Banner

Follow Along

RSS Feed Join Us on Twitter On Facebook

Get Engaged

Banner

Featured Article

Digital Marketing Insights; Integrated SEO 2013Digital Marketing Insights; Integrated SEO 2013Hello and welcome to the first of many Google Plus Hangouts here on SNC. To get things rolling our first session...
Read More >>

Latest Comments

Related Reading

Latest Articles

Digital Marketing Insights; Integrated SEO 2013Digital Marketing Insights; Integrated SEO...
Hello and welcome to the first of many Google Plus Hangouts here on SNC. To...
Read More >>

Our Sponsors

Banner
Banner
Banner

Latest Search Videos

Join Us

Banner
Banner
Some Dos and Don’ts of Linkbuilding Today
Written by Doc Sheldon
Wednesday, 08 August 2012 12:50

Over the last 15 months or so, a couple of black & white Google mascots have pretty much upset the way some people went about acquiring links to their sites.

For the most part, I think the motivation behind loosing those critters on us was well-intended. Realistically, though, I really wonder whether it’ll have lasting effects… at least the effects that were intended.

Taking a look back before Penguin and even Panda bared their fangs (or beaks), linkbuilding has remained largely unchanged for several years. Some folks like to publish linkbait, others drop forum and blog comments and crappy little articles all over the web, like a seagull on Exlax and still others either swap links or buy them outright.

There are other variations, but those cover the field fairly well.

follow the sign...

What’s changed?

When the smoke cleared, of course, we saw that many of the article directories where we used to be able to drop links had either shut down or severely tightened their standards.

Then we began to see that a failure to have a diverse link profile seemed to flag our sites for attention… attention of the sort that some really didn’t relish.

The web was awash with rumors and bad information (nothing new there, right?) with people that didn’t have a clue, advising other clueless people how they ought to live in this new environment.

And of course, since a lot of people still seem to believe anything they read on the internet, some of that bad advice was heeded, and the casualties mounted.

Nothing new there, either.

I suspect that most of us still receive emails periodically offering “monthly submission to over 200 directories” or “niche-specific, high quality, high PR links by the thousands” (If you don’t and are feeling left out, drop me a line with your email… I can forward you a boatload… daily). Eventually, we can only hope that increased awareness of the futility (or e-suicide) of such tactics will lessen the number of such crap-hat offerings.

I guess things really haven’t changed all that much. Well, hell… a fella can dream, can’t he?

Anyway, I thought I’d recap some of the dos and don’ts for linkbuilding in the post-Penguin world, for the benefit of those that may not have heard much on the topic – or worse yet, a lot of conflicting stories.

dos and don'ts of linkbuilding

Some Dos:

  • Do: Diversify your link profile. For instance, I usually try never to have more than 20-25% of my link profile in any single category, such as blog comments, forum comments, forum signatures or, article directories. That can change, depending upon the query space, of course. Regardless, the more diverse your profile is, the less impact you might later see if a particular type of link is suddenly devalued or even disallowed by the search engines. And some of those aren’t worth much even at full value.
  • Do: Diversify your anchor text. Using the primary keywords and phrases for which you want to rank over and over again is a red flag to the search engines that you’re trying to manipulate your rankings. Using the same anchor text two or three times is no problem… 25+ times may be a great way to get tagged for unnatural linking, though.
  • Do: Occasionally use the sort of anchor text that another person might use if they were linking to your site. Anchor text such as “more info”, “John’s website” or “here” appear to be safe bets. The meta title of the page to which you’re linking also seems to be acceptable. And of course, a raw link, such as www.example.com is safe, as well.
  • Do: Be cautious about your link velocity. Search engines aren’t built by village dummies, and they have a LOT more anecdotal evidence available to them than you do. They have a pretty good feel for how fast links will generate to different types of content, and if you pass what they set as an “acceptable” threshold, you may not like the consequences. Slow and steady wins the race.

