martinibuster - 4:02 pm on Jul 18, 2012 (gmt 0) [edited by: tedster at 10:00 pm (utc) on Apr 26, 2013]
Here is the link to the Eric Enge interview [stonetemple.com].
The link is often embedded in the infographic in a way that people donít realize, vs. a true endorsement of your site.
The longer version is this:
The other thing that happens is that people donít always realize what they are linking to when they reprint these infographics. Often the link goes to a completely unrelated site, and one that they donít mean to endorse. Conceptually, what happens is they really buy into publishing the infographic, and agree to include the link, but they donít actually care about what it links to. From our perspective this is not what a link is meant to be.
The process of dampening has already been happening. The comment above is addressing an issue that is apart from Infographics, it's an issue that addresses a major problem with viral link campaigns.
So number one, infographics are not getting discounted. They have already been subject to dampening. Matt is not really saying anything new. He is simply pointing out what I pointed out three years ago, that one of the negative things about viral links is that they aren't necessarily votes for a site.
[edit reason] fixed link [/edit]
[edited by: tedster at 10:00 pm (utc) on Apr 26, 2013]