Kim Krause Berg on the Hyperlink Hot Seat

You may know Kim Krause Berg as the mind behind a variety of sites: Cre8asite Forums, Cre8pc Usability, SEO and Web Design blog, or The Usability Effect, where she offers her highly valuable consulting services.

1. Jakob Nielson: Over-hyped pundit or legitimate guru?



Definitely over-hyped guru. I don't understand why he's so disliked, but I do get why it's easy to poke fun at him.  I don't go for the "Thou must do this" commandments style he has but it works for millions of people the same way some religions do.  When he wrote his latest Top 10 List for blog design, panic ensued.  Even today, two weeks after that Alertbox piece came out, my usability feeds keep bringing up references to it.  He made people believe they were doing something wrong.  They went to work making their blogs meet his requirements, without questioning the validity of the logic as it may have applied to their situation.



I prefer to question things, test them to see if they work for me, and then test again to see if they meet the needs of end users, and then decide.  There are many usability design points that he recommends that do make sense, especially if you want to get the basics down.  However, some things that he says are considered Nielsen Gospel, like blue link colors and linking "home" from a homepage.  There's a sense of guilt or shame whenever someone defies his standards and experiments on their own.  I truly don't think even Jakob Nielsen wants to smother creativity, but he's often perceived as a party pooper.

2. In your opinion, do usability and SEO best practices sometimes conflict? Or do they always reinforce each other?



They definitely reinforce each other. I've seen the positive results of their union.



Another aspect that fits in comfortably with usability and SEO is accessibility.  Organic SEO, for example, emphasizes content as the foundation from which all good things are born.  A title tag that's optimized to make sense for search engines, also makes sense for people who bookmark the site.  Meta descriptions that are logical, and appear as smooth, well written site descriptions in search engines, also convert to traffic because the end user better understands what they will get if they click on the link from SERPS.



It's about confidence and trust. It's about customer satisfaction. It's about meeting end user needs.  SEO practices can do that when they're done properly.  Even so-called "black hat" SEM meets user needs if the technique results in delivering the best result for the person hunting for something in a highly competitive area.  The failure comes when a promoted site fails to deliver what it promised to.  This is a failure of a perceived marketed promise.  Just because that Viagra site managed to make the number one spot doesn't mean it converts and doesn't mean someone with a screen reader can use the site.  Without a blending of SEO, usability and accessiblity design and practices, somebody will lose out.  You really don't want that to be the person with the nice little credit card in their hand.

3. Dijon mustard: bold, delicious flavor or yesterday's news?



You're asking someone who once asked a Ruby Tuesday's waitress to risk losing her job by sneaking me out a big plastic container of their honey mustard sauce.  I begged her to tell me how they make it but she wouldn't turn over the secret recipe.  I asked to see a manager, to see if I could get them to order me a big container of it.  She did ask, but they said no.  That's when she snuck me some to take home.  My daughter thought I was very cool. For the next week, everything we ate was dunked into the stuff.

4. I found your post at Cre8asite Forums to be interesting food for thought. Most of us are in SEO to make money and to have a bit of fun along the way (and, possibly, to avoid the drudgery of a 'real' job). Without getting into a black hat vs. white hat debate, do you think an individual webmaster has an obligation to add 'value' to the Web?



An obligation, no. But you're asking somebody  who, by character, believes that everyone creates their own reality. There's no better teacher than the one that says you're responsible for your own life.  What you do with it is up to you, but no matter what you decide to do with it, it will have an impact on somebody else.  I think all SEO's deserve to be paid well, no matter what side of the color wheel they work from.  I started out as an SEO and I understand the work involved.  I understand that its a field that changes constantly and the skilled SEO's are those who work for clients by day and study search engine patents by night so that they're ready to make the next smart move for their clients.



I do feel, however, that the very competitive nature of search engines themselves has spawned the SEO underworld.  They are like strip clubs that pay police to keep on driving by, so that their patrons keep coming in.  It might be lucrative to play rough, and it may make business sense to pay for an unfairly gained advantage.  The Internet mimics life. That's what I was writing about, and what I wondered about when I asked in the forum if this is what we want and if not, is there something we can change?



What are we doing, really, when we put web sites on the Internet?



The way I see it, the Internet is this unique, lawless opportunity that fell into our laps.  We can talk to people we'll never meet in person. We can write about things we may never have thought we'd write about. We can earn money and watch TV at the same time.  Parents can work at home and actually see their children.  You can find your future mate.  You can cuss. You can rip people off and never have to look into their eyes while doing it.  There's a whole environment where integrity no longer matters to everybody.



I've been part of the Internet-life since 1995. I've played a part in what its doing.  At some point I began to question whether or not what I, and my peers are doing, has any real long-term value.  What the heck are we making for our kids?  Will they want it?  Yet, even though I asked the question and wanted to explore some ideas,  I don't want to lose the freedom we have to make these choices. In the end, there will be businesses developed that will help us deal with the messes we create. I just got to wondering when people will grow tired of creating them.  For example, first there was an online journal. They became blogs. Now there are hundreds of thousands of the them, which evolved into sites that scrape them for content for even more, but they're no longer readable.  Every time there's something new, there's also a way to exploit it and eventually it's no longer fun to do.



Where's the value in that?
                           
5. If you're robbing a bank and your pants fall down, I think it's okay to laugh and to let the hostages laugh too, because, come on, life is funny.



I just know this is about search engine marketing, usability and search engines, isn't it.  You're just as obsessed as I am.

And Don't Forget Best of the Web!

When I posted my directory recommendations before, I left out Best of the Web (based on its price, not its quality). Thanks to Brian Prince for sending me a heads-up on some things that make submitting there a lot more attractive:

I appreciate the suggestion of offering a directory submission option without a recurring fee, which we launched on BOTW in August.  You commented that you felt the price point is a bit high at $99.95 â but please understand that this is the âretailâ or standard price.  We offer a reseller program with recurring commissions of 25%, so anyone who signs up for the reseller plan can immediately get the one-time listing price discounted 25% to $74.95.  In addition, one of the BOTW traditions is to offer substantial monthly promotions (up to 50% off or two for one listings, etc) to all existing customers â so once you are a BOTW client, there are many ways to save on the directory costs of a submission.

