Is Mass Bookmarking bad For Google rankings

by 10 replies
12
I use to think it was good, but now I'm not so sure.

When I set up a site it usually gets ranked pretty quick with a few bookmarks from digg and stumbleupon.

But as I add more bookmarks the site seems to drop, and sometimes even dissapear from the rankings all together.

So I am starting to draw the conclusion that mass bookmarking isn't that good for site ranking, it might actually hurt it.

What are your opinions on mass bookmarking?
#main internet marketing discussion forum #bad #bookmarking #google #mass #rankings
  • My opinion is that the Google algorithms are smart enough to recognize repeat links from bookmarking sites. You MUST diversify your link portfolio. Links must appear over time from a variety of websites. That is why some IM folks resort to 3-way link exchanges, buy paid links, etc.

    TomG.
    • [1] reply
    • Should we perhaps go back and delete some of our bookmarks or has the horse already left the barn?

      I too saw instant boost and subsequent drop off.

      another thing is the traffic generated didn't stay on the page long at all.
      false traffic perhaps?

      of all the visitors (according to G analytics) that stumbleupon purportedly gave me, none of them stayed on site more than 7 seconds or so?
      Less than 10 (I'm not logged into Ganalytics right now so I'm going from memory)

      do you think we can go back and take some out or is it too late?
      thanks
  • Instead of bookmarking your main page repeatedly, try making hubs and lenses that point to your main page, and then bookmark your hubs and lenses.
    • [1] reply
    • Sites like propeller will get a site indexed quickly for just about anything but hubpages, propeller says that hubpages is a banned domain. Seems like spammers have once again ruined it for other hubbers.


      I've heard the same thing about mass bookmarking, that's why I do less than 8 at a time to make it appear more natural.
      • [1] reply
  • Digg is a powerful link. Stumble will provide traffic, but there's no link juice.

    What you're seeing with the quick drop off the SERPs is that Digg links are short lived. You get a quick pop, and then a quick fall off. So your strategy has to be putting up some good diggable content every week.

    Likewise, Digg will get you indexed quickly, but if you want to rank well you need enough votes to get a critical mass of internal links. So while just submitting to Digg is a quick way to get indexed, to rank well you need votes.
  • Perfectly right conclusion, especially for a new site. Go for "real" links, quality first and mix in the spammy ones later, step by step. Link developement must be as natural as possible. Google isn't as easy to fool as a few years ago, the days of mass link generation that leads to good rankings are over, quality of the links becomes more an more important.
    • [1] reply
    • You're misunderstanding Google's algorithm.

      Google places high value on new content and will push a new page to the top of search temporarily on that basis. If it's bookmarked, this gives it an extra boost since this indicates immediate interest in the page. After a period of time, anywhere from a few days to a few weeks, the page will begin to seek its natural level and will typically drop in ranking. Sometimes, if it's ranking for a low competition long tail, it will retain its position.

      You are right that bookmarking links are typically low value links. However, having them has no negative impact on your search ranking, long or short term. If this was true it would be easy for a competitor to 'bowl' your site with them.
  • But can any buddy tell me if i post a page than i bookmark it to 2-3 sites than it is bad ?
    I have 2 month old website.........
  • What about SocialAdr? Is this kind of shared bookmarking effective for building good quality backlinks? I would like to know if I am wasting my time with them or not?
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed