I don't think social bookmark sites work for SEO!

[jimmychuang]

I don't think social bookmark sites work for SEO!

If I post on forum or artcle directories, Google will include it in days, but Google never include any of my social bookmarketing.

Many people talk about how good social bookmark sites are, is it just scam?

[Quadrille]

It's not a scam, it just reflects the fact that many folk live in that niche, these days.

There can be a certain amount of short-term value - but I very much doubt there's much there for serious websites (as opposed to blogs and other social websites!).

Those who promise "results" using social media probably are scamming, of course!

[added:] Some social media sites are so badly constructed and / or managed, that there are ways of abusing them, and so gaining valuable linkage through loopholes as large as a house.

But once they admit the abuse exists, ending it will be a doddle ;)

[edited by: Quadrille at 5:17 pm (utc) on Oct. 1, 2008]

[jimmychuang]

I guess the reason why Google include content from forums, article directories, much more frequently than social bookmark sites is, those sites offers "real content" which Google like.But Social bookmarks are simply text links with a little description, not enough value for Google.

But I don't know the results of using sites like squidoo, facebook. Will it help SEO or not? Or they are just another traffic resources except Googl, Yahoo, MSN?

[Quadrille]

It's not the kind of link that's the problem; it's a combination of thin content - most 'social sites' don't have much in the way of keywords of any kind - and transient content.

Social sites are the 'free newspapers' of the internet; very largely disposable. Plus the internet equivalent of cheap paper - ever changing URLs, and too many of them.

Because they obsess about the 'latest' content, the older stuff gets pushed down by the new, often changing URL in process. Or URLs, as there may be five or more per page.

I could go on, but I'm even boring myself! :)

Trust me, it's an SE's nightmare!

[jimmychuang]

I think the old way of marketing still better than scial bookmarking.

So now I only use plugin to auto submit to social bookmark sites. It just don't worth to spend hours on it.

[carpediem]

Yeah you can submit to social bookmarks but don't expect SEs to value those links too much...

Mate, it's very simple: SEs love CONTENT, and lots of it... Fresh, UNIQUE content. If you manage to get links from place that have that kind of content, and is relevant to your site, THAT is the absolute best thing you can do, as far as link building.

Now, start thinking outside of the box and see how you can implement this to work for you ;-)

[jimmychuang]

Besides social bookmarking, I have also tried article marketing for one of my website, and I checked the search result of my site's name today, I found 447 results.

But I check my site on Alexa, it shows only 19 sites link back to my site, how does it happen?

[razvanp124]

I just got indexed by Google in 17 hours by using the simplest techniques ever:
1) clean coding;
2) relevant tags and relevant content;
3) no spam;
4) by searching in google for my own domain;
4) using some blogs(2) to backlink and some social bookmarking sites (only 3 of them)

So, I think that social bookmarking sites actually work for SEO. I also think that this is not cheating as long as your website's content is clean and relevant.

My advice: Stick with google rules!

[jimmychuang]

Another question is, I see some sites's text link in social bookmark sites have been count as a back links, but when I check my site o google or alexa, no social bookmark site's text link count as a bck link to my sites, why?

[bill]

Many of those services nofollow their links.

[videolearning]

well i think they do, as i own one myself and have looked in my google web master logs and when people search in the search engine for a certian item and there is a match over at my social bookmarking site

my site is placed in the certain position on google

[edited by: phranque at 3:55 am (utc) on Oct. 22, 2008]
[edit reason] No urls, please. See TOS [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]