Last but not least, I would like to reiterate that Best of the Web has a FREE Non-Commercial submission program (in constrast to most âotherâ directories) for webmasterâs marketing non-profit and non-commercial sites.  We feel that this is a big differentiator between us and other tier-two directories within the industry, and hopefully respected SEO gurus such as yourself also value this community effort.

I think their willingness to review non-profit sites for free is a good quality indicator, since it shows they are making an honest attempt to categorize the world's Web sites, not just make an easy buck.

Bottom line: consider BotW along with the others.

p.s. Another great thing about Best of the Web is its age -- it's been around forever and Google seems to heavily favor age and trust these days. Speaking of their non-commercial free submission policy, I'm going to go submit my pet project (s) there!

Eric Ward on the Hyperlink Hot Seat

Eric Ward is one of the most well-known names in linking. To learn more about his services, visit Net Post or URLwire.

1. I know you've done link building for a lot of high profile sites (such as Amazon.com). That aside, which of your past link building campaigns was the most fun for you?



A cable TV network had a web site with companion web content, and they ran an online contest, the "Three Stooges Year Supply of Pies" contest from American Movie Classics.  As a kid I loved the Stooges, but hadn't really researched them online. I dug into it was amazed to find fan pages, discussion lists, forum boards, etc. that Stoggtes fans had created.  And when I contacted them they were quite excited.  What's funny is that the links to the contest page I was able to obtain were 100% about people, not bots.  I never pursue links based on some hoped-for algorithmic ranking boost.

2. Do you think that there are aspects of link building that the average webmaster just doesn't "get"?



Most webmasters understand links, especially since they likely receive 1,000 spam link request a day. :)  But what I see them missing is an understanding of the power of editorial based links to drive topically interested people.  They are consumed with SEO and links.



3. Link building can sometimes get to be a tedious task. Do you ever feel like you need a break from it?



Only when I'm working.  Serisously, there are some projects that do make my eyes bleed. But then I get a fun one and the response is such that I smile again.

4. Tell us a bit about your upcoming link building seminar.



Plan is to do an intensive day-long linking workshop in Charlotte. I'm teaming up with Debra Mastaler for this. She is one of the most cerebral link builders I've even known, and also a really fine person, and between the two of us hopefully we can put a few people in the seats and help them learn to link, without too much pain and suffering.

5. Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words - "mank" and "ind". What do you these words really mean?



That you'd better make sure to double check your anchor text.

Vary Your Links' Descriptions, Or Else

I think most good SEOs have been varying link descriptions for some time now. It's just another thing we can do to make our links look "natural". Admittedly I've never been one to use 100 descriptions when I get 100 links -- but I would try to use 5 or 10 variations, for instance.

This is one of those SEO methods that we say is forward-looking. I.e., in 2001 when a lot of people did this, you better believe it didn't matter. It really didn't. But as long as you're building links, why not build links that will probably still help in 5 years?

5 years later, it matters. I just came across this WMW thread , where Robert Charlton says:At SES, in the search engines' linking session, Matt Cutts was very explicit that Google looks at the uniqueness of descriptions when evaluating links. For a bunch of reasons outside the scope of this thread, I'm very much inclined to believe him.In other words: showing links with many duplicate descriptions is almost certainly evidence of aggressive link building, and it appears Google is filtering / devaluing those links. Note: MSN probably isn't. But they may in 2007 ;-)

Bottom line: if you aren't already, start varying your links' descriptions!

eComXpo is sweet... NOT!!

Well, eComXpo has finally begun. Truth be told, I'm pretty pumped about it, since it's so cool.

Wait, not 'cool', what's the word I'm looking for, oh, right, 'stupid'.

What eComXpo has taught me about good marketing

if your web site doesn't work in many browsers, it's cool!

charging people $100 to "paint" a virtual booth is a smart, creative marginal revenue stream

sending attendees 30 emails a day is good for branding, this will create an emotional connection between them and your company

if you want to impress people, use Flash!

Open letter to Seth Godin:Dear Seth,

eComXpo seems to have gotten some buzz this year, partly because you have been plugging it. Question: are you sure you want to associate yourself with these people?

Sincerely,

Andy HagansNo more blogging for now, I gotta get back to our booth.*The views expressed above are the personal opinions of Andy Hagans. They do not necessarily reflect the position of Text Link Ads Inc.

Stuntdubl on Directories

We (along with everyone else, it seems) have gone back and forth on directories in the past six months: acknowledging that links from many of them are not as useful as they used to be, while proposing that listings in those of higher quality are still a valid, helpful link building method. A few prominent figures have been proclaiming the "death" of all directories, but this is certainly exaggerated (and wrong). Stuntdubl gives a more balanced view in Mr. Ploppyâs Monday Tool List - Volume XXVI - Directory Tools.

I still like many directories. When theyâre not built for the SOLE purpose of manipulating PR, they can be a very good addition to a siteâs backlinks. I donât think the directory model will ever completely die, but it does have itâs flaws. As a final note, donât go over board with getting ALL the directories in one sitting.

There's a lot more there, go read it.

You Can't Buy Everything

Rand Fishkin over at SEOmoz has posted a cracking article on how to get links when money won't suffice.

What do you do when money doesn't appeal to your link targets. This happens to me all the time - sometimes because they're an educational institution, a non-profit or simply a webmaster who doesn't want to "compromise". If purchasing "advertising" links becomes impossible, there are some great ways around it that I've used successfully.

His ideas are link junkie required reading.

Legal Linking Goodness

I just finished writing a rather long post at Threadwatch about the legality of linking. If you're too lazy to read my rather encyclopedic rant, here is a two-point summary:

A hyperlink is basically a reference. A reference, whether in your kid's term paper or on your homepage, is (in and of itself) legal.Any reference, including a hyperlink, is bound by 'normal' laws which govern speech--e.g., you can't slander someone, you can't steal someone's content, etc.

For a concise breakdown of what the average webmaster needs to know, I suggest Linking Legalities...What You Need to Know by Eric Ward.

SEOBook: 'Legal Donations Accepted'

Unless you live under a rock, I'm sure you're aware of the (almost hilariousm, but not quite) Traffic Power lawsuit against Aaron Wall.

He is now accepting donations for his legal team.

PowerHouse Linking Seminar

I just came across the PowerHouse Linking Seminar (thanks, Aaron).

