Posts Tagged ‘black hat seo’

Google is now blacklisting websites on a per keyword base. Per Annie Cushing’s presentation on “Look before you Link”.

Annie presented the fact that Google now has trip wires on keyword linking and link building.  She mentioned determining the amount of inbound links on a per keyword base in comparison with the amount of brand links a site has.  “Quality vs Quantity” was also discussed as the conference was presented with “Brute force link building being thrown out the window.” Big brands are getting away with link spam because they have enough back links to their brand name…. Use SEOmoz for anchor text analysis.  “First thing you ask when doing a link audit is if they have a history of link building? Have they bought links?” Annie also gave a plug for MajesticSEO, and using their tools to determine if there were any changes in link building velocity.  Spikes in linkscape could get you penalized. Sitewide links are a big red flag.

A few of my Twitter notes:

Understand when you have tripped the filter wire. #BlueGlassFL

Hmmmm…. Is Google now open to bowling per keyword with the new filter? #BlueGlassFL

If all your links have the same anchor text then #YouMightBeSEOchallenged

Thos003

If Google is as smart as the IRS then they will weed out the corrupt link building websites in the same way the IRS finds a bad accountant and then targets all his/her clients.  … I believe Google is at least as smart as the IRS… and probably smarter. … although I am still amazed that two national pest control companies went from under 10,000 links to over 100,000 links in one year… I know bedbugs have been a hot topic, but really? Should branding really be that important?

Advertisements

Last year at Pubcon I heard Bruce Clay make the following statement:

“There is no such thing as black hat, white hat, or gray hat SEO.  It’s all calculated risk.”

I am sure that like most other SEO trainers, Bruce has had a number of people ask him the question, “Should I use black hat SEO tactics?” …..What’s the answer?

“Well how much risk are you willing to take?”

I once worked for a national lawn maintenance and weed control company. The owner was struggling to keep the business going.  I was younger and more naive at the time. I didn’t realize that having my paycheck bounce meant I should be worried about getting paid.  Well during this phase a Bill, good friend of mine, was let go.  The owner also changed weed control products. After a long day of spraying this new product I was talking with Bill. He asked how work was going.  I told him about the new blue spray we were using.  “Blue spray?” Bill questioned, “The only thing blue down there is tractor dye.  I bet that spray doesn’t have much smell to it.”

“What are you saying Bill?”

“I am saying that you are not spraying weed control.  You are spraying blue dyed water.”

Needless to say, I left soon after and the branch went under not long after that.

So while the owner may have been saving a few dollars by just spraying blue tractor dye, he wasn’t saving his company. But hey, it sure costs a lot less to spray water and you sure can make more money that way, RIGHT?

Wrong.

But is there any risk in taking the “White Hat SEO” route?

Yes.  Taking a white hat seo route has its “risks” as well.  What if it takes twice as long to get your site ranked and start turning a profit by following all the rules?  Can your money hold out as you wait for the rankings to come? There is risk in waiting.  Further, if your competitor is willing to cheat a little to get ahead and you are not then you are taking a risk. Like Permitex and Porkin adding 30,000 plus links in 3 months, that’s hard to do if you are white hat.

Anyone up for a game of Russian Roulette?

So should you do white hat or black hat SEO?

I differ back to Bruce Clay… “It’s all calculated risk.”

Do you really want to cannibalize all of your work over a gamble?  T is Thomas and T is for Turtle. Slow and steady wins the race…. and I am just a Phoenix pest control guy.

FYI – Grey vs Gray.  The British established “grey” as the proper spelling for the color shade that lies between black and white. However, American’s still tend to use the spelling “gray”.  So in England there really is no “Gray Hat SEO” but the SEO experts there will admit to a “Grey Hat SEO”.

Interesting read today from Fox news on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).  This is something that would effect SEO companies as they are prone to adding links and building blogs to get more traffic.  The FTC has voted to regulate blogging and fine those that are posting product reviews for money.  They believe that these reviews are misleading in that the consumer is unaware if the review is a organic unsolicited review or if the review is paid for by the product company.  Further, many of these sites and reviews sign on as affiliates and receive a commission if the product is bought through their site.

The law will require that bloggers must make it known that they are being paid in a “clear and conspicuous” manner and the law goes into force December 1st, 2009. The law does not require notification for “free” products, meaning if I were to offer you free pest control service in exchange for a review then you are not required to disclose that you are receiving free service. While these regulations may make many bloggers nervous, the FTC says that they intend to target the companies and advertisers.  This actually makes me more nervous as a pest control company.

Let’s say that I am paying an SEO company to build my site and back links.  How can I be sure that the SEO company I hire is adhering to this law?  Who then is responsible, the SEO company or the pest control company?  Further, this law seems very inadequate.  How do you define a “review” of a company or a review of a product?  How will the FTC distinguish between legitimate customers reviewing a product or service versus the paid reviews? And what about blogs that benefit indirectly from their reviews (i.e. Google adsense)?

Or better yet define “clear and conspicuous”. How do I know if this site “clearly and conspicuously” show that I am a Bulwark employee.  Is the facebook profile on the left sufficient or do I need to disclose this in every post?  Beyond that this blog isn’t purely a Bulwark blog, its my own blog and thoughts as well.  Bulwark does not sanction everything written on this blog and I am not really getting paid directly for my content.

Overall, however, I applaud the FTC’s attempt to regulate this gross flood of solicited reviews. It is unfortunate that so many companies and individuals are cashing in on the naive public.  Having worked on the internet for sometime I  spot the propaganda reviews and comments regularly. In fact, there are entire blogs that look like just a single user reviewing everyday products, but in fact are a paid blogger.

As far as I am aware Bulwark has not overstepped these requirements.  But, again, I am unaware of every attempt hired SEO firms have undergone to boost my web presence. Further, I don’t know how they define “clear and conspicuous”.  Hopefully a site that is owned by Bulwark is clear. But, it does sound  like I will need to check in on my SEO team, and I would advise all internet advertisers and business owners to do the same. Don’t get caught with your pants down.

From your Pest Control SEO guy.

This post was not directly paid for by Bulwark Exterminating, however the writter is biased as to which pest control service is the best.