or from unrelated sites
Using hidden links in your pages
Receiving inbound links from paid link farms, link exchanges, or known "bad neighborhoods" on the Web
Linking out to known web spam sites
This tidbit about a negative page rank is interesting:
|When probable manipulation is detected, a spam rank factor is applied to a site... |
There is a full list of link building methods. Here is a small sampling. Read the blog post though because there is a lot more:
|Publish expert articles to online article directories |
Participate in relevant blogs and forums and refer back to your site's content when applicable...
Use social media sites such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to connect to industry influencers to establish contacts, some of whom may connect back to you (be sure you have your profiles set up with links back to your website first)
Join and participate in relevant industry associations and especially in their online forums
| 5:27 pm on Nov 23, 2009 (gmt 0)|
That is long-winded, but it's done with the intention of disclosure on what one can/can't do in the linking area. Be nice to see a similar post by Google.
| 11:08 pm on Nov 23, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Are there any differences compared to Google? In other words, something that Bing likes but Google dislikes? Where the webmaster has to choose between one search engine and the other?
I think the articles directory idea is lame. They say they're for article sites but against link farms?! What on earth is an article site if it's not a link farm?
| 12:09 am on Nov 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Sounds much like Bing is recommending reciprocal linking arrangements.
However, even if reciprocal were allowed by Bing, PageRank-style computations would make reciprocal link value tend to cancel out, unless you're getting a reciprocal link from a higher ranking site.
And, I'd bet that higher-ranking sites are less likely to agree to any reciprocal link love.
| 7:23 am on Nov 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
"Receiving inbound links from paid link farms, link exchanges, or known "bad neighborhoods" on the Web"
Great ... you can hurt your competitors on Bing!
| 9:57 am on Nov 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|PageRank-style computations would make reciprocal link value tend to cancel out |
not 100% true. relevancy algorithms also consider other factors beyond global connectivity (like link anchor text and link diversity). if reciprocal links did not work, then would ego-bait sites ever rank? and yet they do.
it was great being on the links panel with you Martinibuster :D
| 1:59 pm on Nov 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
well this is informative, a article like this from Google would make my day.
| 4:14 pm on Nov 25, 2009 (gmt 0)|
| 12:22 am on Nov 26, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|Are there any differences compared to Google? In other words, something that Bing likes but Google dislikes? |
Does it really matter though? I think the message the article is trying to send is clear. It speak bounds and leaps into what real SEO is. I don't think that the core will differ from search engine to search engine.
Once again, great links and post Martini.
| 6:43 pm on Nov 28, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Well...I think they are encouraging to use every available way to get a link back to your site... unlike google which loves natural backlinks.
| 3:19 pm on Dec 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
So basically relevancy is huge and so is natural growth. I think this direction is where the search engines are really starting to strive towards just to clean up search results as much as possible.