The subject: "Learn to create and execute targeted link building campaigns from linking experts Eric Ward and Debra Mastaler"
The date: October 27/28, 2005
The location: Charlotte Sheraton Airport Hotel (Charlotte, NC)

These two people are some of the most respected names in link building, so it is definitely worth at least checking out.

What do YOU want from TLA?

NickW from Threadwatch is a bit ahead of the curve when it comes to marketing. Rather than getting standard links or banners on Threadwatch, advertisers get sponsored threads where they can engage the blog's audience directly.

Text Link Ads is a regular advertiser of course, and our latest sponsored thread asks, What do you want from a text link company? Please hop on over and let us know!

Greg Boser on Buying Links

I just got back from SES San Jose. Good show, good people, good parties. On the content side, Barry Schwartz wrote some excellent recaps as always. One of the most interesting sessions was Buying and Selling Links.

Greg Boser - WebGuerilla
Brief comments. He is very happy that there is now an actual session on this topic because it used to be considered so âbad.â The wild wild west of buying links is settling down and people are beginning to understand that it is advertising just like any other form. Sees that paid links will continue to be a part of their links in the future. Suggests adding it to your mix.

Text links have come a long way and continue to gain legitimacy and momentum as an advertising method which yields exceptional ROI. Buy up ;-)

Nick Wilson on the Hyperlink Hot Seat

Nick Wilson is the founder of Threadwatch, my *personal* favorite blog. If you read this blog, you know what Threadwatch is... enough said ;-)

1) Ask Jeeves: Up and coming 4th player, or forever 'B Team' material?

If Diller just sits on it, "B Team" all the way. If he pulls his finger out and actually does something with it then they stand a good chance of increasing market share, but even if he pulls out all the stops, i'm not convinced they'd be in with a shot at third place.

It's all about image. If they dumped that bloody stupid butler, rebrand as ASK, take a leaf out of Yahoo's book and open up to the rah rah blogpuppy mania movement, and promote a newer image, they could actually be dangerous. I don't see them having that much gumption or courage, but you never know, Diller could pull a rabbit out of the hat at any time with ASK.

2) In last week's Hyperlink Hot Seat, Aaron Wall commented on how Threadwatch has achieved a high level of success in a relatively short time (e.g., it's been blogrolled on sites like Search Engine Watch, Yahoo! Search Blog and Ask Jeeves Blog). To what do you attribute Threadwatch's steep growth curve of readership and recognition?

Being a bloody minded, egotistical, rude bastard. Didn't you know?

Seriously, I think people are bored of corporate suck up sites, any muppet can use an RSS reader and scan for news, but who wants to read the bland, boring, opinionless "commentary" that most sites in this space spew out?

I'd sooner stick my head in a bucket of cold sick...

3) You're responsible for inserting the words "bollocks" and "wanker" into my daily vocabulary. How do you feel about that?

Very proud. Fine british swear words! You'd not want your 12yr old child to be calling people wankers, but it's pretty mild and harmless really.

4) Sites like ClickZ and CNET are STILL extremely niggardly in re to their linking policy. Will this ever bite them in the butt? Or will they just get away with it forever?

I think both are way behind the curve regarding news, and the way it's reported. But I also think they'll probably get away with being arses for quite some time to come. CNet's latest attempt to catch up, "Blogma", is a farce, it only serves to prove how badly they misunderstand the current climate. As for Clickz, despite some of their staff being deeply unhappy with their non-conversational policies, they're about as clued in as CNet.

Who cares though?

5) The next time I have meat and mashed potatoes, I think I'll put a very large blob of potatoes on my plate with just a little piece of meat. And if someone asks me why I didn't get more meat, I'll just say, "Oh, you mean this?" and pull out a big piece of meat from inside the blob of potatoes, where I've hidden it. Good magic trick, huh?

Yeah! You know, if you did that with minced meat in gravy, you'd have Shepards Pie - And that's LEGAL :)

Aaron Wall Still Likes Directories

Directories have taken a lot of crap lately, but don't count them (all) out yet. Aaron Wall blogged yesterday about how he still likes directories (and believe me, he, if anyone, is aware of their flaws):

Even if Google was not placing significant weighting on directory links I still would use many of them for how they work in the other search algorithms, but with that being said it may also be worth looking more into other sources of link popularity as the business model of junk general directories is dying.

I think the business models that will work the best longterm will be those that have a strong social position in their marketplace, those who can afford to advertise a ton, those who can get media coverage, or those that naturally pick up the random citation on random blogs and community driven sites that provide many random unrequested links.

What I got from all this:

MSN = easy to spam, even with crappy directory linksGood directories = goodBad directories = badCommon sense is making a comeback

Link Building by Buying Web Sites

It's impossible to exhaust all the creative methods of getting new backlinks. A WMW post, Link development by buying competitors, highlights a lesser-used (but powerful) link building method:

My competitors in my business are in 90% of the cases unprofessionell and I just had the idea of increasing our links by buying their websites.

What would be the best way to get their links directing to us? Should we redirect their domain or should we put a bunch of our links on their website?
Any other ideas?

I like this method for several reasons:

If the site you're buying has decent, relevant backlinks, than this will be a good Hilltop-type link to your main siteYou can surround the link  to your main site with links to other authoritative sites, thus putting your main site in a good neighborhoodSince you control the entire site, you can put in tons of intra-content deep links (sorta like the Presell pages from WeBuildPages)Of course when buying and selling assets (and this includes Web sites), I have one golden rule: Buy Cheap, Sell High. If the price is right, go for it! If not, go back to writing high quality content (or comment spamming).  ;-)

Aaron Wall on the Hyperlink Hot Seat

Aaron Wall writes (that is, wrote, and continually rewrites) the most well-known search engine optimization ebook on the Web. He is also the man behind Search-Marketing.info, which, while lesser-known than SEO Book, is a great source for instructional SEO articles.

1) Yahoo!'s search algorithm: Closing in on Google, or 18 months behind?

I think they are closing, but when they started they were far more than 18 months behind, and as they draw closer they reach more toward a point of diminishing returns. I recently interviewed NFFC and he stated:

"This is what I think, SEO is all about emotions, all about human interaction. People, search engineers even, try and force it into a numbers box. Numbers, math and formulas are for people not smart enough to think in concepts."

and that if he worked at a search engine

"I would look to give good things a boost and stop focusing on finding bad things to penalise."

