Article Backlinks = Junk?

[momo3]

Question One:

Are syndicated article backlinks junk? I've just heard this from someone.

Question Two:

How do you know if something (such as a syndicated article) is indexed? Just type a portion unique to the page in quotations on google?

[TZ]

There is always debate on this, but I have tested article marketing a few times.

The pages I promoted with these backlinks took longer to get traffic than the pages I just let Google find on it's own sweet time.

I wrote an article once called; Artificial linking is dead

I believe this still to be true.

[sijugk]

I read your article and which make me nervous. May be you are over imagining or just another Search Engine algorithm change...

[TZ]

Originally Posted by sijugk

I read your article and which make me nervous. May be you are over imagining or just another Search Engine algorithm change...

Don't be nervous. Google won't hurt you for doing some article linking. They just won't reward you as much as they used to.

I watch the search engine news ALLOT and there seems to be a push towards using bounce rate more in determining a web page's value.

You can't artificially manipulate bounce rate like you can linking.

[sijugk]

Originally Posted by TZ

Don't be nervous. Google won't hurt you for doing some article linking. They just won't reward you as much as they used to.

I watch the search engine news ALLOT and there seems to be a push towards using bounce rate more in determining a web page's value.

You can't artificially manipulate bounce rate like you can linking.

Yea I am not.

About bounce rate: I cannot agree about making bounce rate as the quality measure for a website or the article. Bounce rate depends on niche too.

[momo3]

I agree on bounce rate. Google can see more of our actions now with personalized search.

[rockfuse]

makes no sense for bounce rates , if I own a doctors website and people go to my site see my number call me and leave , does not make my site less valuable but gives me what looks like a horrible bounce rate .

[silver93350]

I have read bounce rates are becoming a huge factor in 2011's algo, as well as social media. I don't know how they can put bounce rates in there, but I guess building solid content is a great way to combat that.

I always try to mix up my backlinks so there is a huge variety and it has helped me a ton over the years. Never stick with one thing, articles, social media, blogs, forums, yahoo answers, guest post, videos, the list could go on and on.

Google will really reward you for this, trust me!

[HowardRoark]

They are only junk if you write poor content. In order to have a successful article marketing plan you need to write high quality content and link to high quality content.

[halfpoint]

Originally Posted by HowardRoark

They are only junk if you write poor content. In order to have a successful article marketing plan you need to write high quality content and link to high quality content.

And what, exactly, is "quality content"? Google is a robot that understands relevance, not quality. Quality is subjective, anyway.

[terrapurus]

Originally Posted by TZ

There is always debate on this, but I have tested article marketing a few times.

The pages I promoted with these backlinks took longer to get traffic than the pages I just let Google find on it's own sweet time.

I wrote an article once called; Artificial linking is dead

I believe this still to be true.

I read that (the article you linked to) ... and then LOL'd. And LOL'd some more. So you would not mind if everyone who downloaded your free templates offered on that site no followed your footer template link back to your site. I thought this was a nice touch in the source code ...

<!-- Please don't remove my credit link as I worked very hard to test this template and provide it to you for free. This link will NOT hurt your ranking in anyway -->

I mean ... it would not make a difference to your rankings if all of these footer links just dissapeared? If linking strategies are all dead, then it won't matter at all

Right?

[TBInternetMarketing]

From a page ranking backlink point of view, I would guess yes they are. That said, 100 PR 0 links is better than none.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by TZ

I watch the search engine news ALLOT and there seems to be a push towards using bounce rate more in determining a web page's value.

You do know what bounce rate is, don't you?

It's the percentage of visitors that only visit one page on the site.

It would make no sense for Google to use this in ranking.

First, they have no way to measure it on sites that don't have their Analytics installed.

Next, many high quality sites, such as medical information sites and even Wikipedia, have a naturally high bounce rate. In fact, the higher the quality of the information you're presenting the higher your bounce rate is likely to be. Sure, you want a low bounce rate for an ecommerce site but for an informational site, it isn't as important.

Another factor is how this could be gamed by various bots both by negative and positive interaction with a site.

Lastly, sites that use AJAX and other advanced content rendering methods (such as Google itself does now with instant search) would have a higher bounce rate than those that don't.

[MikeFriedman]

Originally Posted by terrapurus

I read that (the article you linked to) ... and then LOL'd. And LOL'd some more. So you would not mind if everyone who downloaded your free templates offered on that site no followed your footer template link back to your site. I thought this was a nice touch in the source code ...

<!-- Please don't remove my credit link as I worked very hard to test this template and provide it to you for free. This link will NOT hurt your ranking in anyway -->

I mean ... it would not make a difference to your rankings if all of these footer links just dissapeared? If linking strategies are all dead, then it won't matter at all

Right?

Good find.