|
|
|
Discover the Incredible Power of Ethics in Online Network Marketing
…build trust and watch the cash roll in!
As you are reading this article, the tide of the world is changing rapidly. More and more people are taking charge of their own lives, taking responsibility of their own future and taking control...
eCommerce Web Site Building: Where Do I Start?
An article discussing the details on what tools, skills, and services you might need to start an ecommerce business.
Building a web site isn't something that is really cut and dry. There's a huge variety of products and services that can...
LookSmart Answer Their Critics
If you've read my article "LOOKs Can Be Deceiving" (http://www.high-search-engine-ranking.com/LOOKs_Can_Be_Deceiving.htm), you'll already know how I feel about LookSmart's recent decision to change their US-based directory model at www.looksmart.com...
So You Want To Make Big Profits From Your AdWords PPC Campaigns?
Everyone wants to make $300 a day or more with their AdWords campaigns. You've started a few campaigns, spent a few dollars, and now you're wondering - "where's the payoff!"
There's no secret to AdWords success. Like anything, joining the...
Top 5 Marketing Predictions for 2002
Prediction #1: Pay-Per-Click Rocks Pay-per-click (PPC) advertising will rock in 2002. PPC engines like Overture and FindWhat are performing extremely well. Sites displaying Overture's listings include America Online, Yahoo, Lycos, Hotbot,...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Google Bombing or Legitimate SEO?
Today I visited the WebProWorld forums and stumbled across
a topic "New Google Bombing Technique" and was startled to
see that the topic had been viewed over 22,000 times! It is
by far the most active of the forums in the "Search Engine
Insider Reports" section.
This article is simply my response to that discussion thread
and I hope it helps cool off the heat being generated there.
Google Bombing Discussion
The general gist of the conversation suggests that appending
a question mark ? or a pound sign # followed by a keyword phrase, to the end of an embedded
link in a web site could lead to ranking a site at the top for
that search phrase. An example is given of top rank for a
particular phrase, then immediately forum members post their
own URL's in the discussion replies, using the technique to
link back to their own sites with their own targeted search
terms in an attempt to gain advantage with the technique,
many times with odd or obscure terms.
This "new" so-called "#Google-Bombing" technique is simply a
routine SEO strategy that has been used for years by pros.
When we optimize a site for a client, we include keywords
wherever possible within the visible page text. The top
priority is ALWAYS page text and title tags. From there on,
ALL uses of additional techniques are only incremental in
value and don't dramatically affect ranking for targeted
keyword phrases.
I demonstrate the ease of ranking for obscure terms on a page
where I discuss the foolishness of SEO guarantees by including
the phrase, "screeching camels" one time on the page in
visible text. Screeching Camels There
are no keyword or description metatags on that page, yet it
ranks number one at Google when you search for "Screeching
Camels". That is not Google bombing. A one-time use of a
keyword phrase on a page got this number one ranking for that
phrase simply because it is an absurdly rare phrase.
Use of irrelevant and misleading keyword phrase stuffing in
keyword metatags, in comment tags <.!-- keyword stuffing -->
(leading period used in examples to allow display without
embedding links in HTML email) and in ridiculous "invisible
text" (using text the same color as the background) got
abusive and so the search engines began to penalize those
who did those things. They will always attempt to ban the
obsessive cheaters and keyword stuffing liars.
The ? and # technique has always been used legitimately for
?tracking-referrers, calling ?search-terms and #jump-links
to take you to a named anchor within a page. Now obsessive
webmasters
are attempting to use the technique to increase
their own search engine rankings.
Sometimes when I link OUT to a site, I append ?WebSite101
to the tail end of the URL simply to let them know where the
visitor came from (referrer) when they view their logs or use
a traffic analysis or tracking service.
The ? technique for tracking traffic is even recommended by
Pay-Per-Click engines which give instructions to advertisers
using the technique to track clickthroughs from PPC ads.
Appending "?overture-keyword" to the end of PPC destination
URL's makes that visior who clicked your ads show up in your
log files and allows you to know the phrase that delivered
that visitor and that the visitor originated from Overture.
SEO's have always used # and ? to advantage in an incremental
fashion to optimize client sites. The jump links to named
anchors is routinely used by SEO's by placing keywords in the
#named-anchor links.
This works particularly well on long FAQ pages and on glossary
of terms pages. Instead of doing what most do and using
<.ahref="#FAQ1"> Keyword Phrase<./a> instead we use
< a rel="nofollow" href="#keyword-phrase"> Keyword-Phrase< /a>. Of course
you'll need to use it again in the anchor tag at
< a name="keyword-phrase">< /a> Again, just an incremental
tidbit to increase the use of the keyword phrase by a slight
margin THROUGHOUT the site in that same incremental fashion,
without being excessive.
The same is done with image filenames < img src="keyword.gif">
second level directory names /keyword-phrase/keyword.html,
page filenames, and embedding links in visble page text
keyword phrases < a rel="nofollow" href="keyword-phrase.html"> Keyword Phrase
< /a> rather than the worthless < a rel="nofollow" href="wordfrag4.htm"> Click
Here< /a>
Every once in a while someone re-discovers these incrementally
valuable techniques and attempts to abuse them a la "Google
Bombing" (as discussed in the WebProWorld forum) and they get
abused obscenely by overly agressive folks that risk being
banned in order to gain short term advantage for their own
sites.
This leads the search engines to downgrade or penalize those
who abuse the techniques. SEO is not made up of a single
technique used to compulsive levels. Wholistic SEO is using
many techniques moderately for incremental gains. When you get
obsessive about any one technique it leads to trouble.
Stay out of trouble – please!
About the Author
Mike Banks Valentine is SEO for Mesothelioma Attorney Referral Service
Contact Mike
Improve your site Free Tutorials
|
|
|
|
|
|