St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 07/08/2004 05:29 pm
First, lets get the obvious out of the way: Linking is important to achieve rankings on the SEs (especially Google).
Along with that I firmly believe that SE (especially Google) are looking for ways to weed out links that are not relevant, not important, purchased or simply swapped, and want to favor links that appear to have a purpose (read: more valuable).
Because the search engines are always changing algos, it is imperative that SEO firms work to stay ahead of the curve and be forward thinking for new strategies. Anybody who's been in the business for more than a couple of years knows that today's common practice is tomorrow's spam, especially when it involves unnatural manipulation of sites, links, etc.
Link popularity building (swapping or one-way links) could be (and probably is) viewed by the search engines as just this sort of practice.
It is my opinion that Google and others will soon devalue "link" pages. For one, how relevant is a link on a page with 50 other links? Two, how hard is it to program an algo to devalue any link on any page considered to be a "link page"?
Google has stated that the value of a particular link is divided by the number of other outgoing links on the page. (I'm going from memory here so don't shoot me if I'm wrong.) For a crude example, lets say that a particular page can give out 100 PR points (I made this up, just bear with me). if there are 50 links on the page, each linked page only gets 2 PR points. If 100 links on the page, the linked page only gets 1 PR point. If only one link on the page the linked page gets 100 PR points.
So the obvious goal is to be the ONLY outgoing link on a page in order to get the full outgoing PR value. In the current culture of link swaps and link directories this is virtually impossible, you're certainly not very likely to get many people to link to you off their home page (yes, there are exceptions). So if link pages are on their way to just being another page of worthless clutter to the SE algo, what is the solution?
A New and Positive Way to Link
What is the web supposed to be? A resource for good quality content. What is it the search engines are supposed to favor? Good quality content. Most link pages don't fall under that description.
My own company has just started a new linking program to exchange articles rather than links. I'm sure I'm not the only way who has thought of this, but I've yet to see anything definitive out there or a even a small minority of SEOs actively doing such.
Here is what we are doing. Instead of trading links we trade new and unique content. That content is placed on a new page linked from a master "Industry Articles" page which is linked into the primary navigation. Within the content are two links, one internal, back to the home page of the main site and one external link to the linked site.
If the article pages are link as they should be those pages would soon be spidered by the SE's and develop a PR of their own. The PR does not have to be great because instead of sharing the link value with 20, 50, or 100 other links, you are getting the total outgoing PR value. On top of that the web is being populated not with junk link pages but unique valuable content.
Admittedly, its a tougher sell, but so was link exchanges just a year ago before people were educated on the value of linking. But as I said before, anything prone to manipulation is eventually doomed to be devalued. I strongly believe link pages are headed that way. On the other hand, swapping articles is EXACTLY what search engines claim to want, valuable unique content. And if that content links to you, even better.
I'm interested in hearing your thoughts and opinions on this. I'm sure there are some cons that I may not have thought of and perhaps some pros as well.
|
 |
Tigresa
Joined: Dec 23, 2003
# Posts: 42
|
Posted: 07/09/2004 11:27 am
I believe you are right on the money with this one  it is only a matter of time before Google and other Engines decide to put more value on content regarding linking rather than the link itself. In the past 3 years I've been in this business it has gone through so many changes regarding how the engines index, process relevancy and even how your site is submitted and what is most relevant in ranking for natural search.
I'd be very interested in your ideas on this subject. Contact me privately if you wish.
Tig
|
|
bigowl
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 07/14/2004 02:27 am
I also belive that you are right on the money.
Certain companies have been manipulating Link popularity for years, abusing the fact that 1000 links from sites with a pr of 1 is that same as one link from a site with a pr of a 1000. I work within the finance industry and I'm contantly getting knocked down the SE because of some other site thats got 400 links from some mini directory in california selling hotels and slimming pills.
The se will find an answer to this and it will mean that in the future if you want a high ranking the only way to do it is get good quality links from pages that have high value, relevant copy.
I write copy myself for certain sites and its true that copy written like independent articles works better than copy written like a corporate brochure. There are hundereds of other SEO copywiters out there doing the same.
I like the idea of raising the bar, and offer my help if you need it.
|
|
dcaff03
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 142
|
Posted: 07/14/2004 06:16 am
Yes...content is by far the meat of the matter... though one can quickly write up something that will perform for the bots but not be very useful for the visitor...
To maximize the value in your investment and time with this methodology...I would recommend a stringent quality control program...or you just may end up with a bunch of useless junk articles in the future that would have to be re-written...
I know of another firm that is using this approach in a slightly different way...but when I read their content I find that it is not written well and I, as a user, want to move on quickly...though the bots may find it somewhat nurishing...
My philosophy is to always address usability (function/form/content/context) first and then the search engines will always respond well..
Of course the game is to list well...so don't forget about writing broadly for the word stemming algo..
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 07/14/2004 05:22 pm
100% agree that the content articles must have solid content, otherwise we're just building a new kind of "doorway" page.
Solid articles with unique text, not regurgitated from a website. That's the plan on this end.
