New York Times Is A Snitch For Google

17 replies
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/07/bu...s.html?_r=3&hp

Wow whats next.... A newspaper reporting to Google bout improper ranking by people trying to sell flowers?
#google #snitch #times #york
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    Originally Posted by CloseoutDirect View Post

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/07/bu...s.html?_r=3&hp

    Wow whats next.... A newspaper reporting to Google bout improper ranking by people trying to sell flowers?
    what d-bags. Guess they're running out of real news to report or something ... or maybe their paid news plan isn't working out and they need the attention.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841914].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author humbledmarket
      Banned
      Hmm I saw a diagram just the other day bout New York times and Demand media about google new panda update; interesting to see this. Maybe they want to get on to google nice list? lol or getting jealous of others because Demand media supposedly makes more money than New York Times (until the recent panda update losing 40% of revenue)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3843032].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author talfighel
    Looks to me like they are running out of stories to tell.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841926].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WebRank1
    Let me tell you, that firm Digital Due Diligence is doing an absolute great job marketing. That much is for sure. You can't read anything search engine related these days and not come across their name.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841932].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author brendan9971
    $30 a month to put a link on her site.. that she hasn't updated in a couple of years? wow. sign me up! for 100 of these a month please.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841946].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      I'm not surprised as these are companies that spend a lot on advertising offline as well. I expect they would view buying links on sites much as they do buying space in magazines, newspapers and for TV ads.

      kay
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      It actually doesn't take much to be considered a 'difficult woman' -
      that's why there are so many of us.
      ...jane goodall
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842012].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author brendan9971
        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

        I'm not surprised as these are companies that spend a lot on advertising offline as well. I expect they would view buying links on sites much as they do buying space in magazines, newspapers and for TV ads.

        kay
        for sure but $30 a month for I'm assuming 1 link on a site that's not even updated? apparently the marketing folks for these flower shop sites don't know about fiverr and similar sites. they could probably get a link once a month on high PR blogs for 6 months for $5
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842050].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kay King
          the marketing folks for these flower shop sites don't know about fiverr and similar sites
          One of the biggest problems with Fiverr is that people begin to believe $5 is the most anyone pays for anything. That is not the mentality of a big online business with significant sales volume.

          These companies plan advertising a year in advance of a holiday with the goal of maximum exposure leading up to each significant holiday. They will game Google if they can - and it's up to google to stop it. You can learn a lot from the way these companies conduct business.

          kay
          Signature
          Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
          ***
          It actually doesn't take much to be considered a 'difficult woman' -
          that's why there are so many of us.
          ...jane goodall
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842173].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GlobalTrader
    Maybe the New York Times is trying to be Google's link narc so Google will keep About.com (one of NYT's properties) high in their SERPs?
    Signature

    GlobalTrader

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842045].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WebRank1
    The founder of Digital Due Diligence is the former Marketing Director of Blue Fountain Media, the company that provided the knowledge to the NYT on their JC Penny article.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842112].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Hlatky
    Yep, they are on top of things lol:

    None of the links shared by The New York Times had a significant impact on our rankings, due to automated systems we have in place to assess the relevance of links. As always, we investigate spam reports and take corrective action where appropriate.
    This guy also knows what is going on:

    There is a possible correlation between the backlinks and the increased visibility of the site," said Horst Joepen, the chief executive of Searchmetrics. But without more research, he added, there is no way to be sure.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842243].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kellyburdes
    There's some impactfull investigative journalism for you!

    I seem to recall they did the same thing to JC Penny's around Christmas too.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3842266].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jgant
      Aaron Wall makes a good point in his article that the problem with outing is a competitor could buy links pointing to their competitor and then out them surreptitiously.

      It's the same if too many links too fast punished sites, competitors could slam each other with links.

      This outing situation could result in some serious lawsuits. For instance, suppose JC Penney didn't buy links but their comeptitor did pointing to JC Penney.

      The interesting component is how to structure the lawsuit. After all, the damages arise from Google (3rd party) downgrading JC Penny's rankings. The company that bought the links (JC Penney) merely manufactured the scenario and did not take the action of causing JC Penney loss (in this fictional scenario).

      Buying links to another website is not a crime. However, intimating a site purchased links when they didn't that results in financial loss could be construed as an actionable offense.

      Anyway, I'm sure if outing continues, the Courts will have to deal with all of this because there's huge money involved. Could Google be implicated if they act on faulty information? Who knows?
      Signature
      How I hit $10,000+ per month very fast w/ 1 niche blog - Click Here to learn more (no opt-in).
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3843110].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thebitbotdotcom
    I hope the NYT realizes that their playing with fire by calling out SEO firms. If their not careful, the next thing they know they will be ranking for every objectionable term in the book that they don't want to rank for.
    Signature
    Do Your Copywriting Skills Suck?

    Let Us Help You Develop Your Writing Skills!

    Submit Guest Posts With [ TheBitBot.Com ]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3843052].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jeremy Kelsall
      NYT might inspire a couple rounds of Google Bowling and bombing if they aren't careful.

      I for one would think it was quite funny.

      Did you read some of the "expert insights" in the article from SEO people?

      They sound like complete idiots.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3843063].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Wallman
    Why would they care? Ass kissing?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3843100].message }}

Trending Topics