Matt Cutts : No-follow advertorial links or we'll take action

[Whitey]

Matt Cutts: I just posted a video about how the webspam team will treat native advertising that violates our quality guidelines, and mentioned that the Google News team is also willing to take action when something violates our guidelines. [youtube.com...]
[plus.google.com...]

[Bewenched]

So lets say you have a page on your legitimate eCommerce site and you have a supplemental page that is related to the products you sell... let's say it's some sort of widget show listings and you run a few ads on it.

I generally do "nofollow" on links to their widget show pages because it is content that I do not control.

If I do not have control of a site the link will be a no follow.

I always take a look at the pages before I activate their event in the calendar, but who's to say in a week their site goes down and is now some domain registrar or hosting company ad page? I don't have the time to check those linked pages every day, that would be too time consuming.

So now Google is going to see those nofollow links as paid?

We aren't paid for them at all, it's a social service to our customers.

The only paid links are 3 ad placements on the page that are Google Adwords only.

Does Google Adwords put nofollow links in their javascript?

I doubt it.

Maybe google needs a rel="nocontrol" or rel="notmycontent" Or some way to define how long you want that wide open page rank to pass...

like rel="nocontrol" expires="09/15/2013" after which Google will totally ignore the link all together?

[ColourOfSpring]

Directory submission for links, article submissions for links, blog comment spam for links, press releases for links, forum posts for links, sig links, fiverr links, and the list goes on... but what about investing in preferred content on your domain itself and getting earned links?

If Penguin were a 100% mirror of manual unnatural link penalties, then I think we'd know that by now. It's more complex than that - I've seen sites hit by Penguin that didn't match that kind of "unnatural links" profile, and they must have triggered the Penguin algorithm another way - likely onsite content including internal linking. As I say, we do not know what "THIS" is - and the many threads on this forum are testimony to that simple fact - we don't know what Penguin entails, and it's certainly more complex than your suggestion, otherwise we would have seen and heard about a LOT more recovery stories.

[netmeg]

Umm bewenched, if the links are nofollowed, they don't count, whether they're paid or not.

I run direct advertising all over the place (with nofollowed links) plus I run affiliate ads (with nofollowed links) and I have thousands of curated outbound links (all of which are followed) and as far as I know, there's no problem with that whatsoever. I've not lost any traffic because of it, that's for sure.

[diberry]

If Penguin were a 100% mirror of manual unnatural link penalties, then I think we'd know that by now. It's more complex than that - I've seen sites hit by Penguin that didn't match that kind of "unnatural links" profile

This has been explained to Fathom over and over and over. We have also explained that when Google says we'll never backward engineer Penguin, chances are it's a bit more complex than "spammy backlinks r bad." Additionally, we have pointed out that if all Penguin does is something the also always did (look for spammy backlinks), then Google just wasted inordinate resources and is deluded to derive satisfaction from what Penguin is doing.

It never gets through. Trust me. But the rest of us understand that Penguin is more sophisticated than that, so please don't get derailed by this.

[fathom]

diberry wrote:
Trust me.

That's code for what?

I'm sure if you have keyword stuffing (google has suggested PENGUIN handles that)... remove it and that is a cure for PENGUIN keyword stuffing devaluation.

If you are over optimizing in any way - whether Google has suggested PENGUIN devalues that or not - stop that whatever that is and that will likely cure your over optimizing problems.

If you happen to use link webspam I don't understanding why you can't grasp - the "stop that and you are cured"... you can start ranking again just as soon as you start getting earned links.

I would believe Google's reverse engineering quote has something to do with figuring how it works so you can go on webspamming as you have always done... and they suggest "you can't" ... I'm saying avoid webspam... there is nothing at all you need to figure out then. How different is that to grasp?

If you want the world to trust you when you claim "I didn't do anything wrong"... I trust you're optimizing for Bing now.

[mrguy]

Build your site the way you want to and that benefits your visitors and don't let a company tell you how you can and cannot advertise, link, etc.

