SEO and Google’s notice for Unnatural Linking

Be Sociable, Share!

    Google Webmaster Tools notice of detected unnatural links to . . .

    Roughly 700,000 webmasters received this notice in their GWT account this past January and February according to Tiffany Oberoi of Google!

    Were you one of them?

    GWT Messages

    So what’s going on here?

    Some in the SEO community thought this was a lure or phishing attempt on the part of Google to get webmasters to unwittingly rat themselves out. Cause enough of a scare with an ominous warning providing little or no specificity and see who scrambles to bear all in the hopes of getting back on Google’s good side. According to this line of reasoning, you might say Google’s purpose behind the message was akin to a massage (as their original name “BackRub” connotes) with the goal of releasing toxins, unwanted sites and networks of sites polluting their system.

    Google is going after certain kinds of sites and networks of sites created for the sole purpose of link building. The Build My Rank link network was de-indexed by Google and as a result, all the links received from that network were affected. If you had all your eggs in that basket, your traffic and the visibility you enjoyed in the search results would have suffered greatly. Other link networks have also experienced partial or complete de-indexing, affecting the sites and pages receiving links from them. Some of these were public blog networks similar to BMR. Sites using certain autoblogging plug-ins were also negatively affected.  This has had a huge impact on some forms of article marketing.  It’s another episode in the long story of alluring tactics with the promise of quick gains.

    The dark side of the Force
    is a pathway to many abilities
    some consider to be unnatural

    - Supreme Chancellor [Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi]

    What does “(un)natural” mean?

    This is one of Google’s criteria for determining which links pass muster and which ones don’t.

    Certainly nothing is unnatural that is not physically impossible.” – Richard Brinsley Sheridan

    Whatever works: Applying Sheridan’s quote to the current topic might result in view that reduces to pragmatism; if it works, do it.  Is that good enough?

    Obviously not.  I’m sure Build My Rank worked for quite a while before it was de-indexed.  You can’t just look at whether something got results to discern whether you’ve met Google’s criteria for naturalness.  You need to actually understand what is meant by it.

    The unnatural, that too is natural.” – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

    No real difference: How about another often heard sentiment. “It doesn’t really matter, does it? It’s all the same. White hat, black hat, grey hat; who cares? If you define black/grey hat as intentionally trying to manipulate the search results, then many tactics that often are labelled white hat would fall into that category – even something as simple as optimizing your Title tag.”

    This comes across as a plausible argument to some.  However, it is disastrously flawed and depends on either a loosely or ambiguously defined notion of the critical term “manipulate”.  If “manipulate” simply means intentionally influencing, then having a website at all fits the bill.  If “manipulate” requires deception to be at work, then optimizing a Title tag or simply having a website at all doesn’t deserve that label, but making it appear as though there are more separate individuals linking to you than there actually are does deserve that label.

    What you need to know about natural links

    There are many things which make a link natural.  Some can be quantified while others are qualitative.  In this post I’m going to talk about one example of each.

    LINK DISTRIBUTION: This is one of the many quantitative components of link naturalness.  One of the things I actually go over with students is exactly how to quantify this which would be too much for a blog post, but I will cover how to understand this properly.  There is actually a serious debate in some circles over what the distribution of your in-bound links should look like in order for it to be considered a healthy profile or natural.  As an example, let’s discuss the distribution with respect to PageRank.

    One camp believes the distribution should resemble a bell curve.  This would mean you should have:

    - a small number of high PageRank pages linking to you (say 6 and above)

    - a small number of low PageRank pages linking to you (say 0 to 2)

    - and a high number of medium PageRank pages link to you (say 3 to 5)

    If that’s what your distribution looks like, then you’re sitting pretty.

    While another camp insists that the distribution should resemble a power law.  This would mean that you would have a small number of high PageRank pages linking to you, a larger number of medium PageRank pages linking to you and a much larger number of low PageRank pages linking to you.

    So which do you think is correct?

    Well, some interesting research in the area of link spam detection makes it pretty clear that the correct, or natural, distribution of in-bound links with respect to PageRank is one that resembles the power law.  The study actually says most web pages have in-bound and out-bound links that follow a power law distribution.  It also claims that a major deviation in PageRank distribution is an indicator of link spamming.  It even offers a mathematical formula by which it can calculate the degree of “spamminess” for a distribution of in-bound links to a site.

    This is just one quantifiable component of link naturalness, one that deals with link distribution with respect to PageRank.  There are many others and it really does make a difference how you understand this.

    QUALITY OF THE LINK SOURCE: There are many important components of quality.  A very straightforward one is taking a look at the page giving you the link and asking yourself whether you would find the content useful or interesting if you had a genuine interest in the subject area covered by the content.  Then ask whether the site itself is one you would bother to come back to and visit; or if it was a blog, would you even consider subscribing to its RSS feed after scanning through a couple of its posts.  You also need to keep in mind that it’s not enough merely for the page with your link to be of high quality.  If too many of the other pages on the site are of low quality, then your link will be devalued too.  You can thank Panda for that.

    What you need to do

    Realize that the rules are changing and you need to adapt. You need to learn as much as you can about what “natural” links are so that you do not fall prey to tactics that will be detrimental to your visibility in the search results, your traffic, and your business. It’s not enough to use trendy tricks or tools. Choose your link partners wisely. Go for the right diversity and distribution with your links and look for quality in the page linking to you and in the site the page is on. Refer to Google’s Panda quality guidelines if you need to.  Learn how to use a tool like Majestic SEO to keep tabs on bad links coming in from scraper sites and so on and to watch out for an unnatural looking distribution of in-bound links.

