Is Google blind to spammy tricks?

[sleidia]

Hi,

Since quite a long time ago, I've noticed that several of my competitors' websites use tricks like hidden content mixed with keyword stuffing and, months after months, they remain in the top search results.

What is Google doing?

It really makes me laugh when I read about Google penalties here and there because such a thing doesn't seem to exist at all in fact.

Well, sorry for this rant-like post that is pretty useless in the end.

[goodroi]

Google is not blind or ignorant. A big challenge they face is to attack the spam tricks without impacting the innocent websites. Some spammy tricks like ip delivery aka cloaking have many legitimate uses like allowing websites to better serve mobile users and desktop users that visit the same domain. If Google were to kill all sites that use ip delivery it would lead to many innocent websites being hurt.

Don't forget that just because it appears on a website it does not mean that Google is rewarding it. Google often ignores the spammy trick or notices the spammy trick and applies a dampening penalty.

I would not focus on the tricks your competition is using. I would focus on how to make your site unique & valuable. That will lead to people linking to your site and people mentioning it on social sites - both of which will significantly help your rankings.

[sleidia]

Thanks for the reply :)

As I said, the ones using these tricks are in the top results. One have been squatting the first place for months.

You're right when you say I shouldn't focus on it.

But to be honest, the mantra "make your site unique & valuable" is getting on my nerves these days because it's not realistic at all in a world where billions of websites sell the same services worldwide. Uniqueness doesn't exist anymore. And even if it existed, it would be kept hidden under tons of silly websites that cheat or that have more money.

As you guessed, I'm really tired of this nonsense :(

[Lame_Wolf]

As I said, the ones using these tricks are in the top results. One have been squatting the first place for months.

Fill out a spam report with Google. I always report hidden text even if they [Google] are aware of it or not. None are in my niche, so it's not an attack on a competitor etc. I want a clean and honest web.

[sleidia]

Sorry LW, nothing against you, but if find it very lame to report to Google. I can't do that, plain and simple.

[koan]

Well then don't report it. However it's far from lame. It keeps everyone in check and it's a service to the web community at large. It's quite selfless to spend personal time to report abusers and should be commended.

[Lame_Wolf]

Sorry LW, nothing against you, but if find it very lame to report to Google. I can't do that, plain and simple.

Totally disagree. Why whinge/complain/mention it in here ? It obviously bothered you enough to tell us, but we are not the ones who can do anything about it.

Hidden text is black hat. I only do white hat. So, why should I and other honest webmasters have to endure lazy, sneaky black hatters ?

[masterchief]

We are suffering also from a scraper that automatically is spamming the results in our niche, I have been reporting this to google...so far nada, is discouraging that this kind of techniques are still valid and Google isn't able to catch them right away....

Nevertheless I agree with goodroi, we just need to focus in our work..

[goodroi]

...in a world where billions of websites sell the same services worldwide...

That is why its important to be unique. Any site can become unique with good creativity.

For example I was working on a financial site in a competitive & saturated space. I made a new type of online calculator that no one else had thought of. This doubled users to the site and also boosted backlinks.

On another site I added a section that accepted consumer reviews. No one in that industry had previously accepted & published consumer reviews. Now newspapers point to that site as an industry authority and people flock to read the reviews.

A legal site had government forms which all the other legal websites had. I had the forms translated into other languages and posted on the site. No one in that law specialty had ever thought to do that. Business doubled overnight since it allowed non-english speaking people to understand the forms & submit their information to the law office.

I am sure the competition will soon copy my actions. That is ok because I am already planning new pieces to add to keep ahead of the curve. Personally I feel it is more productive & profitable to focus on improving my sites then to worry about the competition.

[Lame_Wolf]

Personally I feel it is more productive & profitable to focus on improving my sites then to worry about the competition.

I agree with what you say. In my case, it is when I am doing general browsing.

If I come across a site, and I see say, a large blank area at the bottom of the page. I try and highlight it to see what is there. Sometimes it is just poor coding (eg: 25 non-breaking spaces), other times it is hidden text. If the latter, I report it. They are not my competion. I do not go out looking for it. But if it comes my way, then it's a quick note to Google.

The way I see it is, if they cannot be honest to the search engines, are they going to be honest with me ? Do I want to deal with them ? No, because the trust is already lost.

[koan]

In addition to reporting spammers, sending DMCAs and copyright notices is also beneficial to others since a plagiarist will usually copy tons of other people's work, so if he gets kicked out by his web host or lose his Adsense account, everyone else benefits from your actions.

[tristanperry]

Sorry LW, nothing against you, but if find it very lame to report to Google. I can't do that, plain and simple.

