Forum Moderators: open
So, I personally don't think Google will penalized the 'advertiser' but I think it would be possible for Google to easily reduce or even eliminate the weight of the links send to the 'advertiser'. What do you think?
So may places will only give you a javascript link so google won't even pick it up :/
point is, how will it know it's advertised or genuine?
Exactly, there is no way for Google to work out if the link has been paid for purely PR or for traffic.
I dont think the site selling the ad space would give any of the information out anyway. It would slow down the sales if word got out.
Craig
For example a site with no other advertising on it and a whole bunch a text links for completely unrelated products at the foot of it is obviously PR buying.
However, I think it might be harder for them to decide if the advertsing could be legitamate?
I have seen examples of the former and Google is acting on this by not passing the PR from site to site!
In any case within the current algo, I think the benefit from such activity has been greatly reduced, not removed, but not as beneficial as it maybe once was.
So many places will only give you a javascript link so google won't even pick it up :/
Brett assures us that javascript links are picked up provided they begin http:// (pity GG can't confirm this). Because the link: function on Google is so poor, it is hard to confirm this, however, I've seen indications that Google may be simply using url text as link, in which case javascript links should be detected.
I guess the rule to follow is always include the http:// prefix when requesting links from other sites and keep your fingers crossed.
Kaled.
I would say it is easy for Google to spot whether it is a link bought purely for PR purposes
How? Google just see the link, text, image or even .cgi link (even if they can't follow it).
For example a site with no other advertising on it and a whole bunch a text links for completely unrelated products at the foot of it is obviously PR buying.
Google cant tell if it is advertising or just a link pointing to an external site, they just see the link. It would need human intervention to inspect the page, which Google dont like to do.
I am not knee deep in the page rank algo, but I think if many high PR web sites (which obviously are the most valuable in terms of bought links) stop passing PR to external sites, the flow of PR for all web sites might be considerably changed. I donīt know what impact that would have on the page rank algo in general, but that might be a problem, too.
point is, how will it know it's advertised or genuine?
If I am google, I won't need to know that. What I will do is discount the links weight from the 3rd link maybe. Which means getting 1000+ links from a same domain site is same as getting 3 from them.
(actually I am noticing it, you can beat a site with 1000+ links from a same site by having a few simple links from different sites)
----
No matter what comes out from google in the future, if they don't like us to BUY links then they should list it in their guidelines... Before they penalize me because I do buy links! :)
I would say it is easy for Google to spot whether it is a link bought purely for PR purposes
How? Google just see the link, text, image or even .cgi link (even if they can't follow it).
Theming for example you run a weather site and have pharm, loans, holidays and cosmetic links. it shouldn't be to hard for google to pick it and stop PR been passed
DaveN
If I am google, I won't need to know that. What I will do is discount the links weight from the 3rd link maybe. Which means getting 1000+ links from a same domain site is same as getting 3 from them.
Good job your not Google then ;)
Which means getting 1000+ links from a same domain site..
IMHO thats not really buying PR though, we do that at work because it makes good business sense to have our link on a site that deals exclusively with our type of widget.
Brett assures us that javascript links are picked up provided they begin [<...]I'v seen scripts that take off the http:// or the www. off the link.
Don't worry about that, collect good links and if you got money you can buy them (as it is has always been in the real world). The smart ones get them for free, the other - or the lazy ones ;) paying for them.
Make good websites for your targetted visitors and make sure they converse into loyal customers. That's what counts.
Let the 'algo-thing' up to the SE's, but be sure they will handle things with great care. They cannot punish for this for they cannot understand the intention of a link, just the context. I'll bet they will give more weight to themed links and thus to relevant links.
Just my 2 (euro)cents ...
And if I offer to sell you a link on my site, and you buy, that makes us both sinners? In that case Google needs to find a priest and confess about all those Adwords. ;)
- The link game is getting old and I doubt it's turning out the way some Google triple-PhD invisioned! Time for Google to find something new.
Besides, Google can't seem to get the links
process run in a timely manner anyway.
If Google move towards a degree of content analysis with respect to the pages that contain the links, the chances are that the value of many existing paid links will become virtually nil. I've said before that I think the bias given to anchor text is simply the first (very crude) step in this direction.
Consider this, if you were to sit down and start writing context-analysis software, the first tool you would need would be some sort of dictionary (with meanings). What have Google just added? A define: tool. Now there is huge step from definitions for people to definitions for a computer algo, but no one should be in any doubt that a search provider as large as Google that plans to stay at the top will be looking very hard at context analysis.
Kaled.
That isn't necessarily the case. On the TV weather channel, there are all kinds of advertisements for pharm, loans, holiday/vacation ..... Must be there advertising value because they sure aren't there for the PR value.
On my website are two freeware tools. I did searches for free blue widget and freeware blue widget for both of these. In both cases, my widgets appeared higher in the serps when freeware was used.
Considering the fact that freeware is not used in the page titles and only appears once on each page (but free appears several times as well as in the title) this result would appear to be unexpected. However, consider that most of the links to these pages include the word freeware on the page (but not in the anchor text) and you might conclude that the content of backlink pages is already used to calculate results.
This is hardly scientific, but it is interesting.
Kaled.
[edited by: kaled at 3:03 pm (utc) on Oct. 23, 2003]
I just checked that for the weather, and there was a big ad linking to a bank. People DO buy ads on websites unrelated to theme, and not for PR.
Usual Advertisement: A link that meant to be seen and receive clicks. Better be in relevant site.
Buying Links: Traffic is not important, most important is Googlebot sees it! :) Relevancy isn't important, you can sell viagra at xbox site.
What worries me is that when the site that sell me links to me also sell links to 50 different sites that are totally irrelevant! I don't expect to get traffic! Do you? But Googlebot do find them all the time!
You certainly can. If this keeps up, I imagine at some point text links (solely for PR) will pass banner ads in terms of ad revenue.
Appears that Google simply doesn't have a response to this scheme yet.
You can't without human intervention. That's why Google is having difficulties with this issue.
So you means traded link are legal while purchased link are not legal?
You can't without human intervention.
I think it's even tough with human intervention. And themeing (that is to decide wether a link is somewhat on topic or not) seems to endlessly complicated even for humans.
I have over a thousand banners on one website- they did it because they liked my website and had spare inventory.
On another website, the webmaster decided to sell another product and shut down his website with a holding page. I asked if he still wanted to partner on traffic and he affirmed it by slapping my link on his holding page.
Both of these beneficial links are the result of a partnership between us that benefits our audiences.
[edited by: martinibuster at 7:17 pm (utc) on Oct. 23, 2003]
Don't really know, do we? This is kind of a grey area because Google won't really spell out the rules. And I think that they keep this intentionally vague, because the algo starts to break down when it has to deal with this.
at the moment it's not an epidemic problem that is skewing relevancy.
Thank you.
Every time this comes up,I keep having to post the same thing. Google DOES NOT CARE if your link is bought, or if it reciprocal or it is one way because someone really liked your site.
What google cares about is that whatever links you have do not excessively skew the results.
Google does not care of you are guilty or innocent of buying links for PR. They just want to have the best results that they can get.
If removing links with certain characteristics from the system improves the SERPs, then they will do it without regard to whether they are free or paid for, or the reason that they were bought. They don't need to take that into consideration, because that is irrelevant data as far as producing the best results.