Get traffic from other methods and forget about Google. If you do happen to get free traffic them, great, if not it won't be the end of the world.

I could care less what MC says. Don't follow him or his words and have not for years.

Unplugging from Google was the best thing I ever did.

[diberry]

Fathom, I have told you I never built links or did seo of any sort. But you've made it clear you wouldn't believe that if a selection of deities vouched for anyone making this claim. It's disrespectful and unreasonable, and yet you demand that others be reasonable and respectful toward you.

So to mimic your tone, why don't you just keep espousing oversimplified views and ignoring any inconvenient evidence to the contrary? Can't have it both ways.

[tedster]

Seems to me that by using nofollow, you could get a Google advantage AND do the same promotion.

[fathom]

Seems to me that by using nofollow, you could get a Google advantage AND do the same promotion.

That is an interesting perceptive. It's a lot of hard work getting a sustainable Wikipedia entry as you can't simply add a vanity page... but a successful inclusion can produce considerable traffic and not a single link added to the link graph.

[fathom]

If Penguin were a 100% mirror of manual unnatural link penalties, then I think we'd know that by now. It's more complex than that - I've seen sites hit by Penguin that didn't match that kind of "unnatural links" profile

Manual Reviews are primarily used (today) when PENGUIN fails to detect the webspam and a search user submits a spam report and the Webspam Team agrees with the submission.

I can assure you Google would prefer to do all webspam automatically through algorithmic divine... but they aren't spammers so they are playing catchup here like they are with Facebook and the social game.

PENGUIN 1.0 COULD NOT address all forms of webspam (links or otherwise) it remains to be seen what PENGUIN 2.0 can do but PENGUIN 1.0 in general could not detect advertorial links.

PENGUIN 2.0 CANNOT detect lots!

There are also content oriented Manual Reviews for thin pages, affiliate pages, doorway pages, auto-generated pages & copied pages but those are a completely different topic.

[ColourOfSpring]

Manual Reviews are primarily used (today) when PENGUIN fails to detect the webspam and a search user submits a spam report and the Webspam Team agrees with the submission.

I can assure you Google would prefer to do all webspam automatically through algorithmic divine... but they aren't spammers so they are playing catchup here like they are with Facebook and the social game.

PENGUIN 1.0 COULD NOT address all forms of webspam (links or otherwise) it remains to be seen what PENGUIN 2.0 can do but PENGUIN 1.0 in general could not detect advertorial links.

PENGUIN 2.0 CANNOT detect lots!

There are also content oriented Manual Reviews for thin pages, affiliate pages, doorway pages, auto-generated pages & copied pages but those are a completely different topic.

fathom, I find a lot of what you say unfathomable...like "PENGUIN 2.0 CANNOT detect lots!" - what does that mean? That Penguin 2.0 literally can't detect a lot of spam?

...but to recap my own point:-

- it's been reported over and over and over across many sources that recovery from Penguin is extremely difficult and there are only rare cases of a recovery. The nature of Penguin is such that Google don't want us to "backward engineer" it, so we can't understand the nature of it, so how can we hope to recover using just guess work and waiting for a refresh every 6 months? Sounds like a TERRIBLE business model. Your suggestions of cleaning up keyword stuffing, spammy links, over-optimisation with content is as old as the hills and has been tried and tried and tried by many webmasters to no avail. My advice is to utilise your energy drawing in traffic from sources outside of Google.

p.s. what's the deal with capitalising PENGUIN? Do you believe it's some kind of acronym?

[Whitey]

recovery from Penguin is extremely difficult

@ColourOfSpring - So what do you think of this thread / article that provides the steps for recovery, endorsed by Matt Cutts and the issus Google faced with previous steps taken not being enough : [webmasterworld.com...]

[fathom]

fathom, I find a lot of what you say unfathomable...like "PENGUIN 2.0 CANNOT detect lots!" - what does that mean? That Penguin 2.0 literally can't detect a lot of spam?