Posting a forum thread about it is much more productive.. ;-)

As LW says, if someone is using black hat tactics, this doesn't just harm their competitors and the search engines, it most importantly harms visitors.

Reporting it to Google is just a way of helping them learn from it and tweak their algorithm.

(Especially since they get so many web spam reports that I doubt they look at all of them - JMO)

[sleidia]

I already aknowledged from the start that this post was pretty useless :) More like a rant.

As for the "report for the good" argument, sorry but I don't buy it.

I mean, the people I see who use those technics, I can understand their frustration. And, 100% of the time, the hidden stuff or the stuffed keywords found at the very bottom of their pages describe exactly the services they offer. So, a lie to Google isn't necessarily a lie to the site visitors.

I don't use these technics but you guy should use a less manichean way of looking at things. To me, this is nothing more than Google propaganda.

[tedster]

To understand why this apparent imbalance happens requires a change in perspective about what is really important to Google.

Google is not running a ranking contest, with rules that they apply either to reward or punish pages. Their focus is most powerfully on their own users and on delivering results that keep those users happy.

So if a website is breaking some Google guideline or other, the results of that guideline infraction need to be disruptive to Google users. Otherwise the infraction is a lot less likely to be detected -- or, if it is detected, Google still may not hand out a penalty. Instead they can also just zero out any positive effect that the violation might have created.

As I said, Google is not running a ranking contest for websites. They are most of all offering a service to their own search users, and they have a tight, laser focus on THAT purpose.

[edited by: tedster at 9:37 am (utc) on Mar 10, 2011]

[DanAbbamont]

Very well said tedster. So many webmasters seem to think that Google has some obligation to provide a level playing field for entrepreneurs. The only responsibility they have is to the shareholders, and to do that they need ad sales. To sell ads, they need to retain users, and to retain users, they have to provide the best results they can.

[Lame_Wolf]

they have to provide the best results they can.

Yeah, and without the need of black hatters.

[DanAbbamont]

Well, the algorithm is always getting better. Keyword stuffing and hidden text don't really work anymore. No point in penalizing an otherwise quality site for trying something that's not even really helping them.

[FranticFish]

I guess we all draw the line somewhere personally. I no longer bother with spam reports unless I feel that the result is a bad SERP. The last report I bothered to file was about Google Places results, where 7 of the 8 pack were from the same company.

I think Ted is spot on - aside from some publicity stunt demotions (BMW for example) Google's core focus should be whether their results are useful to searchers. The majority of sites I see are using less than squeaky-clean methods to rank.

[Lame_Wolf]

The majority of sites I see are using less than squeaky-clean methods to rank.

Then those sites are not white-hat. You should report them because it is something that Google may not be aware of.

What Google should do is (as they are supposedly know how to detect hidden text) is to send the site owner a warning that their site has hidden text and should be removed.

Sometimes web owners are not aware of what their so-called "webmaster / SEO Expert" is doing.

I was asked for a link exchange a while back. I reveiwed her site and informed her that I will not be linking due to the amount of hidden text. "What hidden text?" she replied. She wasn't aware of the stupid antics her webmaster was up to... and she was paying for this "service" too.

[DanAbbamont]

The thing about Google is it's an engineering company. They're not in the business of policing anything. They're in the business of massaging their algorithm to get progressively better, and they do a really good job. You see people ranking that you're not happy about, but it's just going to happen until they come up with a solution.

[chicagohh]

Google is not running a ranking contest for websites. They are most of all offering a service to their own search users, and they have a tight, laser focus on THAT purpose.

Perfectly said, Tedster. Too many people feel that just because their site is "whitehat" - that it is providing a better experience or better quality information than sites that keywords stuff or whatever.

Black hat techniques (I don't consider keyword stuffing or hidden text to be black hat) have NOTHING to do with the quality of the site content.
Get over it and start producing...

[Lame_Wolf]

Perfectly said, Tedster. Too many people feel that just because their site is "whitehat" - that it is providing a better experience or better quality information than sites that keywords stuff or whatever.

WRONG.

My site is white hat because it is the right thing to do. Hidden text, keyword stuffing is for the lazy tykes who want to cheat.

You may as well say that all atheletes can take whatever drugs they want so they can perform better. Same thing.

Black hat techniques (I don't consider keyword stuffing or hidden text to be black hat) have NOTHING to do with the quality of the site content.

I disagree.
In the late 80's and early 90's there weren't any MFA sites, and hardly sites with loads of stolen content etc.

There were plenty of crappy looking ones (tripod comes to mind).

