Google and Content BS!

31 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Doesn't anyone get tired of this whole 'create good content/authority sites' stuff? I mean, seriously. I hear some people going on about how you shouldn't rig the system and do things that are black hat and on and on...

But do you realize every time you build a link to your site, that isn't 'naturally' created, you are going against Google's 'rules'. Have you even read 'the rules?' Good luck. I bet a room full of lawyers could read what Google has put out and not understand any of it. Good luck me understanding anything.

'Build a great site and people will come and love your content and link to you and you will naturally rise in the search engines..." is such crap. Try it, tell me how the crickets sound.

What I see happening is these big 'authority sites' like WebMD and Mayoclinic ruling the health niche now. Why? No why. They are simply corporations, just like in the offline world. Both companies were created to make a profit just like mine was. So what makes them 'better'? Nothing really.

Do you trust what you read on Wikipedia? I sure don't. Especially when it comes to health issues. But guess who is number one one most health issues the majority of the time? Yeah, I am sure 1000 doctors have rushed out to post great health care information on Wikipedia. Give me a break.

So again, the big companies are going to be our real competition in the end. A bunch of companies that for one reason or another Google likes more than my sites. And it doesn't matter if my site is better or if they have more pages, links, likes and whatever else thrown into the mix.

I am not wining, I am just venting a little. Just tired of people saying how backlinking and private blog networks and all things similar are evil. Honestly I just want to say, 'grow up.'

PS: I am really glad that Bing/Yahoo are giving it a go. Google is simply too powerful. And they obviously hate any kind of IMer.

Apologies for this meandering rant! I know it doesn't make any rel sense. But it'll help my post count Now go ahead and roast me...
#content #google
  • Profile picture of the author Zach Crawley
    So basically, create bad content and low authority sites?

    "Build a great site and people will come and love your content and link to you and you will naturally rise in the search engines..." Actually, this statement is true, IF you have good and valuable content. I can say as a witness too.

    and obviously you have to do a little linking at the beginning, but don't be spammy about it. Post on blogs with actual comments relating to the subject, post to forums, twitter etc. Google doesn't care if you naturally send your link out.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839818].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AuthorityRush
      Originally Posted by zachcrawley View Post

      So basically, create bad content and low authority sites?
      Absolutely not! But how many pages would one expect me to write about foot fungus? And how many links do you think I will be getting from other sites. Or what about genital warts, now there is a link I want on my Facebook fan page.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839852].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GlobalTrader
        Originally Posted by StreetBacon View Post

        Absolutely not! But how many pages would one expect me to write about foot fungus? And how many links do you think I will be getting from other sites. Or what about genital warts, now there is a link I want on my Facebook fan page.
        THANK YOU for raising the very questions I have had for years.

        In regards to 'how many pages' could one expect to publish about a single subject before the information becomes redundant?

        Google pushes the issue of publishing more, more and even more because in the end Google as an entity does not care about the publisher, they care about filling up their SERPS that help them sell advertising.

        If you have 100 or 1000 people publishing about foot fungus, Google now has 100-1000 potential views of their advertising, Google has no feelings, they are a corporation that must maintain or grow their revenues and publishers are what helps feed their beastly appetite.

        Let's carry the Google kool aid a bit further - they say how if you write great content other website publishers will want to link to it. Yeah, right! Other competing web publishers have that thought foremost in their minds "to give you linkjuice" for your page or site.

        Consider also, how many people have websites who use the Internet? Probably in the single digits percentagewise so here again the Google kool aid - who are these people who are going to massively "link" to your foot fungus page if they are simply some poor soul suffering from this condition who has no website to link from or who does not care to let the world know they have been looking for a source to cure their condition.

        And how about ecommerce sites that describe a specific model of an item, be it electronic or other type, how many pages must be written about this specific model before it becomes redundant?

        Google cares only about Google's bottom line and all publishers do is feed their beastly appetite. Do whatever you have to do to rank your pages and sites and stop drinking the Google Kool Aid with Matt Cutts sweetener.
        Signature

        GlobalTrader

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841995].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bnwebm
    I have, several times. In fact, it's the only approach I will ever use and it does work. I had sites that were wallowing under poorly written ones for a year or so, until Panda slapped them silly. I hadn't touched these sites at all, mind you and suddenly one has been in the number one slot since Panda and the others have all moved up to page one or two.


    Originally Posted by StreetBacon View Post


    'Build a great site and people will come and love your content and link to you and you will naturally rise in the search engines..." is such crap. Try it, tell me how the crickets sound.
    Signature
    My blog, because nothing is a more powerful marketing tool than a well written article.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839837].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AuthorityRush
      Originally Posted by bnwebm View Post

      I have, several times. In fact, it's the only approach I will ever use and it does work. I had sites that were wallowing under poorly written ones for a year or so, ...
      Excellent, I really am happy to hear it is working out for you. So I take it you didn't feed your family for the first year?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839849].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author bnwebm
        No problems with that either. I'm also a professional content writer, web designer and developer. I found myself unemployed, not by choice, in 2009 and have never made less than I was making in my previous job. I was in a management position at a national nonprofit organization, BTW.

        Originally Posted by StreetBacon View Post

        Excellent, I really am happy to hear it is working out for you. So I take it you didn't feed your family for the first year?
        Signature
        My blog, because nothing is a more powerful marketing tool than a well written article.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839857].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author AuthorityRush
          Originally Posted by bnwebm View Post

          I'm also a professional content writer, web designer and developer.
          I sincerely wish I had those skills. Am working on getting them. And that is great for you. But what about the other 99.9% of the internet? We need to wait a year to eat?

          Again, this was just a quick rant. Not really too serious. But nice to get a few replies.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839872].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author bnwebm
            If you are dedicating yourself to working 12-14 hours a day to develop backlinks (the right way), it shouldn't take a year, no. That is, as long as you haven't chosen topics that are completely saturated. These too, can be overcome by a single content-dense (high quality content) website but will take longer. In the meantime, for money, use the skills you do have to keep income coming in. You can offer to do blog posting/backlinking for a fee, which is fairly easy to learn. Take a look at the people looking for workers in this forum for ideas.


            Originally Posted by StreetBacon View Post

            I sincerely wish I had those skills. Am working on getting them. And that is great for you. But what about the other 99.9% of the internet? We need to wait a year to eat?

            Again, this was just a quick rant. Not really too serious. But nice to get a few replies.
            Signature
            My blog, because nothing is a more powerful marketing tool than a well written article.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839881].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author AprilCT
            I'll use Wikipedia, but with a lot of reservations. If it's anything even remotely important, I'll find much better sites to trust.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839882].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Wilkes
    The truth is, it was never a level playing field as long as there are big boys who can throw more money at it than you BUT it is the only playing field we have.
    The good news is as long as we have places like this forum and we share our information, we are more adaptable and we outnumber them!
    Signature

    Like What I have to say here on the forum? Check out my primary blog.
    Healthy Profits - Green PLR

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839876].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Wilkes
    The bigger the business, the longer it takes to react to changes in the marketplace, due to proposals, meetings, budget, approval, implementation. That is their weakness and our strength. We make instant decisions and act upon them every day.

    If more people here were more willing to share their pratical results like split testing rather than lecturing endlessly to newbies that would make a huge difference.

    I do not think it is about becoming a collective, it is more about a change of attitude and realising that it us against the big boys and our best chance of increasing our own profits is just looking out for each other.

    just my two cents
    John
    Signature

    Like What I have to say here on the forum? Check out my primary blog.
    Healthy Profits - Green PLR

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839939].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AuthorityRush
      Originally Posted by John Wilkes View Post


      I do not think it is about becoming a collective, it is more about a change of attitude and realising that it us against the big boys and our best chance of increasing our own profits is just looking out for each other.
      I like the way you think!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3840040].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author FredJones
      Good discussion. The only thing is that while the Wikipedias and WebMDs have started to domainate more and more, I have also seen a number of scraper sites overtake the original site in SERPs. So not sure whether Google has done anything remotely clsoe to perfect here. The attempt is good and sincere but the results are yet to come up to the mark.
      Signature

      $1 gold: WSO That Instantly Transforms You Into A Content Production Engine

      $2.95 GoDaddy .com domains today: Click here.
      I am offering a free website - get it now (and they offer you a free domain with this).
      Find high-commission easy Amazon niches within 5 seconds here.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3840082].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dellco
        'Build a great site and people will come and love your content and link to you and you will naturally rise in the search engines..." is such crap. Try it, tell me how the crickets sound.
        Some sites of mine, people whom I do not know at all, post links from Wikipedia to my sites. Not to mention other types of links, besides Wikipedia. I certainly never asked them to do it for me. I don't even know these people.

        So, what is so impossible about getting "natural" links? Yeah, the type that Google claims to like.....

        Just make sure you earn that trust, and I'm sure it will come - Over time.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3840196].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author AuthorityRush
        Originally Posted by FredJones View Post

        The only thing is that while the Wikipedias and WebMDs have started to domainate more and more, I have also seen a number of scraper sites overtake the original site in SERPs.
        Yeah, scraper sites make me the angriest! I have never stolen content and it really makes me angry when people steal from me or anyone else for that matter! Google should be going at them first and foremost in my opinion. But that's another topic...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3840220].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yeshuaisiam
    Honestly I just tend to take Google's advice.

    As Nicholas Cage said in "Lord of War"
    "The hardest thing about making an honest buck is that there are too many people doing it". LOL

    It takes hard work, time, creativity. I wish I was better at all 3.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3839992].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dellco
      I know you are frustrated, but think about it, those "big authority" sites (often corporations) were at one time, just like you. Exactly like you. And that was a long, long time ago.

      Everyone has to start from somewhere. And it takes time. Sometimes a longer time. If you grow big enough like them, you too, will be a corporation.

      Simple question to ask yourself is, "Does my site convey "trust" to a human?"

      Obviously, these "big authority" sites have earned that "trust" from the majority (not necessarily everyone; just the majority).

      If the majority do change their minds about those "big authority" sites, then newer "big authority" sites will replace them. It could be you.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3840010].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author johnmichael03
    Build a abundant website and humans appear and adulation your agreeable and hotlink to you and you will acceleration by itself to the seek engines. Actually, this account is true, if you accept a acceptable and admired content. I can say as a witness, too.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3840227].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author IM Ash
    The only difference between the "big boys" and ourselves is that they hire top SEO companies to get them ranked and in most cases the little guy does the SEO work by himself.

    Every IMer engages in greyhat tactics -whether they admit it or not- because whatever we do to manipulate our rank in the SERP's is an attempt to game the system.

    How many marketers will engage in blog commenting if there wasn't an opportunity to gain a backlink?

    How many marketers submit press releases for products that are not news worthy and have been in existence for years?

    How many marketers post on Web 2.0 properties that do not allow any promotional material?

    Most of what we do with regard to off-page SEO falls in a grey area!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841353].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
    Originally Posted by StreetBacon View Post

    Doesn't anyone get tired of this whole 'create good content/authority sites' stuff? I mean, seriously. I hear some people going on about how you shouldn't rig the system and do things that are black hat and on and on...

    But do you realize every time you build a link to your site, that isn't 'naturally' created, you are going against Google's 'rules'. Have you even read 'the rules?' Good luck. I bet a room full of lawyers could read what Google has put out and not understand any of it. Good luck me understanding anything.

    'Build a great site and people will come and love your content and link to you and you will naturally rise in the search engines..." is such crap. Try it, tell me how the crickets sound.

    What I see happening is these big 'authority sites' like WebMD and Mayoclinic ruling the health niche now. Why? No why. They are simply corporations, just like in the offline world. Both companies were created to make a profit just like mine was. So what makes them 'better'? Nothing really.

    Do you trust what you read on Wikipedia? I sure don't. Especially when it comes to health issues. But guess who is number one one most health issues the majority of the time? Yeah, I am sure 1000 doctors have rushed out to post great health care information on Wikipedia. Give me a break.

    So again, the big companies are going to be our real competition in the end. A bunch of companies that for one reason or another Google likes more than my sites. And it doesn't matter if my site is better or if they have more pages, links, likes and whatever else thrown into the mix.

    I am not wining, I am just venting a little. Just tired of people saying how backlinking and private blog networks and all things similar are evil. Honestly I just want to say, 'grow up.'

    PS: I am really glad that Bing/Yahoo are giving it a go. Google is simply too powerful. And they obviously hate any kind of IMer.

    Apologies for this meandering rant! I know it doesn't make any rel sense. But it'll help my post count Now go ahead and roast me...
    Amen! We're all in this business to make money. Do what needs to be done. Google is what we're competing against so who cares what they want, do what works.

    BTW a robot will never ever be able to decide what I think is good content and what you think is good content so this whole idea of "good content" is completely ridiculous. Ya know whats good content to me thefu$k!nweather.com, I like it better then weather.com so let Google figure that one out.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3841690].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sancho Sanches
    I hear what you say and although I don't know where you're coming from exactly what you said has a lot of truth to it.

    It gets tiring having to deal with people's false beliefs, their criticizing of "bluefart" (which is not the same as illegal) and the baggage they bring with them from places they hang out and things they read online and the things they don't understand.

    Maybe they fell into group mentality and play the part because it makes them feel like they belong to something or makes them feel smart?

    It's also funny to see people and groups criticize certain small things people do and yet they admit to doing things like setting up review sites, making up reviews or basing them on what others say without ever having actually had any experience with the products they promote - and yet no one says anything.

    I'm not saying people can't or shouldn't do that but you know what they say about people who live in glass houses...

    To be honest I've seen things, in SEO for example, where two polarizing mentalities are both right in different circumstances.

    I've seen content sites do better and I've seen sites that do not get updated and are actually clones rank right beside the site they've copied.

    In an experiment I nearly cloned a merchant's site, got a keyword domain, competition in quotes wasn't super high and not low either, also used some of his articles and did a little basic on page SEO and the only backlinking I did was one digg and submitting my RSS feed to an aggregator.

    He probably beat me cause his site was older, maybe because it was registered for more than a year, no doubt he had more backlinks especially considering all his affiliates and he had a ton of articles on his site that I was to lazy to bother and copy.

    I ranked number 5 and he number 3 for the same keyword with the exact same sales page. That ranking didn't take very long to achieve (a month) and it stayed there until I decided not to renew my domain.

    Still, two spots behind him isn't bad.

    This was two years ago and maybe Google has changed things since then but what people are saying now is what they said back then, too.

    Probably helped that it wasn't obvious I was an affiliate.

    Site was never updated.

    Fresh content? Duplicate Content?

    This is what Google says is duplicate content straight from the horse's mouth.

    Duplicate content is not necessarily malicious in origin and not penalized but they pick and choose what gets shown when it gets out of hand however when it's malicious or deceptive the deceptive site's rank may suffer or be completely removed from results.

    Google are a little too vague for my taste but most people never read what they say so I guess it doesn't matter.

    If you want to play with Google just try your best to give them what they want.

    Guess what, sometimes Google is right and it would be wise to do what they say.

    So the next time someone says "That's duplicate content bla bla bla!" you can say "Yea? What's your point? Oh really? OK, thanks. Have a nice day"

    It's not worth arguing about. You're not gonna change the world.

    You can do it until you get tired and jaded. I'm already tired.

    Sometimes people won't listen to you unless you charge them for it.

    For real.

    I have a theory on why some sites without updated content do OK and only a few pages thick but it's just a theory. I'm not an SEO "expert" and I hate SEO but I know what I've seen. There's a basic recipe I follow, try to be realistic and when I'm too lazy or hate certain parts I out task the rest (like link building).

    There's just more than meets the eye and my guess is a lot of so called SEO experts (which I am not one of) know barely more or no more than a lot of people here.