YES! They detect tons but Google's PENGUIN is trained to loom for specific patterns... you change the pattern you avoid PENGUIN.

...but to recap my own point:-

- it's been reported over and over and over across many sources that recovery from Penguin is extremely difficult and there are only rare cases of a recovery.

Anything is difficult if you don't know how to do it.

The nature of Penguin is such that Google don't want us to "backward engineer" it, so we can't understand the nature of it, so how can we hope to recover using just guess work and waiting for a refresh every 6 months?

Sounds like a TERRIBLE business model. Your suggestions of cleaning up keyword stuffing, spammy links, over-optimisation with content is as old as the hills and has been tried and tried and tried by many webmasters to no avail. My advice is to utilise your energy drawing in traffic from sources outside of Google.

YOu have different problems. You can't fix a PENGUIN problem in a public thread where the specifics violates the forum rules... that's the nature of the beast

It's really very simple... here's one example. PENGUIN is "by page" it isn't a domain thing. (who know about PENGUIN 2.0 though)

Your clue... PENGUIN is "by page!"... ignore the links and focus on the page(s).

p.s. what's the deal with capitalising PENGUIN? Do you believe it's some kind of acronym?

I've done that since April 24, 2012 because people interchange references between penguin and manual reviews so I ensure every knows I'm absolutely talking about PENGUIN exclusively.

[ColourOfSpring]

@ColourOfSpring - So what do you think of this thread / article that provides the steps for recovery, endorsed by Matt Cutts and the issus Google faced with previous steps taken not being enough

....we've both been discussing that (you and I) in that thread already...

...but to recap:-

I don't see anything new being said in that article. The reconsideration request is plain bad advice for anyone hit negatively by an algo update. The "white hat" advice to link build using guest blogging is plain bad advice because guest blogging should be about building up referal traffic, not dropping dofollow links (which is 100% against Google's guidelines). The other advice on using the disavow tool - where's the evidence that disavow works (in terms of recovery)? Where are all the recovery stories post-Penguin 2.0?

[ColourOfSpring]

Anything is difficult if you don't know how to do it.

The inference here is that you know exactly what Penguin targets. If my inference is wrong, then join the club about Penguin - your opinion is as good as mine. But if I am right about what I infer from the above quote, then please do tell us what you know about Penguin, in plain English.

Your clue... PENGUIN is "by page!"... ignore the links and focus on the page(s).

Not just page, but keyword / page too. But I don't get your point anyway - why so cryptic? Aren't we supposed to share knowledge here? And if it's a home page that can't just be 404'd? (Penguin 1.0) - how long to wait for a recovery - when the next update comes?

[tedster]

where's the evidence that disavow works (in terms of recovery)? Where are all the recovery stories post-Penguin 2.0?

Google spokespeople say that many webmasters, in their panic, are not using the tool as instructed. Instead they are shooting themselves in the foot by misusing it. I wouldn't expect a "full" recovery any wsy. After all, you've just had a bunch of backlinks that used to help you rank wiped out as PR producers for your site.

[netmeg]

In other words, the styrofoam foundation collapsed when the links were removed, and now you have to go back and build a concrete foundation before you are going to rank again.

[Jez123]

Does anyone else feel like a Family Guy phrase might spring to mind?

[n00b1]

Giggity.

[ColourOfSpring]

Google spokespeople say that many webmasters, in their panic, are not using the tool as instructed. Instead they are shooting themselves in the foot by misusing it. I wouldn't expect a "full" recovery any wsy. After all, you've just had a bunch of backlinks that used to help you rank wiped out as PR producers for your site.

To quote myself from another thread, if part of Penguin is to merely devalue links, then why bother disavowing links just to do the job Penguin will do better than you? Just let Penguin do it anyway and you won't devalue links that Penguin didn't actually devalue....!

[edited by: ColourOfSpring at 3:53 pm (utc) on Jun 4, 2013]

[Shepherd]

if part of Penguin is to merely devalue links

That's a big if, who know for sure? Seems to me that it would be too easy if penguin simply devalued the links.

