Backlinks are going to die *cough*

Backlinks died the day SEOMoz dumped the SEO and moved on

R.I.P Backlinks!

I welcome our new LinkLess OverLords

I don't think this is the case. I don't see Google or anyone else inventing an artificial intelligence that can really judge the "value" of a piece of content alone.

In order to judge value, they have to look at context, ie how do people feel about the content and do they agree that it is valuable? And to do that, they look at link profiles.

The only way I see links ever possibly losing control of SEO is if Google or someone new and innovative invents a new way to judge both the value and relevance of content without looking at backlinks. Maybe they could do this by installing a function into your personal browser that lets you rate every web page you come across as valuable or not valuable. IDK.

But the thing is... Google already looks at over 200 factors to determine page relevance and authority. If they have already looked at 200+ factors, but to date the presence or absence of a strong backlink portfolio is still the #1 factor in ranking (most everyone in SEO agrees that it is), then I doubt that backlinks will be going anywhere anytime soon.

The whole google system is based on backlinks, even google ranks and lives with backlinks. I seriously doubt that this could happen anytime in the next 5+ years.

So..

Is there a "Nonsense Section" of Warrior that this could be moved too?

There would be too much chaos if backlinks were being removed... all sites are ranking now because of backlinks. If it happens, it will be years from now.

Trying to produce fresh content on a consistent basis with Google verified authorship. This, of course, is no silver bullet as we've seen the "content creation" biz really take off.

If the internet stays how it now is then I don't see how backlinks are supposed to loose any value. Yeah, Google can determine information of pages but so what? How are they supposed to compose a SERP of that? Who is going to be #1 for such values you still need backlinks (votes) as one of the factors.

If something regarding backlinks is going to change then it is anchor texts.

I guess I'd have to go and get myself a proper job

You know what seo was before backlinks right?

Keyword stuffing!

So I guess that'd be what it would have to be.

I would sell all my shares of Google before people realized it delivered crappy results and stock prices plummeted.

There you have it, all you guys that get your panties in a bunch when I rip on SocialMoz.

Tell me SocialMoz followers don't fall for that so called SEO BS they read on the SocialMoz site.

Kool-Aid! We need more Kool-Aid over here!

Backlinks will never die because they are supposed to be natural *cough*. The web is made of hyperlinks and hypertext. Backlinks are fundamental to the Web, and without them the Web wouldn't exist. Google is aware of this and that is why they use backlinks as their most influential search engine factor.

Google (or anyone) will never invent an AI that knows what quality content is. How do I know this? Because humans don't know or at least can't agree on what is quality content. Legible sure. But just because something can be understood doesn't mean it's quality or useful information.

And to answer the OP question: If backlinks became useless for ranking, I would still use them for referral traffic.

Hey at first I was laughing at this thread.

Then I said to myself....self...hey this guy is using this thread title for a backlink! And there you have it ladies and gentlemen.

Back links should die!! I have almost 800 pages on my not-for-profit website. Nearly every page ranks on the first page and first listing on Yahoo. I go through a great deal of trouble to present a writing with the same standards of accuracy with respects to facts as news reports (e.g. CNN or Wikipedia).

Every writing shows experience and intelligence of the text written. Evidence of having researched and investigated the writing. The content is relevant to the page title. An argument, view or analysis that is original but supported by research or relevant facts.

When I see every one of my web pages on the first page of Yahoo...I feel good because I know it belongs there.

Yahoo’s algorithm is NOT based on links, its based primarlly on content. So why do I rank perfect on Yahoo but horrible on Google? Why do twitter feeds (a page of just links) outrank writings written by scholars, expert writers or experts in a particular field. Its because of link manipulation, PageRank authority, etc...not because its “Good Content.”

The links analysis system is flawed!! They work so hard to save it, yet with every update it deepens the problem. With a world fueled by money, the selling of high PR links will never end. You can never stop SPAM.

I’ve analyzed dozens of websites (both competition and non competitors). I’ve traced their link profile and witnessed countless websites selling sidebar links on legitimate PR8 PR7 PR6 PR5 pages. Websites in the open directory project (with domain ages of 6 months) clearly violating the set guidelines and keyword spammed anchor text....obviously paid submissions! How can you compete with that...buy fing high PR page links!!!

Nothing reduces the value of a thread worse than the 'battle of the imaginary PayDays.' The one guy claims he's making $108,000 by 'making backlinks' and the other guy counters saying he makes $200,000 'just writing content.'

LOL

nice income on the payday loans cpa business.

I used to do dating sites for CPA and eventually sold the site for 5 (close to 6) figures
Spent a year in Thailand after that getting drunk

Good backlinks are "more than" alive now.

Just forget the crappy ones.

Seems to me that Google kows what's going on with backlinks and manipulation.
They're forever trying to work out a way that penalises bad, or spammy backlinks, but every time they do it also seems to alter the credibilty of regular links.

From personal experience I've found it's quality and relevance, over quantity.
But this could take years to finally get right.

Until then, every new algo update will impact on play-by-the-rules-ers as well as the black hat brigade.

For me the days of having a huge raft of sites and simply paying to get them ranked, are over.
It's much safer, and for me at least, more profitable to just keep a few sites and devote more time to them.

WTH is going on here?

Whatever Google would use to rank besides backlinks would be so easy to manipulate

...yeah they arent doing that

Google payday loans, casino bonus or anything really competitive, then tell me backlinks don't make up 80-90% the reason they rank.

I am not a fan of backlinks, mostly because I do not have that many, though I wish I did, but I really really hate making them, to me it is a huge time sink that could be used making content.

I do not see backlinks going anywhere....however, I could imagine a more reputable way to measure the worth of a website using tracking. Search engines could measure the engagement of the user on the page taking note of the time spent relative to the types of objects and word count on the page.

I wrote a basic article on PageRank a few years ago that included a search for the word "The" all of the top results were unsurprisingly very high pagerank.
http://planetarybargains.com/Blog/do...e-traffic/work

I think Google will always put some value on backlinks from sites they trust and consider to be of superior quality. The links from a page with 150 other links to sites that have nothing in common are almost certainly useless. Numerous links to your site on one site are probably also useless (probably counts as one backlink or something. If you get a link from CNN's home page ten years from now though, I suspect you'll still get some good benefit at Google. For sure, any links you can simply buy by sending someone money are useless. Those days are definitely gone.

And in any case, links will continue to become a smaller and smaller consideration as Google's algorithm becomes better and better at judging what is quality content without taking anyone else's word for it.

Yes, which is why I said, "unless it's a specific how-to"

You're right though, the links must also be coming from someplace on subject. A link about alternators coming from a site or within an article about dog grooming obviously doesn't make sense, and is most likely unnatural. They have all sorts of garbage filters.

But even in the case of the alternator, it's still the people's vote that "This is the best source about how to change your alternator in a 1998 Cadillac Seville". Two different how-to's could give basically the same direction, but the algorithm can't tell whether its a bright idea or not to remove the head gasket first. Only people (and their votes) can tell that.

So let's say backlinks die (which won't happen).

I would probably start guest posting a lot, make a lot social buzz, do some article marketing, use PPC. Get my links on every friking site that brings me some referral traffic.There are plenty of options, backlinks and SEO is just 1% of IM. It's not the end of the world.

Anyhow, I'm curiously looking for next thread "Internet is going to die.. What would you do next?"

WHEN EMAIL MARKETING and PPC and Facebook and ............... die then backlinks die also

Backlinks are pretty much useful for seo, but with high quality content and high quality from organic web directories. Quality backlinks from top sources still have good effectiveness.