    It might not be wise to ignore Google but push comes to shove and it's definitely possible to not rely just on Google.

    Just be creative.

    You shouldn't have all your eggs in one basket anyway.

    PS. HTML sites ("regular" sites) can do just as well as blogs - sometimes worse and sometimes better (Tip: Get an XML sitemap on there, submit it, have an RSS feed, submit that, have the most important links on all or most your pages and always a way to get back to the homepage, try not to bloat it so it isn't too slow)

    PPS. Thanks for knocking Wikipedia. It always annoys me when people say "I found out on Wikipedia" It should be used as a springboard when really wanting information but nothing else in my opinion.
    Signature
    * New Affiliate Black Book Coming Soon *
    http://www.affiliateblackbook.com/

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3973309].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dburk
    Originally Posted by StreetBacon View Post

    But do you realize every time you build a link to your site, that isn't 'naturally' created, you are going against Google's 'rules'. Have you even read 'the rules?' Good luck. I bet a room full of lawyers could read what Google has put out and not understand any of it. Good luck me understanding anything.

    'Build a great site and people will come and love your content and link to you and you will naturally rise in the search engines..." is such crap. Try it, tell me how the crickets sound.
    Hi StreetBacon,

    I will disagree with your basic assumption. I don't believe very act of building links is against any Google "rules".

    Yes, they do dislike self-promotional spam, particularly when it's only purpose is to manipulate the PageRank algorithm. However they do encourage meritorious link building. Here is one post from Google engineer Matt Cutts:

    SEO Advice: Getting Links

    Here is a summary of this post:

    "Okay, here are some ways to get high-quality links without emailing, paying, or even paying attention to search engines:"
    • Provide a useful one-time service.
    • Provide an ongoing service
    • Become a resource
    • Provide valuable information.
    • Be the first. Be the first means coming up with a creative idea that catches the fancy of the web.
    • Get an article written about you

    You may note that the last item in that list is essentially a self generated backlink. He also recommended blogging which builds links.

    Google doesn't mind that you are promoting your website as long as it is through meritorious links, which implies useful "content". It is when you attempt to build links that add no value and are only self serving (not useful to others) links, that they consider it as web spam.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3973315].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    IMO, when ranking a page in Google SERP it doesn't matter what color hat you wear.

    Every business no matter If online or offline has it's own bag of tricks to bring in traffic, other than the bare bone basics of just doing business.

    SEO is, do whatever it takes to get the job done. As long as your not breaking real laws (not Google laws, lol, who cares what Google thinks) it's all good.

    I've always done my own seo (year after year), it's a never ending learning experience. Like right now, I've been working on an advanced seo project for two days straight, that with no doubt will have a huge impact on my SERP CTR.

    More than 1/2 my traffic comes from none organic search sources, like niche forums. The Google traffic is just extra traffic, & I can get by just fine without them. Still, I like the seo challenge & it keeps IM interesting.
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3973438].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author timpears
    Don't feel so bad, I have published the best content I can (maybe crap compared to others stuff, but it is the best I can do), thrown thousands of links up to promote it. And I am still not in the first 100 pages of Google. I am too stupid to give up though. Sooner or later I will do something, probably by accident, that will work. But so far it has been frustrating to say the least.

    But what the hell else am I going to do with my time? Watch TV? At least this keeps me a little busy and off the streets.
    Signature

    Tim Pears

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3973708].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      Authority does not mean good content. In basic terms, it
      means content. And boatloads of it. Hence, wikipedia
      can rank for virtually anything in people, places, and things.
      Good content not withstanding.

      Tons of sites do great without updating.

      Google does not hate any kind of IMer. They hate anyone, IMers
      just do it more often, that tries and schmooze their SERPs and/or
      peddles crapola. For the most part.

      I never get tired of following google guidelines. I do get tired of
      people who hate google, don't follow their guidelines, think they
      are crap, then complain that google is ruining their business or
      other such rot.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3974081].message }}

Trending Topics