Instead of the best and/or most creative links SEOs had built, what about the worst they’d seen on their SEOing exploits around the Web, whether it be through link analysis or more randomly?
I decided to ask a number of SEOs in the industry about their experiences, horror stories and/or funny encounters. There were a few caveats though:
No outing! All examples must be anonymous so as not to implicate anyone specifically.
It didn’t necessarily have to be the spammiest link they’d seen – I was also looking for links that had been poorly executed, incorrectly implemented, etc.
When asking for contributions, a few people declined, feeling a little uncomfortable with getting involved. I could understand, given the nature of the content. However when I had the idea, I never saw it as this negative or hateful post, and so I’m hoping people will see it as a good teaching point – i.e. certainly how not to build links! – and also get a few chuckles out of it.
NOTE: Even with the above caveats, it goes without saying that some of the examples are NSFW, so be careful if you’re reading at work! (I’ve labelled the ones that this applies to.)
As many SEOs will know, you have some clients who don’t want to get involved with the SEO at all (they just want you to do it all for them), but there are those who like to get stuck in and involved as well. I once had a client while at a previous agency who wanted to help out. I won’t say what industry he was in – let’s just say it was household furniture. Anyway, we’d had discussions about our link building process before (e.g. keep it relevant, keep it high quality, etc.) and so I assumed he had a good idea about the good ways and bad ways to obtain links.
A little while later, he got back to me and told me that he’d just bought 100 links! I was concerned immediately. 100 links at once? Paid links?! I asked him for examples – and that’s when I started to panic. 20 of them were on ‘health’ sites (yep, you guessed it: the ‘v’ word)! The funniest was one that had a blogroll containing a dozen links: 11 of them had anchor text such as “buy [pill name]” and “[another pill name] 100 mg” and in the middle of them? One link all on its own, the odd-one-out, with the anchor text: “buy pine furniture”.
If you’re pro-white-hat SEO then you’re going to love this post…
If you’re a WordPress blog owner like me then no doubt you’ll also be sick of the amount of blog comment spam your blog receives. This blog gets about 100-150 spam comments per day and because Akismet isn’t 100% accurate – and I’ve had quite a few false-positives (genuine comments marked as spam) – I usually have to glance through them all manually. Ack!
Why do people blog comment spam? It’s usually the case with lazy, ignorant or opportunist SEOs who want to get a lot of links easily. Using something like ScrapeBox or XRumer (note: link to Wikipedia, not to them directly), black-hats can fire off hundreds of comments on blogs. If even a fraction go live – on blogs that don’t allow for moderation or by blog owners who think they’re genuine – then that’s a fair few links for little effort.
…Or is it?
The Experiment
A while back, a friend of mine (a fellow SEO) and I decided to conduct an experiment. We would both try to find blog commenting opportunities and also leave comments on blogs linking to the same site, but take two different approaches:
His approach was slightly grey-hat: he used ScrapeBox to find the opportunities, although he would then submit to them manually with your typical generic “great post,” “this is amazeballs” and “you make me weak at the knees, good sir” type comments.
My approach was 100% white-hat: I would find blogs manually, actually read the content of the posts and reply with a meaningful comment that actually aligns with and responds to the post.
Given the fact that my friend was using a semi-black-hat/grey-hat approach, you’ll have to forgive me – and I’m sure you’ll understand – why I’m not revealing his identity. There you go, I said “his” – I’ve narrowed it down 50% for you. 🙂
Oh and we only had one hour (each) to do it. Game on!
The Results – Submission
The first phase was the scouting and submitting part of the process.
My ScrapeBoxing friend searched for blogs by keywords relevant to the site we were linking to. He found dozens of opportunities. However, as I mentioned previously, he still decided to submit to them manually. But hey, at least the first part was taken care of automatically, and sometimes finding the relevant blogs can be harder and more time-consuming than submitting to them.
By the time he was done, he had submitted comments on thirty blogs. As I said earlier though, they were fairly standard, generic comments. But still… thirty comments. That’s a lot in one hour – about one every two minutes.
Then it was my turn… Using an advanced Google search (probably something like [inurl:blog keyword] and set only to show pages from the past month), finding relevant blogs via my approach took longer and was more time-consuming. I found quite a few, sure, but with some of them, either they didn’t allow comments or I didn’t know how best to reply to the post, so inevitably I ended up visiting and reading more blog posts than actually commenting on them. I then took the time to carefully craft a response, something that the blog owner would surely appreciate and therefore publish.
How many did I manage? A paltry four – about one every fifteen minutes.
So, thirty vs… four. Ha. Here’s a graph to visually depict the difference:
Yeah, it’s not looking very good, is it?
But wait, there’s more…!
The Results – Approval
Submission is one thing, but what’s the point if they don’t even go live?