[ColourOfSpring]

That's a big if, who know for sure? Seems to me that it would be too easy if penguin simply devalued the links.

So when it comes to links, Penguin seems to be doing one of the following three things (unless anyone else can think of another option):-

1. When it comes to "bad" links, Penguin merely devalues them

2. When it comes to "bad" links, Penguin imposes a negative weight to them

3. When it comes to "bad" links, Penguin simply ignores them and doesn't do anything

Or perhaps it does a mix of all 3 above depending on the link-type. Maybe some "really bad" links get a negative weight, some are merely devalued, some even ignored?

[fathom]

Anything is difficult if you don't know how to do it.

The inference here is that you know exactly what Penguin targets. If my inference is wrong, then join the club about Penguin - your opinion is as good as mine. But if I am right about what I infer from the above quote, then please do tell us what you know about Penguin, in plain English.

Not really.

The problem with PENGUIN you're limited by your specific view of details. You have to take action in some way to create an observation and you have only one domain so it is difficult to see multiple observations to make any determination.

The problem with disconnected observations are - they are disconnected, they are random with random error is observation and implementation and you don't really don't know how to interpret all these mixed signals... e.g. if you edit your title and you gained two position in 2 days you assume your edit caused that... but that is not necessarily true.

If order to have a chance of understanding PENGUIN as it relates to a a specific domain you need to have great historically understanding of that domain... thus anyone coming here to figure out how to recover from a PENGUIN issue isn't likely to have any luck because the alleged developed experience produce "here" is in abstract form.

It isn't really user-friendly.

Your clue... PENGUIN is "by page!"... ignore the links and focus on the page(s).

Not just page, but keyword / page too. But I don't get your point anyway

The more ways you look at things the more complex you make the situation and the more data you need... so ignore keywords.

- why so cryptic?

three reasons:

1. you can't fix what you aren't privy to... no one can begin to help you without details and you can't provide details at WebmasterWorld.

2. mus-identification is unforgiving. Without facts that are indeed facts to an issue... we as humans will identify the first thing that looks like what we are looking for and prejudge that as the cause - even if it isn't... following that advice just makes your situation 100X more complicated

3. when my webspam goes completely unnoticed by PENGUIN - I've changed the pattern far enough to the left that is blend in with the granular background... but that really does not help anyone caught in the middle of a PENGUIN issue.

Aren't we supposed to share knowledge here?

Sharing, in general, is the cause of your problems (an opinion supported by all the noise here)... and I don't mean you specifically I mean the inexperienced DIY community at large. A doctor will do 4 years of med school and 4 years of residency before he can practice his craft on real patients on his own... and you would never think about practices medicine on anyone with just some tips and tricks (unless it is handing someone a pain killer for a headache) but you will do open heart surgeon on your own domain and within any qualified assistance and in the aftermath things look good for a time... you reward yourself... but you did that with great risk that the aftermath could be your darkest days... and now it is.

Sharing to get into trouble isn't helped by more sharing. You generally don't understand SEO best practices and what you should have avoided and there's your problem... and that is a very simplistic view of it - but that is accurate for most.

And if it's a home page that can't just be 404'd? (Penguin 1.0) - how long to wait for a recovery - when the next update comes?

For anyone struggling the best course is to stop guessing about the cause and grow a new project.

1. delete you website

2. add a sub-domain you never used before

3. place your website there

4. add a splash page at the old default page

5. add a nofollow image logo link to where the new website

6. update your sitemap and set your preference to a high priority and recrawl and once completely recrawled you are PENGUIN free.

7. start getting new links to where the website is now but if you are just doing to develop the same links and same link types as you had before this won't work.

DISCLAIMER: obviously this is a throw the baby out with the bath water approach... but it does work.

Alternatively, I believe PENGUIN is a RUN once algo (refreshes are simple changes to apply, say, false positive variables) once it has ran there is nothing to do.

