Matt Cutts blogged that Google would like you, the average search engine user, to report on sites you feel are displaying links for cash. This created a firestorm of negative responses from the SEO, webmaster, and free speech crowd. Below, I put together what I feel are the top 7 reasons Google's paid link snitch plan sucks. I linked to my inspirations (No payment requested!).
 |
| Worried About Google's Link Snitch Program? |
 |
1. Links are valuable because of the Page Rank display in the Google Toolbar. Matt, if Google doesn't like the way paid links influence search results, then eliminate the scoreboard. It's hard to take your call-to-action seriously when you have the power to grind serious link buying to a halt all by yourself.
If people had to guess a page rank, most of their motivation for buying links would go away. Of course, Google won't eliminate the green bar because that is the number one reason the Google search engine is at the top of most web browsers.
2. Most people that post on Digg, or add articles to Wikipedia, or work as editors at DMOZ also send paid link reports to Google to benefit themselves in some way. My point: Anyone taking the time to send complaints to Google about a paid link that hurts no one and may even be relevant, probably has unseen motivations.
One of the problems is that there is no other motivation I can see to report a paid link than to help Google out. It's not like paid links irritate the end user like poor search results do. Therefore, the detection these reports offer will be of no value to Google.
3. It's impossible to define a paid link exactly. Paying cash is obviously what you meant, but is that any different than a link to a client or to a buddy who helped you submit your site to 1,000 free web directories?
If I'm right with that assumption, then it's really about determining motivation. Humans cannot determine motivations any better than the Google algorithm. It's a virtual coin toss!
4. Payment can be proven only by following the money trail. Otherwise, it is simply a case of 'he said, she said.' This creates a heavy burden on Google to be correct in their assumptions.
5. Marketing Pilgrim's Andy Beal asks: "What business does Google have in dictating the disclosure of any business relationships on others?"
Google, you are just a search engine. You should be reacting to the internet world, not trying to recreate it in your own image. Links are not evil and payment for links is not evil. The Web is based on links, link-trading and advertising, which of course is payment for links.
6. The hypocrisy of being in the business of selling links and then asking others not to sell them is a bit much for many webmasters.
7. Is this just a way to create more spending for Google AdWords? Stopping the selling of links will make AdWords one of the last ways to generate traffic from Google. If the link police can slow this to a crawl, then what will businesses do?
They'll buy AdWords!
What Do You Think About Paid Links?Retailers Panic Over Google Site SearchThe SEO Playbook (Welcome to the Rabbit Hole)Yahoo Patent Filing Sheds Light On PageRank Cutts, Sullivan Weigh In On Paid LinksIs Google Hitting Directory Links? Google Slams Paid Links? Good or Bad?Googler Games Google; Cutts Goes SilentSearch Engine Optimisation (SEO) and Search Engine SPAMThe Meta Search Engines: A Web Searcher's Best Friends
Comments
Depends on the link
I think that as long as you are not selling the link based on Pagerank, but your selling the link/banner whatever because you are a content related site and need advertising money, I don't any problem with that.
Google getting too big for their boots
Agreed - things at Google seem to be going in the wrong direction if they want to maintain user trust and admiration.
I see a backlash brewing against Google. They are getting a little too big and arbitrary.
Tanzanite
Lousy program
I think the program is lousy. It pretty much forces owners to snitch on other owners, when the real issue with the mechanics of the operating algorithm of Google.com itself.
Guitarstatic.com
Thanks for the article. I hate the way one search engine controls everything.
http://www.guitarstatic.com - Free guitar lessons and videos
Thumbs up to the Program
I think the program is great actually. It forces owners to have to look at their own standards and write quality information that makes sense for their website as opposed to simply gobbling up links to get rankings and then providing crappy content. With this in place, owners know there is the chance that other webmasters could report them, so they consider more carefully what they do. It is not different than Counterattack or The Paid Snitch programs that the police use, which work.
Google is just protecting
Google is just protecting itself. Paid links could be a business model that would actually compete with Google in a big way. If they squash this possibility before a competent potential competitor is able to implement that business model successfully , they have effectively nipped the problem in the bud. This is Google squash in action.
Well Written
Great article
nice article
very good article, thanks
Scare Tactic
I agree with the "SEE THROUGH THE SMOKESCREEN" comment.