We waited a couple of weeks before revisiting all the blogs that we’d commented on, in order to allow ample time for them to be approved.
How many of the ScrapeBoxer’s comments went live, bearing in mind he’d submitted thirty? You ready? Wait for it…
One.
Yep, just one. Out of thirty. That’s a 3% success rate. Bahahaha! Sorry mate.
How many of mine went live? All four. A 100% success rate. Not only that, but two of the comments gained responses from other readers and/or the blog owners themselves, and – in one instance – I was also approached by one of the bloggers about a guest blog post opportunity.
Four comments may not sound incredible, but a) they encouraged interactions and led to other potential opportunities, and b) it still kicked the arse of the black-hat approach anyway, so there…!
Using the same scale as the previous graph, here’s the difference when it comes to the actual number of links acquired:
Who knew the quality approach would actually lead to more quantity, too?
The Conclusion
Don’t be disheartened, white-hats. I for one never would’ve suspected that a black-hat-led approach such as this would’ve failed so miserably. In fact, even if there had been more successful, with more than one comment going live, would it have led to the guest blogging opportunity or the replies from other readers? Probably not.
If anything, this just goes to show the importance of understanding the difference between links submitted and links that actually go live. After all, saying you’ve submitted links to thirty different sites may sound impressive, but if very few actually go live then what’s the point?
Anyway… Hooray for white-hat, long live white-hat, etc. Let’s just enjoy this small victory.
Guest blogging is possibly one of my favourite offsite SEO strategies. There’s tons of benefits in doing it and it’s (mainly) good, honest, ethical work. It’s certainly not an easy link building strategy (but then again, these days, link building shouldn’t be), but in my opinion, it’s worth it.
It seems as though the SEO world has ‘woken up’ to guest blogging this past year or so. Obviously there are those who have being doing it for longer or who have always carried it out, but now it’s considered a typical and popular strategy. Unfortunately though, when something gains popularity, there will be those who taint it – they’ll try to be lazy, cheat the system and automate it if they can.
A few industry peers have shared some of their guest blogging nightmares, from the perspective of the blogger accepting content. Mike King of iPullRank has shared an example of some low-quality spun content he was offered, while more recently, Mike Essex of Koozai has shared examples of some of the terrible outreach he has received, claiming that “around 80% of the guest blog requests [he] received went straight in the bin.”
Of course, the authors are not the only ones to blame. While some of those wanting links will try to do it in the easiest way possible, some of those giving the links will take advantage of the opportunity – and attempt to profit from it.
At my previous job, we tried to do a lot of guest blogging, not only on behalf of our clients but on behalf of ourselves as well. I first started guest blogging over a year ago (early-ish 2011). Back then, with one client, I didn’t have a single blog come back to me and say “actually, we only accept posts if you pay us as well.” For a later client, a couple of weeks ago, the 80/20 rule kicked in: in one industry, about 80% of the people I approached asked for payment in addition to the post that they were receiving for free. As I said earlier, I do wonder if the difference between the two times was not because of the types of industries (although it could’ve been a factor), but because people are getting wise to guest blogging, especially recently. After all, why give away something for free (i.e. a link from your blog) if you could make money from it?
A few weeks ago, I resorted to Twitter (as always!) to let off some steam:
Wow. Y’know I mentioned blog that only allows guest blog posts if you pay them £100? Just found one that wants £300 ANNUALLY. WTF?!
While I do see his point, and guest bloggers should be grateful for the exposure (even at a cost beyond the time it has taken to write the content and conduct the outreach), my concern is that the overall quality of guest blog posts – and therefore guest blogging as a practice as a whole – could be affected.
I’d argue that if someone is not charging money to receive guest blogs then quality will be an extremely important factor. They’ll only want good quality content and dismiss poor content and poor outreach (similar to the two Mikes I mentioned above). However, if someone says “pay me £100 and I’ll publish it,” is quality really going to be that big a concern to them? After all, for people who are that way inclined, if they had to choose an excellent post for free or a mediocre post that also earns them a tidy £100, which one would they choose?
And this is the problem. Guest blogging will become tainted and ultimately lose its shine and its value. Similar to infographics, which are a current concern due to the abuse they’ve been receiving in an attempt to get links. In an ideal guest blogging utopia, guest blogging is about offering good content for free, which is hosted and published for free. Everyone wins – the blog owner gets good content for free and for his/her troubles, the link builder gets a link. But when a spammer approaches a blog that accepts payment and may or may not give a crap about the quality of the content it receives, then we have a problem.
Unfortunately, guest blogging is becoming Article Marketing 2.0. Lazier, spammier SEOs think they can just send someone a spun article, give them a few quid and happy days. Instead of an article directory or a ‘fake’ blog network, the content is going on a more ‘legit’ blog (even if it’s not really more legit, but just looks that way), so the spammer gets the added benefit of looking less spammy, too.
