Entries Tagged as 'Google'

Google Page Rank Update In Progress January 2008

Some of my sites had page rank gain ( that I noticed) this morning. This site is still sitting firm at PR0 which has me wondering if I have some sort of penalty. I have no paid ads or links nor do I use PayPerPost on the site but I write about it often.

Some of my internal pages on this site have PR3 (!) while main page has PR0. This suggest to me that update not complete.
This page for example has PR3 while Main page ( www.bigfootwebmarketing.com) has PR0 showing in toolbar.

This link has PR3 : http://www.bigfootwebmarketing.com/2007/11/15/payperpost-scrambling-trying-to-implement-realrank-after-their-bloggers-page-rank-disappears/

Using some of the Page Rank Checkers I don’t see flux happening on other sites.

Some sites with no page rank now have have Pr3/4 and others went up. Several have no movement. Ones that had PayPerPost penalty of Page Rank Zero have not gone up and still remain at zero.
There are many disappointed PayPerPost bloggers.

How have you fared in in the latest update? Are you new to blogging and have your first page rank showing in tool bar? Let me know :-)

Google Adsense Changes Referral Fee Structure- Is it Racism or Smart Business Model?

Google announced it is changing the way they will pay out referral fees to its publishers. The new Google Adsense referral fee pricing can be found here.

The hardest hit are overseas users who are no longer eligible for the program. reactions have been fast and furious. The change causing most of the anger is Google’s decision to drop whole counties from the program -allowing only North American, Latin American and Japanese publishers to participate and excluding everyone else.

Twentysteps.com writes a particularly pissed off post.

Blogmeister’s Jeremy Schoemaker of Shoemoney.com and Darren Rowse at Problogger.com express their own disappointment and dismay at the exclusionary move.

Andy Beard once again steps up to the plate with a well thought out post and explains why this makes sense to Google and how they are closing gaps in the system that allows for potential fraud in his post, Google Adsense Referral Hydra Had To Be Clobbered and reasons that Google made the changes as part of a well thought out business plan.
This may be the truth- but poor communication on Google end has lead to a perception problem.

The the lack of explanation other than a cursory

‘We’ve found that this referral product has not performed as well as we had hoped in these regions’

may be perceived as racism.

When you implement policy based on on group of people being less desirable or implying dishonesty because of the Country they live in you are teetering on a very slippery slope.
They would be wise to publish some pretty heavy data to further explain their rationale. Google needs to make public evidence based reasons for pulling the plug on Bloggers in Europe, India, Australia, etc or the will be facing some real backlash. Not the kind of backlash from mommy bloggers who got their page rank dropped.

The have entered into a PR quagmire and better start doing some heavy spinning.

Google Requires Nofollow Tags in Entire Post if Compensated?

I have been out of loop for a bit- one of my children has been seriously ill. First time I have had a chance to look at computer in a a while.

I have stated many many times now that Google is facing increasing problems with their algorithm and flailing about trying to control the Internet with Page Rank. They are REACTING and pro-acting to their self-made problem of passing page rank and buying/selling page rank. I have come back to a scary proposition the idea Google is floating around that ALL links within a sponsored post should be nofollow.

Clear As Chocolate

Looking over PayPerPost – IZEA Blog I had to give my had a shake. Am I reading things right?

Mat Cutts (who is an unusually nice guy and very approachable if you ever get a chance to be at an event with him) did in fact approach Ted Murphy of Izea/PayPerPost as outlined in his blog post here.

Ted spoke further with Matt about nofollow links, etc and then they have exchanged emails.
This is the part that has thrown me for a loop:
Matt Cutts:

I think quoting me as saying “ALL links inside of any sponsored post should carry the no-follow tag period, regardless of whether they are required, not required or even link to the advertiser paying for the post” is different than our conversation. I believe that I said that adding nofollow to all links in paid posts would certainly be safe. Then I asked if you were going to require nofollow on required links, why not put them on all links in paid posts? I think you replied that your business model didn’t support that, but I may be misremembering.

Ted Murphy

I may be misremembering our conversation, but this is what you said in an email to me: “Google (and probably all search engines) will consider all links in a paid post to be paid. If a link were truly editorial, someone wouldn’t have had to pay for a review to get that link–the PageRank seller would have made the link on their own, without any payment involved.” This email response is what prompted me to gain further clarification on the subject at PubCon as it left me confused. I think my recount of the conversation and the above email snippet are aligned.

This has enormous ramifications for all bloggers. The implication is that links in a post cannot be compensated- and if there is one link in a post then all must be considered “paid”.

What Does Google Consider Compensation?