In the past Google was able to give people more reason to give back user data (ie: toolbar and PageRank), Yahoo! is trying to catch up with their My Web idea, but even though they allow users to block sites and share them I still feel none of the competing search services have a brand that can compete with Google, and none of them make users feel like they own and help improve the results.

Look how Google launches other products: Gmail, Orkut, using other brand names. Google wants their name to be synonymous with search. Yahoo! wants to be synonymous with everything, and that thins the brand. Owning content networks means having internal customers, and that creates a biased search service which some people will question the relevancy of.

Google has also bought Urchin and may be creating a payment system to help create the micropayment business model or get more end to end consumer behavior data. As far as collecting user data I think Google has the competition beat, but there is only so much you can do with the data before the focus on more data creates algorithms which resist innovation and change.

I think most of search distribution is down to positioning and who can lock in more users with their other services. The search service which makes you feel like you own the service will be the one that wins in distribution. As far as quality goes I think NFFC was right on that, whoever focuses more on signs of quality than reasons to penalize will win. Adding more human interaction to the algorithms would help a ton as well.

2) NickW: Highly entertaining SEO personality or rebel without a cause?

Based on regularly linking at his site and posting comments to it I obviously like it. My opinion does not matter that much though in the grand scheme of things. If you look at the more official type links, he has got blogrolled on sites like Search Engine Watch, Yahoo! Search Blog, Ask Jeeves Blog, has been Slashdotted a few times, and has had press mentions from sites like Guardian, Slate, etc etc etc.

My site is not on any of those blogrolls, has had little mention in any traditional type of press, and has had limited reach outside of the search community, so I would say in that regard he is doing a much better job than I, especially when you consider that he gets away with far more cursing than I do :)

Even when he calls people out, like ClickZ recently, they still feel the need to comment on his site, so that is fairly impressive. In less than a year his site has probably moved into the top 10 search related sites in terms of quality inbound linkage data, and with modern search algorithms it is all about linkage data.

3) SEOBook: Reached its peak, or just getting started?

Will steal a line from Larry Page at Google's recent quarterly conference call. It is still in the first inning.

4) Do you think the guy that posted here (and in subsequent comments on that thread) is really GoogleGuy as we know him (aka Matt Cutts)?

You don't know a person for sure based on a few heated forum posts. I am not sure if that was GoogleGuy or Matt Cutts. Rumour has it that Matt loves tomatoes though.

5) If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy!

Never been in the Sears Tower. Do not plan on going. I am a HUGE FAN of the dummies crashtestdummies.com/ though. Luckily I was able to link your question to that great band, or there would have been no link based Q&As

Rotating Links

This thread at WMW caught my interest. The question: do rotating links help link popularity? Crush replies with what also happens to be my initial reaction.

Crush: works for now but I think SE's are working towards killing rotating links. Like I say for now fine but may have less effect.

I'm not sure about this one though. LBB readers, tell me what you know!

Outbound Linking - Underrated

We post a lot on our blog about how to best aquire valuable incoming links, with nary a peep about the power of outbound links. Our unequivocal opinion is that good outbound links are a good thing, both for users and for search engines:

For Users

Helpfulness: Users will leave sooner or later. If you help them as they leave, they are more likely to return.Perceived Authority: Not sure if I've ever used the word "authority" in a non-SE context... but if a site links to other HQ sites, in my mind, that makes it more trustworthy to users.

For Search Engines

Hilltop Hub Points: If you link to topical authorities your site may get "hub points" from the Hilltop algo (or similar algo's)Good neighborhood: As martinibuster has said, your neighborhood is important to modern SEs. Outbound links may be as important in this as inbounds are.

Bottom line: good outbound links = good for your site.

Todd Malicoat on the Hyperlink Hot Seat

Todd Malicoat aka Stuntdubl works as V.P. of Sales and Marketing for We Build Pages. He also maintains a widely-read weblog on internet marketing, self-titled Stuntdubl Internet Marketing Consulting.

1) Google Sandbox: myth or reality?

Sheesh...start me off with a trick question. I was thinkin' maybe I'd get to tell you my life history about "falling into SEO by default" after being a web designer/developer like everyone else. I think the sandbox is a name given to a variety of different ailments, and provides a good excuse for those not ranking. There is so much talk about sandbox, filters, and penalties that it has really become overwhelming. I think Google has learned their lesson about being too open with SEO's. I don't blame them a bit for ambiguous guidelines and subtle disinformation tactics. SEO's make their living manipulating their algorithm, which isn't in the best interest of their users. There is something that was implemented in late 2003/ early 2004 that was much more time based. Using a great line from "Things to Do When You're Dead in Denver"..."Give it a name"...call it a filter, call it a penalty, call it the sandbox...the simple fact is if you are a good SEO you will diagnose the problems and get the site up the rankings.

You really have to play the "best practices" to beat the sandbox (and other filters for that matter). I'm often pointing people to your guide to beating the sandbox on WMW . The age type filtering has really made SEO much more complex, and I'm sure personalization implementation will only continue to increase the complexity of learning to rank well on Google.

2) Link building: love doing it or hate doing it?

Link building is a necessary evil. I still love PARTS of link building. It's exciting when you know you got a very valuable link for next to nothing. I think the low barrier to entry in SEO is what has made it so attractive to people offering the services. That barrier is rising, and link building is getting tougher. Tools are getting better, but it really comes back to personal relationships with other webmasters. I think link building has really become the red headed step child of SEO that most companies don't want to do anything with except ship off to the neighbors. It's difficult to put a revenue model around it that is beneficial to both the provider and the consumer. The models that DO work are abused by everyone and ultimately cut off at the base by the big G-monster. It's great to see the results of link building and that's what makes it fun. It can be quite disappointing when you put in a ton of time though and don't see highly tangible results.

Even more than link building now, I enjoy tryin' to find older sites to purchase more bulk advertising and presell pages from. It's a little trickier than getting just a plain link, but it's more worthwhile as well.

3) TrustRank: implemented now, or next year?