I know it’s not something anyone can do about it, and that unfortunately this stuff happens. It’s the way it is. When something gets abused, it devalues the process for everyone, even for those who were playing nice and doing things properly.
But sometimes it’s good just to let off some steam, even if it’s just a few hundred words in a blog post.
Rant over.
[Image credits: “SEO” spinning top: Todd Hall (note: it actually says “SEQ,” but that “Q” looks so much like an “O,” don’t you think?); spam gift set: Seoulful Adventures]
In a few previous posts, I’ve talked SEOno news as well as guest blog posts I’ve written for other sites. Rather than having them as random, standalone posts, like some of thepreviousfew, I thought I’d start a series of them, as-and-when I have anything to share.
News
SEOno is in dire need of a proper custom design, but with my third and final instalment of my CAM Diploma course coming up over the next few months, it may be a couple of months off just yet. Besides, I prefer writing, so if I have to choose between the two, I’d much rather write a new post than go overboard with the blog’s design. Still, it’s something I have in mind (it’s just a matter of ‘when’)!
Guest Blog Posts
I’ve been quite busy the last few months, mainly writing stuff on behalf of Liberty Marketing:
I’ve had two posts published by the wonderful Ann Smarty (@seosmarty):
Last but not least, a recent post on behalf of both Liberty and Computer Recruiter is one I’m particularly proud of: How to Find Jobs Using Twitter Search for the GO Wales blog. This is a sort of follow-up to a similar post I wrote a while back for the Liberty blog on finding jobs using Google, however I think this one about Twitter Search is better explained and laid out. If anyone gives it a go then I’d love their feedback on it.
I have a few more exciting guest blog posts planned, which I’ll share in Part 2…
While Andrew tweeted like a madman (this tweet sums it up well!), I made a ton of notes, equalling 1,000 words – good fun on an iPad, let me tell you…!
Anyway, here are my top 10 takeaways from the event:
1. Bing: Social is a “strong signal” for content Talk:Panel – Ask the Engines with Pierre Far, Dave Coplin, Martin McDonald, Rishi Lakhani & Tony Goldstone
Straight from the horse’s mouth – Bing’s Director of Search Dave Coplin explained that social is used as a ranking signal in Bing. He even specified that they definitely take Facebook and Twitter into account, and those whose efforts are “bloody good” will be rewarded with better rankings.
2. ISO DateTime gives search engines context to dates Talk:Microformats & SEO – Glenn Jones, @glennjones
I’m still fairly new to the head-scratching-inducing world of schema.org and rich snippets, but I thought it was cool that “ISO DateTime” can give context to dates that search engines will understand. With so many ways to write a date (17th Apr 2012, 17/04/12, 2012-04-17, and so on), it can be used to clarify a date in one standard format. It can even be used when a date isn’t actually written, but a date is still suggested (e.g. “next Tuesday”).
Glenn’s slides can be found here. See slide 17 for more info.
3. What info to include when reporting on online PR Talk:How you can get BIG links from BIG media sites – Lexi Mills, @leximills
Lexi’s talk was by far my favourite at the event. In terms of reporting on online PR efforts, one should consider including:
Domain Authority of the site (not PageRank of the page: the article/content will be brand new on the site – as a brand new page – and therefore PageRank will be low (n/a) for that page to begin with, so for that reason, DA is a more sensible metric to use),
Whether the link is dofollow or nofollow,
Whether the link is an image or text,
The anchor text of the link.
I think the same easily applies to guest blogging as well.
4. Follow #prwin, #prfail and #journorequest for potential online PR opportunities Talk:How you can get BIG links from BIG media sites – Lexi Mills, @leximills
Another gem from Lexi. Keep an eye on the above hashtags for an opportunity to strike.
My tip: Want to filter it by industry? Add a keyword after each one, e.g. #journorequest fashion. You could have one (or a few) per client/site.
5. Tell clients their month-average ranking as well as/instead of their current ranking Talk:Maximizing your SEO Agencies – James Owen, @jamesoSEO
It’s happened to all of us… When we give our client their end-of-month report, they’ve performed consistently well all month, and then Sod’s Law strikes and on the 29th or 30th they’ll drop a few places. We give them their current rank and they wonder it’s been like that the whole time…
In those situations, it might also be worth including their average ranking over the month, so that you can say “yes, it is nth right now, but look at where it was before…!” Especially handy if it’s a temporary dip.
6. Say “Did I explain that clearly?” instead of “Did that make sense?” or “Did you get that?” Talk:Sell the Sizzle, Not The Search: Tactics for Appeasing Marketing Directors – Chelsea Blacker, @ChelseaBlacker
This is very timely for me. I’ve been meaning to write a post about sales/networking tips for non-sales people, and although Chelsea’s talk was applied to Marketing Directors and others within an organisation, I think it applies to any/all environments involving laymen.