This could be just a scare tactic. I would think the manpower needed to track and penalize even a small majority of paid link sites would be monumental. Because Google cannot afford to abolish their link weight measurement completely, I think we're all pretty safe as long as we do not 'over utilize' paid links.
'The best links are the ones you need to pick up the phone to get' - ahh if only we were back to that.
The Fence Sitter
I was originally going to comment on the post - but, as it stands, the comments compel me comment.
I remember the first day someone told me to Google it. It was a person I trusted, we had been through a lot together: Macintosh II, Duke Nukem over dial up, windows 95 boot disks, the works. I was getting frustrated searching for a file for flashing my bios - i think I was using metacrawler way back in the day. Anyways, I 'Googled it." I couldnt believe what I as seeing - the site in #1 had exactly what I needed - I was instantly converted!
Fast forward. Enter spam. Enter pop ups. Enter SEO.
Let's face it, as much as Google screws things up (their intent notwithstanding), user content and manipulation has made the search engine what it is, and what is isn't. My point?
My point is that there are those who are of the opinion that Google is a SE and does not guarantee anything to anyone - and, some argue, the fact that Google has such a large market share due to their (initially) efficient engine and market savvy, then we really have no right to complain on any changes that they make, especially when we argue only because it is getting in the way of us, as SEO's, making money. Then there are those who argue that Google wouldn't be what it is if it wasn't for us, the surfer, the user, the content and spirit.
Both opinions are correct - there is no right and wrong, the relationship is a perfect example of symbiosis. One problem - one side seems to have all the control. So, for the comments, while I do not particularly like the changes that Google makes (for examples, simply read through WPN archives), I still cannot cry oppression - Google is a tool, and I use that tool to make money! Google never asked me to partner with them. Google never guaranteed me anything. At best, I have manipulated Google in order to make money. If that weren't true, I would simply type up a nice website, add lots of cool flash, upload and *hope* lots of people came.
================================================
Now, I must submit - when Google starts asking people to fink out on paid linkage, this does really get my goat. I'll have to do more research to have a real opinion on this. To me, paid linkage is another way of taking advantage of the Google algorithms, and in that sense, Google has a right to change their algorothms when they see fit - but crossing the line and looking for finkers is downright 'nasty' and reeks of underhandedness and sneak tactics. If this is indeed true, I may stop posting fence sitting comments altogether and join the Force.
Great post, great comments.
Great article
Great article. Look forward to reading more from you.
intersting
interesting viewpoint on a very topical subject.
Excellent points you've
Excellent points you've mentioned. Google definitely loves money..
WSOP 2008
You raise some good points Rich will be interesting to see how this develops relations between google and paid advertising
Paid Links Sucks
Very Good articles.
Vb Interview Questions
Don't Bite the Hand that Feeds
Google needs to establish rulesets like this so that it conveys an image of having control over its own ranking system.
The fact is, it is unlikely paid link reports get very far.
See Through the Smokescreen
Let's face it, what is really going on has nothing to do with Google actually verifying or validating paid links reports. The move was likely done as a scare tactic so that people considering links in the SEO field as a tactic for clients would think twice. Ultimately this scares and prevents about 94% of the SEO's out there.
The other 6% are well ahead of the game and could care less because if they bought links, they did so in a manner that had no footprint, paper trail and only did it on authority reputable sites - the kind of website you have to pick up a phone and call.
Google AdWords
Paying to other webmaster is not allowed. Paying to AdWords is welcome. Google is KING!?
No Choice My Friend
Google will just grow more
Google will just grow more Nazi-like as time passes anyway. There is no way any corporation can not do "evil" sooner or later. Behemoths will always end up stepping on random innocent people.
Soon they will become the evil empire they used to stand against, and something small and unanticipated will become a new safe haven. At least I hope so because Google certainly gets more annoying every year.
Is it time for a bit of spite?
I have to say that telling me not to sell MY ad space to others shows exactly why we don't allow socialism and communism in America. Centralized power is ALWAYS Abused.
What is up with MSN? I would gladly put their ad box on my 100,000 + pages if they would issue the program just to spite google at this point. I have tried to work with Yahoo but they have a staff who can't tell the difference between quality perfomance and the garbage they have.
One of the big things Google can do is STOP paying Foreign website owners for US traffic. If your sending 20 million a month to the CZech republic and China it might give you a clue to poor search results problem.
If they use the list of WHO snitches as a way to find people trying to manipulate the listings it would be better than punishing those that got snitched on.
Now as a website owner I have to have fears about selling advertising and buying it from anyone but google? Why does my search engine want me to fear them?
I agree, I have thought many
I agree, I have thought many times about moving away from Google completely. People being punished for selling links, by a company that makes its money from selling links is just stupid!
Reporting Paid Links
Hmmm...let's all bombard Google with reports about ALL of the Adwords links we find.
Might send them a message if they got a few million of those.
;-)
Here here!
My competitors' paid links just gunk up the SERPS. I'm reporting 'em!
Matt Cutts and Google
This latest move on paid links has really pushed me over the edge. I will be dropping my Gmail accounts, Google Analytics accounts, Adsense account and generally not using the search engine (hello Yahoo, MSN and Ask). This is my little way of not buying into the Google monopoly. I hope that others will follow.
It (Google) all started out so innocent, but so do so many dictators....:-(
Right on
http://www.braintrove.com
If people live in fear of losing their Google rank just because they shared links, then what's the point?
Well someone agrees with you
Well someone agrees with you so much that they've reprinted your article verbatim without credit - as is the same for most of their site;
http:// adsensere venuepro.com/forum/showthread.php?t=208
Do No Evil?
I thought it was evil to fink on someone? Okay, we're not talking about breaking the general law, but Google's perception on how the web should be developed.
I see a backlash brewing against Google. They are getting a little too big for many of us.
MattK
http://www.thearticlewriter.com/blog
Link report
I see a purpose behind it, but from my experience with any report option Google has given us in the past, the results have been more hurtful than helpful for them as well as the community of webmasters and web searchers.
Mike Damman
http://www.frogengine.com
MONOPOLY investigation
If google is using it's market position to intimidate people from doing business with each other (i.e. buy/sell links), google should be INVESTIGATED FOR ANTITRUST practices and should be BROKEN UP into smaller competing companies.
If they don't want that to happen, they should stop being so GREEDY.
Since they asked for it, let's REALLY give it to them...
Since they asked for it, let's give them a report of every bloody site on the Internet that has paid links on it...
And that includes AdSense, Yahoo! Search Network, DoubleClick ads etc etc. Basically, i'd love to see Matt Cutts and Google flooded with emails showing ALL the sites in the world which actually use paid links!!
That'll teach 'em "Do No Evil unless it benefits Google" fellas!
Paid links suck
Rich, in the WP newsletter you stated that nobody likes this idea, that's not true. If you read the comments there are a number of people optimistic about this potential development, others are not getting in a tiz and waiting for FACTS. There are however a large number of sheep that have been scared into thinking it's bad by the talentless whingers who's businesses SURVIVE on extracting large sums of money from businesses with big purses. A few links and enough ££s gets you to the top of the SERPs with almost zero effort and if this level of manipulation was reduced or eliminated maybe people will actually have to start doing some real work such as improving the content and maybe even the product, to get the site ranking well. Yes I am an SEO, no i don't buy links (don't start getting silly asking for definition of what a paid link is - you all know exactly what they mean!), yes i have bought links in the past (for riduculous £££s!) and yes i do still enjoy excellent ranks for my very well deserving clients. As for the snitching, there have always been spam reports and plenty of you won't hesitate snitching that top ten ranking website for using less than google friendly methods, dont start claiming 'loyalty to your brothers' now.
sucking links
I agree! I am also not sure that everyone here has actually read what Matt said. He must have really hit a tender spot, touched off some guilty feelings or something! The bottom line is that a page should stand on its own merits,if you want to spend money, to get more people to click on your site, buy advertising, (that is what the paid links are)just don't cloak it with fake popularity, to get it through page rank. The playing field has been unleveled by the paid links!
Search Engines Monopoly
Hi
Hmmmm, i smell it is something cooking in Google's Kitchen. Let's watch, and wonder if their is anything to eat for us (SEO).