I think there are definitely elements of Trustrank in play now which we will only see increase. We all know now that leaving an unattended ballot box is going to result in ballot stuffing. Humans are a better determinate of quality content than artificial intelligence (at this point anyhow), so combining as much carbon based intelligence into the search algorithms as possible would be a priority for the SE's I think. It would make logical sense that the data Yahoo and Google are mining from personalization will eventually be rolled into the criteria for rankings. The add/block feature on MyWeb 2.0 is about the best spam-reporting feature out there, because Yahoo doesn't have to pay anyone to use it. It would be silly if they DIDN"T use that data. Of course it can be manipulated by the uber savvy blackhats, but it's still a step in a good direction for them.

I think Trustrank will start to affect the SEO/SEM community more and more. It will just change the game like so many things in the past have. There will always be best practices for marketing a website and that's what we will continue to do. Rolling with the changes is part of what makes SEO services valuable. I did an overly dramatic article on Trustrank and personalization that details why I think it will spell the end for a lot of the crappy SEO's we've seen start charging for BS services in the last few years.

4) Will blogs still be "in" next spring?

Ugh. I sometimes cringe at the thought of myself being a "blogger". Bloggers as a whole are really quite an annoying bunch of blowhards that have become full of themselves because someone actually listened to what they had to say. I think they will be around next spring, and will probably evolve in some way. Chances are they still will be the in thing because I think as a society we like hearing the inside scoop about a company. It's the whole Cluetrain thing...having an open dialogue with customers is the only way to conduct business effectively these days. Blogs provide a nice form for communication. I blog for a couple reasons...firstly to give away information to people that I think would be valuable when there is no way I can really take them on as a client myself. I want to be helpful to those who are interested in learning for themselves the same way folks at WMW and other forums have helped me to learn so much. The second reason I blog is to have a nice timestamp for when things happen and reference points to go back and use. The last reason would be to communicate ideas and methodology to existing clients. I think all these are valuable and valid reasons beyond just yapping about rehashed news because someone might listen.

It's pretty easy to skim 50 or 60 blogs in a day if they all only have a couple of posts. The good information will rise to the top of the stack and the way it is presented to users is just kind of a formality I think. Blogs will be probably by "in" on MTV soon which I suppose would make it "out" in our early-adopter type circles. Blogs with information rich content and good value for a reader's time will be something I'll be happy to learn from for a long time to come.

5) Sometimes I lie in bed and surf the Web with my laptop sitting on my chest. Do you think this could give me cancer?

Much better your chest than your lap. Gotta watch out for your neck and back....more likely to jack that up lookin' at a laptop all day and night. Since you're an internet marketing geek like me I suppose you see the sun about the same as I do so I'm sure it all balances out.

Interlinking sites... Again... Ugh

I've seen a lot of threads about interlinking over the years, and frankly, I'm tired of reading/talking/hearing about it. In case you're "new here" and want to hear the latest pundits on the issue, check out Threadwatch and WMW.

If you want to save yourself some valuable time, here is my answer (in a single sentence): If interlinking your sites is good for your users, do it!

Mr. Ploppy's Press Release Tools

Stuntdubl's blog continues to dish out the good stuff. Today it's Mr. Ploppy's Monday Morning Tool List Volume XVII - Press Release Tools. It's got a great list of free newswires - crucial if you're trying to quickly build permanent oneways to a new domain (on a budget... and aren't we all). Don't just read it, bookmark it.

I am wondering though, who is this Mr. Ploppy? Is it Todd's alter ego? His imaginary friend?

This Just In: PageRank MATTERS!

I guess I should share the blame here: I've been saying "PageRank
doesn't matter" for some time now. I remember the old days (2003). The
toolbar had made us all obsessed with green; in fact, we were fixated
on it, when we should have been looking at other link metrics along
with it.

And thus started the myth that "PageRank doesn't matter". I've heard
pretty much every expert weigh in on the issue, and make the same basic
point. Mike Grehan is only the latest to do so.
What's more, one question I was asked last week had me slightly
dumbfounded for a moment: "If you're saying I can't value links that I
buy based on PageRank, how do I value how much I'd be prepared to pay
for them?"


This is the stark reality: People still actually buy and sell links valued against Google's PR score. Which is ridiculous.Let's step back a bit. Is
PageRank "ridiculous" as a useful link popularity metric? What is a
better metric to judge "rough" link popularity/power? Yahoo backlink
count? That says nothing about the importance of a page's backlinks; it just gives you a count, and the sites themselves. Of course, you could go to each of those sites, and count their backlinks. But that's just a recursive link popularity algorithm--umm, PageRank?

I'm not saying PageRank is the end-all or the Holy Grail. It isn't.
It's just a starting point. After checking out a page's PR, I look for
authority backlinks (.edu, .gov, DMOZ, topical authorities), I look to
see if the backlinks are mostly on-topic, I look to see whether or not
its links have been obtained organically vs. rented or traded, etc. But
I do start with PageRank.

Let's be honest: PageRank still matters. And it will for a while--unless, of course, Google stops showing it ;-)

Do Links from PDFs 'Count'?

This is something I've wondered about before, but never pursued much: Do links from PDF's count towards link popularity?

I can't say that I know for certain. I do know that Google often caches an HTML version of a PDF document, converting URLs and links within to normal HTML links--so, my guess would be, that links from PDFs do count.

The question was asked at High Rankings in Worthy Links In Readable Documents, Links in PDF's:

If a client produces numerous PDF Fact sheets that are available for download from their site will links to URLs in the PDF's have any weight when it comes to link popularity?

xScottx replies with some good, hard evidence:

...when searching for backlinks in Google for some sites, PDFs sometimes show up....so it seems that the links in PDFs do count for link popularity.

And fathom seems to agree. Does anyone know for sure, either way? Feedback appreciated...

"Link Building Makes My Brain Hurt"

Sometimes I think the SEOs who win out in the end are those with the will, rather than the skill. I have a million things I could be doing for a lot of my sites, but in truth I really can only summon the energy to go "all out" for two or three. And I suspect that those two or three will make me more money than all the rest together, in the long term.