I appreciate the comments on this thread. I think educating people is the best way to make a program like this work for the masses.
|
|
shannanrohde
Joined: Jul 13, 2004
# Posts: 8
|
Posted: 07/15/2004 08:17 am
I agree but also would that be concidered link farming. As far as the artical swapping, I would think that the relevance of the page goes up. I am also looking in on that with XML and RSS feeds. What do you think?
|
|
bhartzer
Administrator
Joined: Jun 08, 2000
# Posts: 7035
|
Posted: 07/15/2004 11:08 am
Great post, as always, St0n3y.
The only question I have is in regards to possible duplicate content. If your article is simply traded with another site, then you're going to run into duplicate content issues. So, to get around that you'd have to make a different version of the article for each site you trade articles with--which could be rather time-consuming.
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 07/15/2004 04:48 pm
bhartzer, if the same article was traded, you're right, that would be a dupe. This is where and how it gets difficult, each and every article must be unique. I would never use the same article to place on other sites, nor would I swap the same article between two sites.
shannanrohde, why would this be considered link farming? Each link is supporting by unique and relevant content. Not something you get out of standard link exchanges.
|
|
dcaff03
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 142
|
Posted: 07/18/2004 04:50 pm
I think that the "content articles" will have to be multi-page in order to be truly effective with Google's new word stemming algo in place and being tweaked daily..
A single page article with a strategic link(s) embedded and then "swapped" with another Web site...comes too close to a doorway page type arrangement...
The article would have to be very carefully integrated wherever it ends up...you want continuity across a site's content..
...take a look at this site... articleinsider.com ... it is a product of another SEO firm and is nothing more than mediocre content writing to game the engines and with the predictable "Visit our recommended partner" click through to client scheme...
|
|
g1smd
Moderator
Joined: Jul 28, 2002
# Posts: 10183
|
Posted: 07/19/2004 12:25 pm
Hmmm; aren't they tied up with Traffic-Logic in some way?
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 07/19/2004 12:47 pm
I think that the "content articles" will have to be multi-page in order to be truly effective with Google's new word stemming algo in place and being tweaked daily.
All good points and things we have considered before moving forward with this program: article would be its own unique page, not a bunch of articles on one page.
A single page article with a strategic link(s) embedded and then "swapped" with another Web site...comes too close to a doorway page type arrangement...
The actual article would not be swapped, the swap would be two different articles, one unique article for each site.
The article would have to be very carefully integrated wherever it ends up...you want continuity across a site's content.
absolutely! very important.
|
|
dcaff03
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 142
|
Posted: 07/19/2004 02:32 pm
yes g1smd...
This is traffic-logic's content project...
|
|
treacherousdog
Joined: Dec 09, 2003
# Posts: 17
|
Posted: 07/22/2004 12:03 pm
This is the premise behind my concept of business blogging. I haven't actually found too many sites that want to actually trade articles yet unfortunately. If you have news dealing with computers I'll gladly work with you on providing news at www.jltinc.com. I have chosen to keep the blog separate from our official site with consistent branding and references to our main page. This allows me to more freely post content but also spread our corporate site at the same time.
|
|
nickn0783
Joined: Mar 26, 2002
# Posts: 1371
|
Posted: 07/23/2004 02:05 am
I would be careful as for every honest person there is a dishonest one who likes to cut corners.
IMO swapping unique articles is a good way to both increase the size of your site, and your PR... BUT if your trade partner decides to re-use their article a few times then it will be you who will be picking up a penalty for duplicate content, not them.
I would much prefer swapping product/service reviews with a client/supplier etc. If you want to go one step further why not conduct an interview and write it up in your own words?Quoting 'magazine style' and providing an appropriate link. It may not be as easy but it's definately unique and gives you more control for editing and optimisation.
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 07/26/2004 02:27 pm
That is also an excellent way to go. I must stress that it is absolutely important that the articles not be reused. We are requiring an agreement to such.
|
|
greenleaves
Joined: Mar 21, 2002
# Posts: 720
|
Posted: 08/02/2004 09:47 am
BUT if your trade partner decides to re-use their article a few times then it will be you who will be picking up a penalty for duplicate content, not them.
You wouldn't get penalised. Plenty of content is duplicated (poems, lyrics, etc) but I strongly believe dup content doesn't rank as well as original (this is just a suspision, not a fact)
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 08/03/2004 11:46 am
I would tend to agree with that. Lots of dup content out there, but unique is substantially more valuable.
|
|
cz
Joined: Oct 06, 2002
# Posts: 50
|
Posted: 08/14/2004 12:47 pm
What about using unique copy from a company's business blog? Blog is hosted "off-site" and 100's of articles. If the business who runs the blog & the commercial site brought one 300 - 500 word article on to the business site from the blog, would this put them in a precarious position for duplicate content?
|
|
dcaff03
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 142
|
Posted: 08/14/2004 05:04 pm
I would think that if the "off site" blog has been indexed either in whole or in part...and if the content you want to bring across has been indexed then the answer to your question is "yes"....this could trigger a duplicate content penalty and your newly place article page would not produce the desired results..
When you say "off site" I take it to mean that the blog is in no way attached to your primary web site?...
duplicate content is just that...duplicate content..and Google seems to be pretty good at catching this sort of thing...though there are plenty of examples of "borrowed" content showing up in the SERPs...
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 08/16/2004 12:37 pm
yep, a dupe is a dupe, regardless of where its found, as long as its found on the web.
|
|
