info [ AT ] redcardinal [ DOT ] ie
Jazus, some of the results in Google are worse than terrible these days
I see some sites not worthy of the title "junk" ranking on link profiles that would make even the worst SEOs squirm.
New sites are getting a hall pass to use comment spam and shitty directory links, and all because Google now has to avoid Negative SEO.
I'm really starting to think that blackhats could have a field day with this (similar to the payday loans sites coming and going).
Google+: View post on Google+
This post was first made on the Richard Hearne Google+ profile.
How do they "avoid Negative SEO", mate?
Comment by Jim Munro — February 16, 2013 @ 11:51 am
Just my theory, but I suspect dirt doesn't stick for some time so spam will inflate rankings initially. After time the dirt will stick, but all this means is that the rinse and repeat strategy will likely work nicely (as seen in payday).
Comment by Richard Hearne — February 16, 2013 @ 11:59 am
I'll give you an example. I'm seeing a site rank at #2 for a language school related keyword. The keyword wouldn't have huge volume, but it's really valuable to the schools chasing this niche.
This site has come from nowhere. It's got the following stats:
Referring Domains 30 (26 in the last 5 years)
External Backlinks 58 (60 in the last 5 years)
Links are coming from comment spam (to show how low quality many are from nofollow .edu blogs) and direcory links. I cant find a single "quality" link.
The interesting thing is that most of their links started to appear after Nov 2012, so really fresh. I'm seeing more and more of this – dodgy link patterns that rank well because they are fresh. This makes an already bad SEO problem even worse because it means the junk SEO offers you get in your spam box daily can work initially. Later on your site will likely be dinged, but that's after the fact (and after you've paid the "SEO" agency).
I really think Google has created a dreadful black hole all due to their reliance on links for negative signals, and therefore enablement of NSEO. Sadly Google are creating NSEO with this silliness.
Comment by Richard Hearne — February 16, 2013 @ 12:10 pm
I see what you mean, Richard. Yes, I agree and think the entire NSEO saga has been clumsily handled but I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that they have stopped lying about it.
Comment by Jim Munro — February 16, 2013 @ 12:21 pm
I'm not sure they've ever been up front about this issue Jim.
Comment by Richard Hearne — February 16, 2013 @ 12:31 pm
I meant that the provision if the disavowal tool was the time that they came clean, finally.
Comment by Jim Munro — February 16, 2013 @ 12:48 pm
Aha.
Comment by Richard Hearne — February 16, 2013 @ 1:33 pm