We all get exhausted by the many necessary tasks involved in building sites, from time to time. Especially with link building. Let's be honest: it's often tedious and annoying. It can also seem like a lot of work for low return (although I will argue that link building almost always has a spectacular ROI). This is the topic in this WMW thread, titled Just can't get myself to do link development. One_on_One posts:My brain hurts just thinking about link development...it's such a tedious, boring process. How do you guys do it to drive traffic to your sites?My brain hurts just thinking about his brain hurting. ryan26 has a short reply but I think it's a nugget of wisdom:Dirtiest job in SEO but the most important. Try and think out of the box. Press releases, RSS feeds, PHONE CALLS. Every small step forward is a step in the right direction.Of course you can take the easy way out and just rent links, but experience tells me this won't work well unless you have a decent underlying base of permanent links.There are no freebies in life! Unfortunately that goes for link building as well...

20% Off SES San Jose!

LBB Readers, the Text Link Ads crew will be exhibiting at the upcoming SES San Jose Show August 8-11.  Please follow this link (pdf file) for a 20% off coupon for any conference pass.

We are also excited to announce that Danny Sullivan has added a new session: Buying & Selling Links that I will be speaking at.  Thanks Danny!  We are looking forward to meeting everyone in person in San Jose.

Can't Think of a Witty Title for This One

Thanks to SEOmoz for pointing out this thread at WebHostingTalk:IMNSHO, paying for pagerank v. seeking out legitimate links is the
difference between meeting someone, falling in love and getting married
v. paying for a hooker.I guess that makes the nofollow tag a contraceptive! *zing* (groan)

Are Directories On Their Way Out?

Noted spammer DaveN asks an interesting question in Did Google just target Directories at SEW Forums:I have been collecting quite a bit of data just recently and noticed
that some WH sites got canned the only thing I can find is a large % of
their IBL's are from directories.. is this the end of the road for
smaller directories ..


DaveN
DaveN is well known for being 'in the know', so if he asks a question like this it is not to be ignored. Marcia's reply gives us link builders some more food for thought:You know, if we look back at the first post, what Dave was saying is
not related to the directories themselves, but that sites with a large
% of their links from directories took a hit.


I think the engines probably have more serious challenges than the slew
of little directories out there - but the issue is whether those types
of links, especially if they comprise the majority or IBLs to newer
sites that aren't established, in great numbers and accrued quickly,
really have any value as far as algorithmic link analysis is concerned.
Do they represent genuine links that reflect relevancy or importance,
as would a link from a page from a related, on-topic site?
My .02: I think Google may be nuking low quality directories with tons of spammy sites listed, so a listing in those types of directories may not have much value going forward. From a relevancy perspective however a listing in a quality directory such as GoGuides probably will help a site in the SERPs, since that directory actually makes an honest attempt to categorize quality sites and rejects many low quality sites, and as such who it links out to is actually useful data for Google.

In any case, obtaining 100 directory links is no longer a short and easy route to high rankings. That said, when I'm trying to get a new site established I will still be submitting to my shortlist of HQ directories.

Ian Turner Safe and Sound!

We can all breathe a sigh of relief :-)

Coverage at WMW and Threadwatch.

Where is Ian Turner?

From Threadwatch:Ian Turner has been missing since Sunday. He was due to fly back from New Orleans (wmw show) and has not been seen since. His wife and family are all very worried about him, and so are we.If you think you may have any information, or even if you were at WMW New Orleans, please click over to the Threadwatch thread.

Find ALL of Your Backlinks

I've never even looked at MSN Search's WebLog, but for some reason today I did, and I'm glad. They've finally integrated the "linkdomain:" command:

Link: and LinkDomain:

We shipped 1.0 with the Link: keyword, which allows you to find pages that link to a single page, ala link:search.msn.com. Weâve added a variation of that, LinkDomain:, which returns pages that link to any page in a given domain. This is a great way for all you bloggers out there to see how many people are linking to you some way some how, and where theyâre linking. For example, to see pages that link into MSN, you just issue the query linkdomain:msn.com.

This is great news. I've long felt that MSN gives you the freshest and most comprehensive look at your backlinks, and this command will making sorting through them a bit easier.

For "links at a glance", I prefer Yahoo!, which seems to give backlink results in order of their importance (e.g., your "strongest" backlink is the first one listed).

For you n00bs out there: Google gives just a random sampling of back links and is not a good place to check your links.

Linking on a Dime

Barry Schwartz wrote an awesome recap of the "Linking on a Dime" panel here at WebmasterWorld New Orleans. Patrick was of course on the panel, as were linking experts martinibuster, oilman and stuntdubl (Todd Malicoat).

If you're not in New Orleans, I highly recommend you check out Barry's recap, it's pretty extensive.

Using Creative Commons to Build Links

Just saw this great thread over at WMW, Using Creative Commons to build link popularity. Creative Commons is a system that allows you to offer content for free syndication while retaining copyright.Why it's great for link building

People who syndicate your content often link back to you. Really this is not too much different from offering articles for syndication, except I would guess that sites syndicating Creative Commons content might tend to be higher quality than a generic article bank.

From the thread:We have a database of "Widgets" which has been cited in a large number of publications - all good linkages.

Now we have released that database under a Creative Commons license, under the condition that the authorship (our web site) is retained.

Now, anyone can duplicate the content for free - but they must link to us.

So, now - for no effort on our part - we are starting to build up a body of
sites linking to us, as a condition of their using the content.

And even better, the page and sites that link to us are all relevent to us,
and hence that also boosts thematic linking as well.

Heading to Narleans...

I'm going down to Narleans tomorrow for the WebmasterWorlds Search and Marketing Conference 2005. I have a lot to look forward to:

John Battelle's keynote speech

Manning the TLA booth (handing out our free link building guide!)

Finally meeting SEO friends in person -- AWall, Todd Malicoat, et al (too many to count!)

gumbo, mmmm.....

Patrick Gavin's presentation on determining the value of links

PubConference on Friday

Hopefully getting a picture taken with Matt Cutts, Brett Tabke :)

Bourbon Street



And I'm not sure what exactly my schedule will be like when I get there, so I may be blogging sporadically or not at all. But in any case I plan to start posting more regularly next week.

Hope to see everyone in New Orleans!

Can Links from Scrapers Hurt You?

AWall posts about "good links" and "bad links":Have you ever had a strong ranking site filtered out of the results
because automated links gave you an unnatural linkage profile?I have never seen an instance of this. (Have you?) To be honest it sounds tin-foil hattish to me.