Cheers
Nawaz
http://my.opera.com/SEO_Specialist
The sky is falling!!
Do Google Adsense links pass PR from the site hosting the links to the site paying for the links?
No, of course they don't so those claiming hypocrisy need to look for a different bone to pick.
Does having Google Adsense on one's site knock one out of the SERP's?
No, of course not so those thinking that selling links will no longer be allowed need to look for a different cause for the end of the world.
Does using Google Adsense as an advertising tool knock one's site out of the SERPs?
No, of course not so those thinking that they could knock a competitor out of the ring simply by placing a link to their site on yours and then reporting it to Google need a different excuse to claim the Apocalypse is coming.
Would any of you Doom-n-Gloomers NOT rip a blogger to pieces who it was found out reviewed Microsoft Vista and DIDN'T also happen to mention they had been given a fancy pants laptop free?
Why is that? Maybe because you deserve to know that so as to be able to make an informed opinion about the credibility of the review?
If the credibility of what a blogger happens to review is dependent on full disclosure, why shouldn't links, which in effect are a positive endorsement for the linked to page?
Has not Google, for some time now, made it possible for people to report Adsense being used improperly or being used to gain benefit from sites that scrape just about all of us and by so doing, reduce the quality of the ewb in general not to mention the SERPs themselves?
Does one think that a simple report is going to get any given site wiped off the face of the earth simply due to the report itself?
Did one see any mention at all that reports would even be used in a way that would negatively impact any site reported?
Is one a "snitch" when reporting scrape sites effectively spamming the SERPs with their ad filled auto-generated shyte?
Some valid questions have been mentioned by others, such as how can it be determined that a link is indeed paid for or what will be the effect or resulting value of a link determined to be paid but I for one do not believe Satan is soon to walk the earth torching and burning all the Netizens in his path and that some of you would seem better off just chilling out a bit and engaging mind before engaging the reply button.
The sky isn't falling, but....
Craig,
Thanks for your comment, but I think there are legitimate concerns that matter because Google has tremendous market share. We don't sell or buy links at WebProNews but I don't like the idea of the Web's most powerful internet traffic driver asking us to send in "crime watch" type reports on our internet neighbors.
They probably have the best of intent, but it is simply wrong to ask web surfers to send in reports of paid links when obviously they have no way of knowing these links are truely paid for. Since these reports are not proof ... why ask for them?
Additionally, you stated that links are a positive endorsement of a page. Actually, that is not true. Sites simply link as a way of giving more information to their visitors. Links were never intended as a vote or recomendation.
Lastly, if Google removed its scoreboard in the Google Toolbar the game would be difficult to play.
Thanks,
Rich Ord CEO, iEntry, Inc. Publisher of WebProNews
Yes, but...
So you would also have a problem with the existing spam reports, right?
If that is the case, we do not have a problem as each is free to their own opinion as long as they are consistent and I just happen to have a different one so, no problem.
Why ask for them, to collect more data. With enough data, both good and bad, patterns begin to emerge.
Links without the "nofollow" rel attribute value are, from a PageRank/SE point of view a positive endorsement. That is one of the basic facts upon which SEs operate. One can dress it up in whatever "clothes" one wants to but when all is stripped away, a given link, without the rel=nofollow, on a given page indicates a positive vote for the page it links to.
Matt seems to have said that a paid link would cause no problems at all if it were nofollow'ed but were that done, do you think people would be buying the links they are buying?
Even if the toolbar e-penis were to go away, which I would REALLY REALLY like for other reasons, it wouldn't change very much.
The value of a given link would simply switch from being determined by PageRank to a given site's Alexa rating, much as it is for AdBrite.
But, with AdBrite ads, one not only knows those are ads but more importantly, search engines do as well so those ads cause no flow of PageRank.
Paid Links
Okay, so I guess I should report Google to Google, because they charge me to effectively place a link on their site that I pay them for each time someone clicks on it. But I guess they want to make sure they are the only ones who can do this? Uh, I guess that's why we don't like monopolies and we fear the power of a market dominator. Please ....
Paid links
My views also entirely
Paid Links
You said, that no one likes this idea, were we reading the same blog?
I think so....
James -- Matt has 303 comments on his blog so far and by far most comments are not in favor of this snitch plan. Maybe you are not looking at the right post . Here is the link again.