    “Many years ago, a mentor told me that understanding “why” something is done, is far more important than knowing “how” it is done. Knowing “why” gives people the ability to be innovative and the creativity to improve how something is done to get even greater results. Those only knowing “how” are doomed to repeating what they’ve always done.

    - NEIL SALERNO

    Be Sociable, Share!
      About Michael Marshall

      Mike Marshall, is lead instructor at the Search Engine Academy of North Carolina. Michael has over 20 years experience in information technology covering a wide range of specialties including: web design, software engineering, e-commerce solutions, artificial intelligence, and Internet marketing. He is a contributor to "Building Your Business with Google" (Wiley Publishing) and has taught classes on search engine technology for the U.S. Patent Office. He has degrees in Linguistics, Philosophy and Theology.

      Comments

      1. FYI – I plan to write a second part to this post by this coming Friday.

        Please share any comments or specific questions you might want covered in the comment thread.

        • Lalu says:

          hello there and thank you for your information I have denifitely picked up something new from correct here. I did however expertise several technical issues making use of this web site, as I experienced to reload the web site lots of times previous to I could get it to load properly. I had been wondering if your web hosting is OK? Not that Ie2€™m complaining, but sluggish loading instances times will extremely regularly affect your placement in google and could damage your quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords. Nicely I’m adding this RSS to my e-mail and can look out for a lot much more of your respective exciting content material. Make certain you update this again soon..

      2. Great article Michael! Does SEO Majestic create graphs outlining the link structure for a website? If not is there any tools out there that analyze linking structure and presents the data graphically?

      3. Alex says:

        Inbound links from updowner are not going to knock you out of the rankings. If they could, then every blackhatter within 10,000 miles would be submitting sites to them for de-indexing as a way of knocking out the competition.

        Do you believe you’re being penalized? If so, what kind of penalty?

        30 place drop – for light content sites used as Made for Adsense (often)
        50 place drop – for paid links that haven’t been rel=nofollow
        950 – for those felony offenders, a massive drop
        Sandbox – new sites with too many links too fast (often un-natural). You get to play in the sandbox awhile as they figure out if you’re for real

        If you search for yourdomain.com do you come number 1? If not, it signals a penalty

        Does a search for site:yourdomain.com return more than 0 results? If not, it signals a penalty

        • Good pointers Alex, on checking for penalties. Thanks.

          Are you saying, however, that black hatters cannot hurt a web site by getting bad in-bound links? It would of course be very difficult, but were you saying that it cannot happen? Just looking for clarification.

      4. That bell curve makes me remember my Statistics class back in college. Anyway, I remember coming across a blog before that talked about this recent email from Google to the webmasters. It actually made me a lot more worried than feel happy because of the fact that Google’s trying to make the Internet a better place. Didn’t it feel like they were saying, “Hey, you have unnatural links and we’re going to penalized you for that” in some way? I’m thinking that a lot of people in the SEO reseller industry, and the entire SEO world in general would continue to think of stuff that would further “future proof” their material.

      5. I’d like to find out more? I’d love to find out more details.

      6. Bob Walton says:

        Great stuff Mike! I’m looking forward to the next post.

      7. Zach Kong says:

        Great share! Wonderful and enlightening piece of article. In fact, I’m ashamed to say that I’m actually one of the webmasters who received a warning from Google about my website’s unnatural links.

        This warning and the possibility of being de-ranked or even de-indexed by Google served as a good wake up call for webmasters, SEO agencies and SEO professionals alike that Google has very little tolerance for websites that pay for inbound links in hope to manipulate their search engine ranking results (SERPs).

      8. I think that what you published was actually very reasonable.
        But, what about this? suppose you added a little content?
        I am not saying your content isn’t good, but suppose you added a title that grabbed a person’s attention? I mean SEO and Google

      9. cassphie003 says:

        This article is nice. You did it well. Show up some more. Thanks! :)

      10. it is really great article

        Thanks

      Trackbacks

      1. [...] my previous post on the topic of search engine optimization (SEO),  Google and unnatural linking, I [...]

      2. [...] SEO and Google’s notice for Unnatural Linking – by Michael Marshall [...]

      3. Rhymiaz2 says:

        Skipflyz2…

        Great blog post, saw on…

      4. My Homepage says:

        … [Trackback]…

        [...] Informations on that Topic: blog.searchengineacademy.com/blog/seo/seo-and-googles-notice-for-unnatural-linking/ [...]…

      5. kopi luwak says:

        … [Trackback]…

        [...] Read More Infos here: blog.searchengineacademy.com/blog/seo/seo-and-googles-notice-for-unnatural-linking/ [...]…

      6. … [Trackback]…

        [...] Read More Infos here: blog.searchengineacademy.com/blog/seo/seo-and-googles-notice-for-unnatural-linking/ [...]…

      7. Handyortung says:

        … [Trackback]…

        [...] Find More Informations here: blog.searchengineacademy.com/blog/seo/seo-and-googles-notice-for-unnatural-linking/ [...]…

      8. … [Trackback]…

        [...] There you will find 76655 more Infos: blog.searchengineacademy.com/blog/seo/seo-and-googles-notice-for-unnatural-linking/ [...]…

      9. … [Trackback]…

        [...] Informations on that Topic: blog.searchengineacademy.com/blog/seo/seo-and-googles-notice-for-unnatural-linking/ [...]…

      Leave a Comment

      *


      × six = 42