And Some Don’ts:

  • Don’t: Send out emails asking people to link to you. Consider how you react when a total stranger contacts you asking for a link to his site. I bet you’re more likely to at least give it some thought if the request comes from someone you know. Reach out and make contact and build a relationship before expecting someone to pass you a link. Better yet, do something for them, linking or tweeting something they’ve done. People are much more likely to return a favor than they are to respond to someone asking them for something.
  • Don’t: Contact a site owner asking him how much he’d charge to give you a link. C’mon, people… that’s just not smart! Whether you or I happen to believe in ratting out people has nothing to do with it… there are folks out there that’ll turn you in just for giggles. Besides, why would you want to show anyone how stupid you are?
  • Don’t: Load up on blogroll or footer links. Sitewide links are bad juju, and should be avoided in most instances, certainly in excess. Once in a blue moon isn’t likely to hurt you. But then, it won’t likely help you much, either, as evidence seems to indicate that these are significantly devalued already.
  • Don’t: Go crazy with reciprocal links. Again, a couple of these aren’t going to do you any harm, but I’ve seen bloggers that had profiles consisting of 25-30% reciprocal links. In my opinion that’s five or six times what I’d call a safe number.

At the end of the day, Google isn’t really changing the rules on us as far as links are concerned… they’re just getting better at limiting our ability to get away with gaming the system.

Anyone that’s been toeing the line all along is probably in good shape and those that have been buying links by the thousands probably think they’re too smart to get caught.

Hopefully, if you’re doing it for clients, you’re either steering them on a path of caution or at least making them totally aware of the risks they may be taking. If you’re not doing either… well, I guess that would put you in the crap-hat category.

Doc Sheldon -

Doc Sheldon is a retired business management consultant, and a perpetual student of all things SEO. He’s also a copywriter, providing professional webcopy, articles and press releases. He’s been involved in SEO for a little over five years, and writing professionally for over thirty.

Also hook up via

Read More >>


More articles by this author

RDFa:  The Inside Story from Best BuyRDFa: The Inside Story from Best Buy
An Interview with Jay Myers Late last year, I approached Jay...
Read More >>
 Myths,  BS and FUD, Oh My! Myths, BS and FUD, Oh My!
During a chat in the SEO Training Dojo the other...
Read More >>
 

Comments  

 
-2 #1 Andreas Voniatis 2012-08-08 14:26
Agreed with most of the points above. How about not focusing on anchor text at all? Professional journalists don't think about optimising anchor text and it's clear the search engines are not as reliant anchor text to assess what the content is about, hence the confidence in the SERPs quality as a result of rolling out Penguin.
Quote
 
 
0 #2 Doc Sheldon 2012-08-08 16:00
Hi, Andreas-

I don't think it's necessary to stop using anchor text altogether - we simply need to be careful to not overdo it.

The key is to be as natural as possible. Non-SEO folks don't typically do KW research and use the same anchor text over and over again. They'll often use text like "read more" or "website" or even just raw URLs. And as I said, the meta title of the target page seems to be a safe bet. A little of all these in our link profiles is not only less likely to raise a flag, but also leaves us less vulnerable to any significant impact to our rankings if one is suddenly rendered useless or undesirable.

It's also important to remember that non-linking citations have taken on more importance and seem to be yielding a lot more benefit toward building authority now, too. And the algorithms now look at surrounding text as well as the anchor text more than they used to. Those two things in combination give us the ability to convey more information about what the copy is saying, who is saying it and how much credibility can be attributed to what's being said.

That, in my opinion, actually expands considerably the tools available to us for our copy, in terms of helping both the search engines and the readers understand what we're writing about and how much credence we should be given.

So I agree completely with you that the search engines needn't rely on anchor text to understand what either the source page or target page is about.

Thanks for commenting!
Quote
 
 
0 #3 Matt Coffy 2012-08-13 13:42
Thanks for this post, Doc. I'm quite sure these Do's and Don'ts of yours will be a good reminder for me. After all, we all could use a little help here and there especially with this ever changing updates from Google.
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Getting Around the Site

Home - all the latest on SNC
SEO - our collection of SEO articles
Technical SEO - for the geeks
Latest News - latest news in search
Analytics - measure up and convert
RSS Rack - feeds from around the industry
Search - looking for something specific?
Authors - Author Login
SEO Training - Our sister site
Contact Us - get in touch with SNC

What's New?