Nowadays, anyone who can move a mouse can build a site and think it is okay to take your content, hotlink to your images, or write like it was written by Johnny Weissmuller in his Tarzan days and cover it in advertising.

Get over it and start producing...

I do. and FYI... I help my competion. (search WebmasterWorld for past postings).

The ones that should "Get over it and start producing" are the lazy content writers that think it is easier and quicker to produce such kak.

[chicagohh]

My site is white hat because it is the right thing to do.

In your OPINION. Let's try to stick to facts...

Fact: Black hat techniques have nothing to do with the quality content of a website.

Fact: White hat techniques have nothing to do with the quality content of a website.

Black hat does not mean poor quality any more than white hat means high quality. I think this is what Tedster was alluding to when he said, "Google is not running a ranking contest for websites.".

[MrFewkes]

The post above is totally correct.

I run websites which are the highest quality - excellent service - best in field.

I use black hat link spamming to get them indexed and rank. Because "natural linking" is non-existent these days.

[Lame_Wolf]

In your OPINION. Let's try to stick to facts...

Umm, No. As per search engine guidelines.

Fact: Black hat techniques have nothing to do with the quality content of a website.

I know.

Fact: White hat techniques have nothing to do with the quality content of a website.

I know.

Black hat does not mean poor quality any more than white hat means high quality.

I knew that too.

I think this is what Tedster was alluding to when he said, "Google is not running a ranking contest for websites.".

And that too. Wow, I can suck eggs at last.

[Lame_Wolf]

I use black hat link spamming to get them indexed and rank. Because "natural linking" is non-existent these days.

Inform the ASA or Google of your sites and to what you are doing. Lets see how long they last in the SERPS.

"natural linking" is non-existent these days.

Really ? Works well for me.

Welcome to Earth.

[chicagohh]

Umm, No. As per search engine guidelines.

That is the opinion of for-profit businesses trying to impose their business rules (read wish list) on the rest of the world in order to increase *their* bottom line.

All website owners have to decide if their business needs align with search engine guidelines. If not, ignore them at your own peril. If you are aligned - you still do it at your own peril.

This is not unlike MAP pricing. Any company/website can choose to ignore MAP pricing and then run the risk of being cut off from product supply. If your smart, quick and become valuable to the manufacturer sometimes you can get away with playing at the edge of the margins.

Sometimes it's worth the risk.

[FranticFish]

@Lame_Wolf

Then those sites are not white-hat. You should report them because it is something that Google may not be aware of.

Four years ago I used to file spam reports when I found
(a) splog networks
(b) compromised link exchange pages (run by software, forgotten about on old authority sites and being milked by spammers)
(c) huge link buying programs on sh*tty directories
(d) huge link exchange programs

Four years on, guess what I see in the link profiles of many or all of the top sites for every niche I check?

The same techniques that worked then STILL WORK NOW. Google is busy elsewhere - namely making sure that searchers spend more and more time on their site and less and less on others.

Their human reviewers let them know when a site isn't providing value in a SERP and they ding it manually. But their human reviewers don't review link graphs looking for quality profiles.

They don't really care.

They only acted on those two high profile cases recently where they got gamed because they were forced to act. Either they were ignorant or they didn't care before it became public knowledge that they got gamed.

I used to think like you do: "It's not fair". But I don't have time to be the internet police, especially when the justice system doesn't really give a damn.

I've still never used any of these dodgy techniques on anyone's site, but the temptation to switch to the dark side grows a little stronger every month. It's so much easier than doing it the way Google say you should. You don't need a bespoke plan for each site; you just have a 'one-size fits all' policy that you can use time after time.

[incrediBILL]

They don't really care.

I reported one of my competitors for some big misleading colorful text over an ad unit about a week or so ago and that ad unit no longer exists.

Some of us pass along these sites to friends that also report them as a single report may not get their attention but a cluster of reports usually gets the job done.

[chicagohh]

There is a risk that by reporting sites for minor offenses that you become known as a snitch to the wrong competitor. Some people view spam reports and other such things as a different style of hat - but still very black regardless of which company claims it's not. Like the elementary school kids that would tattle on other students for small violations - this could lead to playground retribution.

Playground retribution for a pissed off webmaster that equates *lame* spam reports with black hat tactics could easily be one of the following...

DMCA reports against your websites. It does not matter that you have done nothing wrong. A properly filed DMCA is a nut buster until it gets settled.

Clever spam violation complaints filed with the leading spam tracking companies. Enough of these and you could see some problems.

I have personally seen the devastation when DMCA complaints go nuclear. It gets very ugly, very quickly. With disposable cell phones, throw away email addresses and remote faxing - anyone can file DMCA reports with little risk.