Badges , widgets and Google - how to avoid penalties?

[Whitey]

I've heard of the benefits of putting widgets or badges onto your site , but what are the things a webmaster must take care of before engaging them to avoid the risk of a penalty or page / SERP filter ?

[backdraft7]

Personalty, I would think about good content before badges & widgets, unless you really like "pieces of flair". Say hello to Lumbergh for me! LOL-JK.

[Tropical Island]

There is a place for these.

We are a small B&B with very good TripAdvisor reviews so I use their badge to promote this as a reliability factor.

The only thing I don't like is the lag for them to load.

[HuskyPup]

What are badges and widgets?

Are you writing about trade logos or something?

[Whitey]

Widgets, in terms of what I'm querying , are a functional mini-application added to a web page blogs, web pages etc. by embedding a snippet of HTML code.

A badge is a tile , such as a trade logo which may also contain code , yet not have an application feature. I guess these are close to text links since they can pass link juice.

[Lorel]

I put a twitter widget on the home page of my website which loads my tweets instantly. It's designed with Javascript so Google doesn't pick it up but it would only enhance my site if it did.

[Whitey]

Maybe I didn't express myself clearly in the earlier posts.

What about Google's interpretation / perception of Widgets as " hundreds of sites with doorway pages " or elaborate link networks. Likewise hundreds of "badges " with common code , such as blogging or advertising networks.

I guess there are many other things to watch out for , but what about these for starters.

[tedster]

Whitey, are you talking about putting badges on your own site that point to others, or distributing your own badges that help other sites link to you?

[Whitey]

I was more interested in the distribution of widgets and badges pointing back to one's own site. But I guess it would be good to know also about the dangers of also hosting them on one's own site also.

[Robert Charlton]

Some apps, WordPress themes, etc, essentially contain hidden links. They link back to sponsor sites without telling you about it, and I know that Google doesn't like that.

Badges that I've seen are organization memberships and the like, and once upon a time some of them were bought for possible link value. I'd assume that Google would just discount these. There are too many of them around for sites to be penalized because of them.

[tedster]

This issue is sometimes called "widgetbait", and it's not a black and white thing - it's "nuanced" as the Googlers like to say. Here are some comments from a Matt Cutts interview:

we come at it from a perspective where the first widgetbait that we saw was web counter spam... So, a few of the criteria to think about are, are the links hidden? Is the image clickable or are the links are buried in some NoScript or something like that? If so, that’s not going to be as good for users. How relevant is a widget?

...we wanted people to be informed of what they are linking to and we want the links to be editorial. And, if we feel like somebody got tricked into making a link; like they signed up for some service and they didn’t even realize that a link was going to be piggybacking along on this.

[stonetemple.com...]
This interview goes on for some depth on the topic.

[Robert Charlton]

Matt Cutts also commented about "theme sponsorship"... essentially hidden link syndication via sponsored links embedded in themes and apps... back in 2007....

[mattcutts.com...]

[Whitey]

That's a concern .... it seems a bit vague in areas.

Tropicalisland mentions the use of Tripadvisor badges which are utilised and presumably successful as part of their widgetbait strategy, but since they have such a strong relationship with Google anyway, i would think they would have a total green light for most things they do. One of their practices is common amongst directory sites , where suppliers point a link back in a badge to the TA site. I guess this really boosts the directory's authority with the endorsement.

But, what about if a lesser known site put's out a highly successful widget that produces thousands of links a month , not so much the " web counter " one which arguably has no theme relationship to the content. Or more to the point have you seen this done successfully without the worries Matt Cutt's alludes to on a widespread scale?

[tedster]

I doesn't really seem vague to me, but it is a judgment call rather than a technical "rule". Google wants the badge or widget link to be as above board and editorially awarded as any other link that they allow to be active on their web graph.

So it comes down to this: Does the business have a strong enough following that other sites would WANT to display their badge/widget? Or are they required to use the badge/widget in order to use some service that the site provides? In other words, is everything completely above board, or is there some manipulation and social engineering involved. That's the judgment call I'd say Google wants to make.

If a site tries to find a loophole, they might succeed for a while, but they're mostly going to fail and get burned in the longer run. The widget-bait party is relatively stale at this point, at least as a pure link building ploy. As a brand reinforcement play, done straight up and legitimate, it's viable.

what about if a lesser known site put's out a highly successful widget that produces thousands of links a month

It all depends on how that lesser known site made and distributed such an attractive widget. As I said above, the widget party is relatively old news. It would need to be an amazing concept to garner thousands of installs per month. Not impossible, but more on the unlikely side of things, I'd say.