Not only I, but many other bloggers. Anyone participating in any sponsored posting, selling of links or any similar program is now considered to be unreasonably manipulating SERPs by Google.
I find that interesting because last week, I wasn’t a spammer.
This speaks to the very core of my discussion on white hat vs black hat SEO. There’s one of the most intelligent summaries of the situation over at SEO class. They’ve pulled a lot of quotes from a lot of respected bloggers. My favourite quote comes from Black Hat SEO. He announced his welcome a while ago, as soon as Matt Cutts fired the first volley.
It’s a war. Google has cast you as the enemy. Make sure you are prepared.
I’m pleased to say that I am prepared in a sense. I’m prepared to have my revenue drop. Realistically this war is going to be messy. There will be lots of innocents lost if Google is intent on taking down the new fleet of “enemies”. It’s hard to tell what long lasting effects this will have. I’ve already seen an advertiser request a post that shows that they understand what’s happening and have adjusted their strategy. The thing is that not enough advertisers are going to have enough knowledges to work within the newly drawn lines. The only way for them to do it is for a large system to bring it to the masses, in which case Google will pick up on it quickly and nerf it all again.
If, on the other hand, advertisers really are into the traffic generated through referrals and not so much in the Google juice, then nothing will change at all. There’s still a lot to determine so we’ll have to wait and see how this will all develop. For the time being, I see no immediate change in strategy in my future.
mike // Jun 7, 2007 at 11:42 pm
I haven’t yet seen or heard anything to convince me that the following statement is not true:
“The only difference between link spam and sponsored posts is that the blog involved gets paid for sponsored posts. ”
We try pretty hard to stamp out link spam, and I think we can all agree that we don’t want link spam taken into account in Google rankings. Why should sponsored posts be different? I don’t like the idea of someone paying (indirectly) to get better search results.
Yes, absolutely, bloggers get cash from sponsored posts, but what benefit does it have for the larger community? None that I see.
I have no objection to bloggers using sponsored posts for income. None whatsoever. Maybe being labelled a spammer is a bit strong, maybe it isn’t. But for damn sure, I wouldn’t want sponsored posts to affect my Google search results on bit.
Marc // Jun 8, 2007 at 10:37 am
With regards to what benefits it has for the larger community, I believe it’s greater than “none”, but less than “as much as a regular post”. Where it lies between the two depends on the op.
Some of the ones I’ve written are on topics that not a lot of people here are interested in. That being said, I try to put enough personal spin on it so that it does relate to me and this blog.
Other ops though expose me to things that I find interesting and get me to write about fun things that mean something to me. Those are just about as valuable as a real post. Take the one of the Police I wrote a short while ago. That one was fun to talk about and was pretty much all me.
I do understand and appreciate your point of view with regards to link spam and its affect on Google’s rankings. There’s not much I can say to that point except that I do question as to whether or not this is spam. I select my ops, I can easily cancel any questionable links from my sponsored linking system. I suppose that at the end of the day it’s a difference between Google and I over the definition of spam.
mike // Jun 8, 2007 at 9:30 pm
If the ops are “a list of fun ideas for blog posts” and it is completely voluntary, I support that completely.
To my mind, the line is crossed when something is written about – and links are posted to – a site that a blogger wouldn’t be writing about if they weren’t getting paid.
I have no doubt there are instances where your interests and an op coincide. If you are getting paid to write something you’d be writing anyway, I see that as good and efficient use of your time (though the advertiser might see it as something else
).
I mean, you have to make money, and PayPerPost seems to be a passable way to do that. I take no issue with that, and never have. Just don’t be surprised when the rest of us applaud the fact that Google wants to ignore posts that are bought and paid for.
Marc // Jun 8, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Point taken, well played
Ian // Jun 8, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Damnit, Mike beat me to it, I’m too slow.
… So, uh, how ’bout those Mets?
Marc // Jun 8, 2007 at 10:37 pm
35-23… They might make the playoffs. More than I can say for the Yankees.
Tom // Jun 11, 2007 at 5:05 am
“We try pretty hard to stamp out link spam, and I think we can all agree that we don’t want link spam taken into account in Google rankings. Why should sponsored posts be different? I don’t like the idea of someone paying (indirectly) to get better search results.”
Honestly, I don’t understand WHY you don’t like that idea. We all some strategies..:)
rightfred // Jun 11, 2007 at 8:18 am
I have to agree with Mike here. I don’t have anything against the practice (which is basically celebrity endorsement), but I don’t support any method by which search engine rankings can be bought.
Marc // Jun 11, 2007 at 9:32 am
Whether you support them or not, they are a reality. Take Google Adsense for example. It’s the easiest way to buy yourself to the very top of the search engine rankings.
Bucky // Jun 11, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Do you think that this will hurt the websites that people pay generate links from? Text link ads and payperpost for instance.
If google stops “looking” at those sponsored links, I believe more advertisers will be going straight to the bloggers themselves and saying, “Hey, if you write about my new product, I will give you $50″. It would be a paid review, but if kept under wraps, google would never know about it…unless it is completely out of the niche you normally blog about.
rightfred // Jun 11, 2007 at 1:08 pm
The difference with Google Adsense, is that we know it’s an ad.
Marc // Jun 11, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Bucky: It depends on how public Google is about it and how effective they are at it. If it’s a known quantity that these things don’t work, it will kill both these companies. If it’s allegedly going on, but people are still seeing results nonetheless they will survive.
At hand is the question of just what will trigger filters and what will slip past. Google has to find a balance between banning all links from blogs to letting everything through. Where that balance rests will determine everything else.
rightfred: You’re right, but does that matter?
rightfred // Jun 11, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Well, I think it does. It has to. Advertisement is lucrative, it’s effective, and some would argue useful, but should it also be subliminal? Mcdonald’s burgers reallt aren’t anything special, but children are so indoctrinated towards the idea of Mcdonald’s as the embodiment of fun that it becomes the target and desire rather than the place at which to get your desire (whether it be food or toys). See also: Disneyland.
Martin // Jun 11, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Whenever I read about Black Hat SEO, I always think of Bad Bart from Sesame Street
Marc // Jun 12, 2007 at 5:03 am
rightfred: I hear what you’re saying but I’m not making the link as to how it applies here. In either case though I don’t think either one of us will convince the other that they’re right
At the end of the day, this has to do with arbitrary lines in the sand. It has to do with where they’re drawn and who draws them.
Martin: I had to Google that one because I couldn’t remember the character. One look at the face though and I had it
In the pics I found, his hat was very, very light 
mike // Jun 20, 2007 at 12:25 am
*cough* comment spam *cough*
I got about 20 comments sounding exactly like that- they want the link back to their own site.
Marc // Jun 20, 2007 at 6:23 am
Thanks for the head’s up Mike, it’s gone now. I thought it might be spam but figured I’d just roll with it since I couldn’t say for sure.
Ozonew4mWebmaster // Jul 18, 2007 at 8:42 am
There seems to be alot of posts springing up on alot of blogs lately about the black hat seo subject. I think the difference between black, white, grey, blue or any other color hat is getting very blurred and personally i will do ALMOST anything to get links and people to my website and I think the majority of people (if they are honest) would do the same. Its up to the various search engines to try and stop or control it which currently i iether think they are not doing very well or dont care…
Interesting blog by the way.. ill be coming back to this one