Rich Ord CEO, iEntry, Inc. Publisher of WebProNews
paid links
I looked at it again, and I didn't take the time to tally, but it looks about neck in neck. Besides, something needs to be done, this may not be it, but there are a lot of sites out there, with little info of value, and very high page rank. A distinction of some sort, between advertising, which I see as being the nature of paid links, and links which serve as channels to and from real information. I am a novice, and just have a business site, that I never intended to use for advertisement purposes, only as a brochure of my services, which most people will get to by typing in the url from a biz card, and some info sites my customers kan find when they get there, so I don't have an ax to grind. I just think the system needs some work, and this may be their way of doing that. Perhaps a two level system, might work.
Hypocrisy
"6. The hypocrisy of being in the business of selling links and then asking others not to sell them is a bit much.." Period.
I am so glad bigger SEO players are waking up to google getting out of control.
They use OUR web sites as the basis of their entire business model, and then tell us we can't make money when they've made billions.
Not to mention creating search algorithms, and then penalizing us for using them!
They've destroyed me and I'm just one little ol' grandma in the middle of nowhere. No idea what I did to make the google gods mad, but after ten years of a minimal income from a travel web site, I'm bankrupt.
Wake up while you've got the chance!
Matt Cutts
you mention the "average" user . . are you sure?
Matt has targeted this comment at people who are specifically interested in SEO/SEM - not exactly your average user?
For example, how many people know that they can complain about MFA sites? by clicking on the ads by google link.
Google is asking people "in the know" to make a positive contribution to ensuring that the "average user" does not get swamped by MFA sites and scraped directories when they search for home insurance, shopping, and holidays!
Think about it folks . . how pleased are you when you search for something and just get the crap sites that can afford to pay for traffic from any means?
paid links
AMEN!
Paid Links
Here is a link:
http://www.searchen.com
Now how sure are you that I did not pay for the link to be there?
Somewhat Sure?
Really Sure?
Almost Positive?
So what happens if I strategically place a sitewide footer link to one of my top competitors and report them for buying links. Can I effectively ZAP their link passing juice. Will it effect their "trust" passing influence?
Hmm, a relatively simple, effective and clever tactic to negitivelly effect someone elses business...
Now I wouldn't do it, but many will if this is the recipe we are creating here.
Depends...
A single link on a single site? Impossible to know and anyway, what effect is a single link going to have in the larger scheme of things?
A dozen links on a dozen different sites? Still difficult to tell but again, still not that important either way from a PR point of view?
A hundred links on a hundred different sites? Getting easier to tell.
Thousand of links? Positive.
The devil is in the details.
Google bastards Hypocrites
I have a site where google sells links on my site:
http://prepressforums.com
Google sells links on my site actually (brokers) links. If a guy wants traffic he buys links from Google.
For Google to say that this SAME PRACTICE is not legitimate EXCEPT by Google is total hypocracy. They suck. They are taking over the internet and can take your site to no-mans land in a second, arbitrarily.
In any other business venue this would not be legal for a business to arbitrarily influence another like Google does. There must be an anti-google that works with more fair and open dealing.
Like googles ads, back to their selling links. How much profit do they get? They don't disclose that. Oh, really. I wonder why the publishers share keeps shrinking but click costs are rising.. hmmm. Not only do they arbitrarily affect your ability to do business, but they give themselves an arbitrary raise, anytime. It's time for disclosure for google, time for fairness, time to respond to webmasters questions and problems. Who the F#*k do they think they are. Like they have taken over the internet totally, screw matt and google too.
Sewing Their Own Path
How much more of this can we take. Google's paid links are out of control. Now they are hiding even better paid results (ADS to the highest bidder) and organic results. Actions are much louder than words Matt Cutts. Sooner or later the other search engines will learn like Google to give us relevant results not who the heck can pay your corporate conglamorate the highest BRIBE.
Say what?
"paid results . . . organic results"
I think you might be thinking of Yahoo, no?
If what you say is true than some of my competitors are getting screwed because they advertise using Adsense whereas I don't yet I consistently show up higher in the SERPs than they do for just about every single keyword/phrase I've come across.
Maybe they should ask for their money back?
Post new comment