That being said, I do try to get one high-powered link to every new Web site I put up; that way, if someone quickly jacks my content and Google puts us head to head for canonization, my site comes out on top.

Yet another 'How do you choose Directories' thread ;)

SERoundtable has posted on an SEO Chat thread, Main deciding factor .

Some joke that the best directory is the free directory, or better yet there is no recip link required for inclusion. There is a good discussion about design and the visual appeal of a directory. While I do agree it is nice to see, it doesn't necessary mean the directory is always the best.I agree that it's best to stay away from directories that require a reciprocal link. My earlier post on TrustRank stressed that low quality directory listings may not help your rankings (and could possibly even work against you). When in doubt: get listed in those places you would like to be even if Google didn't exist. Yes, I toot that horn a lot, but I truly believe it!

Don't Be a Greedy Linkster

This thread on SEO Chat has some interesting advice. Namely, that when you link out to an "un-themed site", you should use the rel="nofollow" attribute. I try not to get emotional about these things but this attitude really ticks me off.

When did we all become Greedy Linksters? I guess it started with PageRank and morphed into the mess we have today, with blog spamming, Arelis et al. Admittedly, I'm as greedy for links as anyone. Heck, we even made a blog about how to get as many/the best links as possible to your site (p.s., isn't our blog great? you should link to it).

So your site is about blue widgets, and your hosting was graciously donated by HostingCo Inc. You, of course, want to link to them in your footer with "Hosting graciously donated by HostingCo Inc." The problem (apparently) is that HostingCo Inc. isn't ranking for "blue widgets", so you're afraid that by linking to them you will lose hub points with Hilltop.

Link to them. Trust me. The algo will get over it. Don't be a Greedy Linkster! *steps off soapbox*

Out of Link Building Ideas? Get Creative.

I don't normally visit Jill Whalen's High Rankings Forum, but there's a fantastic thread up there called Out of Link Building Ideas.Here's what I've tried so far, can any one offer some suggestions? The
ones below have worked out somewhat ok (Marketleap 758, PR4) but
obviosly I'd like more. Yes I am keyword optimizing all these links and
will continue to use the techniques below but they're getting less
efficient every day.If you're a serious white hat link builder, and I am, you know what it feels like when you've given it everything you've got. You're in all the directories, you've gotten 12 articles syndicated, you've traded links with everyone possible ranking top 500 for your term (and a ton of people who aren't), etc. etc. But you're still ranked #7! How will you get to #1?

At this point, I usually do two things:1) Rent a couple very powerful, on-topic links (prepay for six months -- it won't help unless it stays up for a while!)2) Put my content creation in overdrive (e.g., pay an author to write 3 articles per day, instead of 1). The content will drive traffic and links (very slowly, but remember, we've already gotten all the "easy" links)

And if I was a different type of person I might even try3) Think of a very creative way to make your site better or say something crazy. Aaron Wall is always tooting his horn on how creative / excellent / terrible ideas attract a lot of links.

DMOZ Bashing!

Question: What Should one do if DMOZ Link got rejected?

Answer: Complain about it.

Let the productive mud-slinging begin!

And P.S., I've never been offered a bribe as a DMOZ editor, although I'm certain that it does go on (probably on a limited basis, and only in "high margin" categories).

P.P.S, If you would like to get listed in dmoz.org/Games/Gambling/, send a $2,000 cheque to:


Andy Hagans137 Fake St.Anytown, State 12345

And don't forget to double the amount if you want a keyword-rich title.

Disclaimer: That's a joke, son, a joke...

'Link Spam Alliances' Research Paper

Gary Price of Search Engine Watch Blog has found yet another Stanford research paper . In this paper we study how web pages can be interconnected in a spam
farm in order to optimize rankings. We also study alliances, that is,
interconnections of spam farms. Our results identify the optimal
structures and quantify the potential gains. In particular, we show
that alliances can be synergistic and improve the rankings of all
participants.Seems like old news to me :)

Article Syndication, Gaining Steam?

A few signs that article syndication is becoming more mainstream as a link building method:

new article banks are popping up left and right

I've seen a lot more posts on webmaster forums on article syndication

This thread from SEOChat introduced me to a pretty comprehensive article submission list.
If you are promoting multiple sites, it's a good idea to come up with a
good article submission list; if you do, each 500 word article that you
have written can provide you with over 50 relevant, permanent backlinks. Not a bad deal.

Roundup: Links About Links

Aaron Wall's Link Harvester. Yet another useful linking tool Aaron is offering for free.

Threads of the Web - Linking for Success @ Search Engine Guide.

Linking Strategies that work in 2005 @ SEW Forums. The post is interesting in that it ranks link building methods by how effective they are and also how hard they are to duplicate. It seems they left out article syndication though, which happens to be my very favorite link building method.

Does Google Hate Directories Now?

So you've all probably heard about TrustRank by now, and if you read SEO Book, you know that it could possibly screw low quality directories (i.e., 95% of them), making the links they hand out worthless.

Meanwhile, it appears the Google may be publicly taking some steps to combat spammy link building via directories. From Threadwatch:According to the members at the DP forums, several directory categories in high profile sites such as Dmoz and Yahoo have been blanked out of PageRank.
We've talked in the past about Google targeting directory sites for
various reasons, but this time it comes with a twist, cutting off PR at
major sources. Those blanked out categories include...
Dmoz: Computers - Internet - Searching - Directories


Google - Computers - Internet - Searching - Directories


Yahoo - Computers & Internet - Internet - WWW - Search engines & Directories


Personally I am surprised they would combat spammy directory links this way (if in fact it is what they are doing). Why wouldn't they just greybar obviously SEO-inspired directories, or make the links from them worthless?

Balancing Linkability and a Subscription-based Business Model

The New York Time's announcement that they would be moving to a partly subscription-based model didn't surprise me at all.

Of course, the move ticked many bloggers off; Nick W at Threadwatch wrote "Stupid, Stupid, Stupid"
in his headline for the story. When people are used to getting
something for free, and then are asked to pay for it, it is only
natural that they would be unhappy.

But the Times reasoning made sense to me (see their full explanation here, subscription required):Mr. Sulzberger said that while some Internet users accustomed to free
content might not be willing to pay, many others would be attracted by
the online package of columnists, archives and other material.