If you have to develop new earned links _{(or currently undetectable webspam links that PENGUIN hasn't been schooled in just yet)} ... just ignore PENGUIN and develop those and save yourself a lot of unwanted headaches and time.

[fathom]

where's the evidence that disavow works (in terms of recovery)? Where are all the recovery stories post-Penguin 2.0?

Google spokespeople say that many webmasters, in their panic, are not using the tool as instructed. Instead they are shooting themselves in the foot by misusing it. I wouldn't expect a "full" recovery any wsy. After all, you've just had a bunch of backlinks that used to help you rank wiped out as PR producers for your site.

Ya... IMHO disavowing is a preemptive action you can take to void PENGUIN from assessing you badly. Once you are assessed it is largely worthless.

It is a valuable addition to Manual Review recover though.

[fathom]

1. When it comes to "bad" links, Penguin merely devalues them

2. When it comes to "bad" links, Penguin imposes a negative weight to them

3. When it comes to "bad" links, Penguin simply ignores them and doesn't do anything

Here's the first problem:

Define devalues in great detail...

Define imposes a negative weight in great detail...

Define simply ignores in great detail...

Ignoring links (that weren't previously ignored suggests such links are devalued in some way. (those two seem to be the same). If you correlate that to a visual or metaphoric effect on your ranks they drop as if some enormous weight is pushing them down (negative weight) and now all three seem to be the same thing unless your definitions are way different than the ones I perceive.

[ColourOfSpring]

Define devalues in great detail...

If a link is worth 5 points, then Google nullify that value so it's worth 0 points.

Define imposes a negative weight in great detail...

If a link is worth 5 points, then Google lower the link to a negative value e.g the link is now worth -2 points.

Define simply ignores in great detail...

If a link is worth 5 points, then it's still worth 5 points even after a Penguin update.

Personally I believe Google do give a negative weight to some links - otherwise why bother disavowing links? You disavow a link, therefore you are saying "Google, please devalue that link". Why bother if Penguin only devalues a link in the same way? It would only make sense if that link is truly "hurting" your site i.e. holding a negative value toward it OR triggering some kind of penalty.

[ColourOfSpring]

The problem with disconnected observations are - they are disconnected, they are random with random error is observation and implementation and you don't really don't know how to interpret all these mixed signals... e.g. if you edit your title and you gained two position in 2 days you assume your edit caused that... but that is not necessarily true.

If order to have a chance of understanding PENGUIN as it relates to a a specific domain you need to have great historically understanding of that domain... thus anyone coming here to figure out how to recover from a PENGUIN issue isn't likely to have any luck because the alleged developed experience produce "here" is in abstract form.

My background is programming. Penguin is like trying to work out how a "program" works purely by experimenting with inputs. This is made far worse by the fact that the "program" is run only once every 6 months or so, so you get few opportunities to experiment. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. It's the sheer amount of time you have to wait to see if your inputs have affected you positively or negatively. If Penguin were run once a week, we'd have understood it by some point in May (perhaps June) 2012. Google don't want us to understand it because it's a punitive update by nature. It can ONLY be punitive if it's run irregularly and infrequently. Moreover, its effects are long-lasting too, by nature I believe: most sites never recover. PENGUIN IS DESIGNED THAT WAY. The fact that most sites never recover means Penguin works as intended (from Google's perspective). If Penguin were a helpful, instructive update to make better webmasters of us, Google would be more active in helping us recover.

[Jez123]

What should we be doing with advertorials with follow links? I have one that I paid A LOT for with a UK magazine. They aren't going to be receptive to putting nofollow on the links I doubt. I don't suppose they could care less if google likes or dislikes what they do from their own point of view as they do not rely on or probably care much about google

[n00b1]

@Jez123

If they don't care or rely on Google (or search in general) why would they care if the link was followable or nofollow?

[Jez123]

@ n00b1 exactly, but if google decide to penalise me for it?