After exploding someone’s head with overly-technical information, I’ll often say something like “do you know what I mean?”, which might leave the listener feeling a little silly (albeit unintentionally). However “did I explain that clearly?” is a softer approach and – chances are – I probably didn’t explain it clearly, so more accurate, too.
For me personally, this has been one of the most valuable takeaways of the event. Thank you Chelsea!
7. Use competitor downtime to your advantage… Talk:Enterprise SEO Titties (was that a typo or the actual title of the event in the end?!) – Tony King, @ToastedTeacake
All’s fair in love, war and search…
We all know that competitors bid on each others’ brand terms using PPC (especially big brands), in an attempt to cheekily pinch each other’s traffic before it reaches the site. But Tony made a very good point – if you notice that one of your main competitors is experiencing website downtime, increase your bids on those terms. That’s the time to strike, offering yourself as a (functioning) alternative to frustrated customers who could use you instead of waiting for their usual port-of-call website to get themselves sorted and fixed…
It’s cheeky as hell (although brilliant, mind you), but hey – they’d probably do it to you, too!
8. Shape your response to emotional highs (and use SEO and PPC accordingly) Talk:SEO & PPC Working Together in Harmony – Tim, @JellyfishAgency
Use SEO and PPC together, but for different reasons. As PPC can be turned on and off very quickly and ads can be shown at certain times of the day, it can be used to drive people to a website at a time when they might be feeling an “emotional high,” as Tim put it. Don’t just rely on SEO, when PPC could be used to draw in additional traffic that may be more inclined to read/react/buy compared to usual.
EDIT: Sorry, it was Tim who was speaking, not Craig! Cheers to @JellyfishAgency for clarifying!
9. Author Rank could be swayed by industry Talk:I Believe Authors are the Future – James Carson, @mrjamescarson
James’ talk was interesting – it’s early days for the likes of Author Rank, rel=author, etc., but it’s clear that Google is becoming more and more fixated in this area as time goes on.
James has a theory that in the future, Author Rank could differ by industry. Rather than a well-respected, high-ranking author always ranking well no matter what they publish, Author Rank could be determined by the consistency of what they publish by industry, based on their previous successes. For example, if a famous fashion blogger suddenly blogged about football, it may not necessarily rank well – even if their fashion posts usually do – because it is inconsistent of what they’re known and respected for.
10. Mascots can cause a reaction (but be a distraction) Talk:I appear to have started a sweetshop (and advertising company) – Dom Hodgson, @Thehodge
Dom easily wins the award for the most entertaining talk of the day (as I’m sure fellow attendeanales reading this will agree…)
Dom originally used a mascot – a “f***ing squirrel,” as he so eloquently put it! – on the first design of his sweet shop website. Although they had a lot of social media mentions revolving around said mascot to begin with (“did that squirrel just f***ing wink at me?!”), showing initial promising signs that his(?) inclusion was a good move, they decided to “kill” the squirrel and eventually removed it from the site. Why? Because an eye-tracking test showed that visitors were distracted by the squirrel, and in some cases it might’ve been such a distraction that it was putting some customers off from buying anything.
I found this fascinating. It just goes to show that even if people say something positive via social, it may not actually be a positive for the website or company.
11./Bonus: Advanced Search String Queries for SEO Talk:Word from a Sponsor – Analytics SEO, @analyticsseo
Ok, so I lied – I’ve included an 11th takeaway, as while writing this post, I remembered another good takeaway from one of the sponsors – Analytics SEO – who used their ‘sponsor message’ section to share their list of advanced search string queries for SEO.
So that’s it! That’s some of the words from the 1,000-word tome that’s left me with aching fingertips and a low iPad battery…
I’d like to take the opportunity to thank a few people:
Analytics SEO, who ran the ticket competition and therefore the whole reason I managed to go,
Kelvin (@kelvinnewman), the event’s organiser, for his help and patience with the infamous ‘ticket confusion’ on Thursday,
The man who bought me a shot of sambuca because I apologised for accidentally queue-jumping him at the bar at the afterparty. Alcohol + poor memory (generally) = I’ve forgotten your name, but if you tweet me and remind me then I’ll edit this post and link to you as promised. (And before anyone tries pulling a fast one, I’ll know the name when I see it!),
The magician (@mcrmagic), for blowing my mind to smithereens.
Oh and for anyone reading this who enjoyed the karaoke at the afterparty, I’m the guy who sang the Foo Fighters song. I apologise for the high bits!
EDIT (03/05/12): I thought I’d share this awesome infographic as well…
Steve Morgan