"The
advertising growth on the Web has been just spectacular the last few
years," he said. "But like any business, it's going to mature over
time, and when that happens, it will flatten and then you'll get into
the normal cycles just like we do it on print. And at that point you're
really going to need to have another revenue model." Internet
advertising has seen a huge boom since the advent of pay per click, and
I expect that it will see some more growth before it declines.
Advertising is notoriously cyclical though, and there will be a point
in time when internet ad-buying takes a dip. At that point, those
publications who have diversified their revenue streams will be sitting
pretty.

Furthermore, in terms of SEO and linkability, the majority of
content at NYT will still be available free of charge, and bloggers and
webmasters will continue to link to it. Really what this is is a form
of market segmentation: for those users who aren't willing to pay for
content, NYT puts most of it out in the open. They then obtain
subscription revenue from the "diehard 5%" who are willing to pay for
the extras.

In my not-so-humble opinion this is a smart hybrid business model that has proven itself over time. For proof, see SEW or WMW ;)

Google Toolbar and Web Accelerator's Role in Fighting Link Spam

Google has amassed quite a bit of user behavior data with the Google Toolbar, and the Web Accelerator will only increase their vast knowledge of surfers' habits. I would be willing to bet the farm that this will drastically impact their search algorithm soon.

For instance, suppose we're looking at two Web sites that rank for "blue widget". Site A has 500 higher quality backlinks from related sites. Site B has 40,000 lower quality backlinks obtained by spamming blogs. In the past, these two sites might have obtained similar positions in the SERPs.

But with data collected from the Web Accelerator and toolbar, Google knows that visitors to Site A tend to stay for 3:41 and view about 4 pages, while visitors to Site B stay for 0:31 and view 1.3 pages. Further, Google knows which of each site's backlinks are being clicked, and which are never clicked by users (hint: the spammy blog comments are rarely clicked on).

When Google fully integrates user behavior data into their algorithm, sites with HQ content and HQ, highly trafficked links will benefit.

DaveN said something similar on this post at SEW Forums:the way SE's look at links is changing and changing fast imo If you can
ask yourself will this link i have just added get traffic from people
visiting that site, then you are on the right tracks if the answer is
Yes.Getting HQ links seems to be the theme of our blog in its initial days :)

Press Release Spam Goes Mainstream

In case you missed this thread over at Search Engine Watch Forums, press release spam has gone mainstream. I've noticed dubious releases in sites like PRWeb for years, but I think it's safe to say that the problem has gotten worse.

Bob Gladstein highlighted this point with a press release he got syndicated as a bit of a joke. Excerpt (italics added):Experiments for the week included an attempt to determine the efficacy
of the use of search engine submission forms and a study of the
attention spans of editors working for online press release services.


In other news, Gonga and Maya continue to enjoy their birthday gifts,
and this has significantly decreased the amount of work getting
accomplished in the office.I think this little experiment proves that press release services need to increase quality standards. The way things are now, even terrible press releases with grammatical errors get into Google News (this doesn't happen through PRWeb, where you need $30 to get into eMediawire, but there are other press release services that get a release into Google News for free).

An SEO'd press release can be a helpful link building tool, though, as it provides a backlink from a contextually relevant page. It can also drive heavy traffic if it gets syndicated in Yahoo! News or Google News. The bottom line: we should all use press release services to get targetted links and traffic, but if abuse continues, the usefulness of this marketing method will decline.

Eric Ward on 'The Passively-Obtained Backlink'

Eric Ward is one of the most respected experts on linking on the Web. His latest article is a good read and one that I think highlights what a good link building strategy should be:
Every web site has its own universe of inbound links it can reasonably
expect to come about from a passive approach.  But you can't just
sit back and wait for a webmaster somewhere to happen upon your site and
link to it.  The key is to be strategically active, rather than randomly
active.
This isn't referring to an approach that requires 1000 reciprocal
links on your site, or buying links from 50
"SEO-spam-directory-listing.com" type Web sites. Instead, think about
where you could be linked from sites in, or related to, your industry. This will likely not require money, but instead, will require time.

As search engine link algorithms improve, quality links will perform
much better than reciprocal or spam directory links. Any possible
algorithmic feature-whether Hilltop, TrustRank, "the sandbox" or VIPS-will
reward HQ links over spammy links. And if you have a long term SEO
strategy, that fact should dominate your link building strategy going
forward.

Read more: Linking's Holy Grail: The
Passively-Obtained Backlink

Building Links With Articles

Articles just may be the most powerful link building method you're not using.

And I say that from experience: my old homepage
ranked for terms like "link building," and this was accomplished almost
completely by getting links from articles.The trick is writing a good
article and catchy title so that the article will be widely syndicated,
and then using the "resource box" (author bio) to fit in the links. The
great part about the resource box is that you get to pick your link(s),
and can use any anchor text you choose.

Here's what an article syndication offers:1) Free, permanent links from many domains and IPs2) Links from pages with your keywords contained in the content (and sometimes in the title, too)3) Deep links (from your resource box)4) Keyword rich links (from your resource box)

Note that numbers 3 and 4 are bonuses that a high quality directory won't give you.

The Nitty GrittyRelated sites that reprint articles are the best places to submit articles. But if your article is on something very niche,
it's unlikely you will find very many sites in that niche that will
print your article. Hell, you might be the only guy in your niche!

Which brings me to the beauty of the article bank. Article banks will reprint most any
article, which is then archived permanently (with your links in the
resource box intact). If you get listed in 15 article banks, that's 15
links already.

As time goes on you'll notice your article will also appear
elsewhere. Sometimes new sites will raid these for related content that
they can reprint. Other sites exist solely to syndicate articles from
these article banks. Finally, many scrapers pick up content from these
article banks--usually leaving the links intact. All of these types of
sites will give you a link from a contextually-relevant page on a
unique IP.

The catch: many article banks are not actively reviewing and accepting articles, but I've put up a pretty current list here.

Aside from SEOIf you mine the public stats of
my old homepage, you will see that it also gets a lot of direct traffic
from these syndicated articles. It's guaranteed that the people
clicking over are qualified leads, since they read the article I wrote,
and were interested enough to click through. This is, I believe, the
litmus test for a golden link. A golden link is a link that is great
for SEO, but that would also be great if the search engines didn't
exist!