ColourOfSpring - 11:51 am on Apr 3, 2013 (gmt 0)
Is this really a new policy from Google (i.e. returning to their ORIGINAL policy pre-March 2012 of ignoring spammy/paid links), or is it just Matt Cutts saying something off the cuff that doesn't truly reflect Google policy?
If Matt Cutts is saying that Google will simply ignore paid links, then what of blog networks and the like? What about sites that STILL over a year later have unnatural links penalties made against them? Are reconsideration requests now unnecessary because there's now nothing to reconsider?
It's interesting that Matt Cutts talks specifically about paid links here, as surely they are most likely links to involve collusion from the linked-to site. What of "spammy" links like blog comments, blog network links, forum signatures etc? These are LESS likely to involve collusion from the linked-to site since they simply cost a lot less than directly paid links. If he's saying "hey buy links if you want, but we'll just ignore them when we realise they're paid", then he's saying any form of link building is OK because Google will simply ignore the value of the links once they're labelled as unnatural i.e. no more negative value, just novalue.
Just think of all the time that will save for webmasters to actually write useful content than try to hone their link profiles via link removal requests!
However...still, more questions than answers here from a likely off-the-cuff remark from Matt Cutts that may not reflect Google's policy to paid links.