The biggest challenge is what is compensation? On several of my sites I OFTEN link to Amazon when mentioning a product, book or movie review. I get big fat Amazon affiliate cheques every month from Amazon. I am getting commission on sales leads. Is this compensation? Must all Amazon links be nofollow? I do routinely add nofollow tags to Amazon links but on we on the ay to affiliate links being nofollow links?
If I work in an SEO capacity on a site- and then in one of my blogs I mention the client’s product or service with link to it- is this compensation?

if some one signs up to be a Google Adsense publisher through one of my site links and I get 100.00 referral fee- is this compensation? Should all my links to Google Adsense now be nofollow?

I am not being tongue in cheek- I really think this is getting murkier and murkier.

I may be repeating what’s all ready being discussed- I have not had much time to really delve into the issue but these are my knee jerk reactions.

I see Andy beard is on similar wavelength and gives a long list of conflicts and compensation scenarios in his post, Google Dictating Nofollow For ALL Links From Compensated Content.

I just read a great post by Rob Watts, Paid posts are the devil incarnate according to search engines at Yack Yack SEO outlining the problems Google is facing and how the best way to deal paid links as a blogger.. is to..well .. fly under the radar and hope for the best.

Google is really missing the ball here- and creating more and more confusion for bloggers with every clarification!

Mission: Organizing The World’s Information (minus everything we didn’t get paid for)

I have been eagerly awaiting the return of one of my favorite bloggers, Andy Beard, who has been away moving house. It has been over 2 weeks since I have had an Andy fix. He’s back. With a vengeance. Andy has the eery ability to see through the BS and pick up things that other marketing bloggers miss or plain ignore.
In his post “Before I deal the FUD “I’m going to ask you to put on your regular user hat” Andy analysis a recent post by Matt Cutts, “Selling Links That Pass Page Rank” .
Note the title of the post… the words are chosen very carefully- “Selling Links That Pass Page Rank” Not paid links. Not sponsored links. Not paid for post links. “Links that pass page rank”. What is the purpose of buying a link or buying link that will pass on page rank to your site? The only reason to do it is to get higher results in the search engine results pages.

Google Created the Paid Link Monster

Google chose to factor links to a web page as one of the corner stones for ranking web pages. In general, the more links from quality sites to a web page, the better. And therein is the problem. Ruud Hein of Search Engine people explains how Google created this grey market of links and the impact in his post, Hilarious PageRank Update Impacts Google Badly.

google handcuffs link sellers
Why does Google want to stop paid links? selling links that pass rank? They are quite serious about stomping out blogs and sites that sell links- in fact- they encourage the reporting of paid links .
Google search is very interested in maintain their credibility. Matt posts here in the “report paid links” post

I even mentioned earlier this year that paid articles/reviews/posts should be done in a way that doesn’t affect search engines.

You can find countless posts the Matt Cutt’s blog on why

“The best links are not paid, or exchanged after out-of-the-blue emails–the best links are earned and given by choice”


google is world organizer of information
Google has laid out quite a task for themselves- their mission is index and catalogue information on the web and be able to serve up accurate results for a searcher researching a topic. No small task. They have put themselves: IN CHARGE OF ALL THE WORLD’S INFORMATION .
Wow. They are looking our for all of us- the searcher and the user and giving us the best possible information available. That is their mission.
They use very complicated and top-secret methods to decide what site is the best site to spew out when you type in a search term into its search box. How many sites are linking to you, what kids of sites are linking to you, how old those sites are, how credible they are, even who owns the site, a link from a site owned by the government or University is more important than a business or individual, for example. They are looking for relevance and quality. Getting your site to have good page rank takes work. SEO’s get paid a lot of money to make sure your site is well designed and easily crawled so your information can be cataloged.

Keeping The Internet Honest

Why go to all this trouble? What is the end result? All of this is done to achieve higher rankings in search engine results pages.
A dog breeder want to be on page one when you look for “dog breeder” . A florist wants to rank for “send flowers” .
Google doesn’t want you to cheat your way to the top. It considers buying links as a way to cheat or game the system.
I understand this. I even applaud this. I am a huge proponent of the Open Directory.

Google takes its mission so seriously that as well as asking you to report paid links- That if it finds out you are selling links that pass on page rank (and increase the chances of a site being higher in the SERPS) it will strip your Page Rank!
paid link seller in jail
This happened to thousands of sites late October 2007. Sites that did not have nofollow tags in links that were “paid” got nailed with a Page Rank ZERO.
They can do this- its their sandbox and they make the rules. However this is where it gets murky for me. Google wants to Organize The World’s Information … this is why it is zapping those sites that pass on page rank for a fee.

Pay For Top Spots

You don’t have to jump through fiery hoops to get on page one of search engine results pages. You can pay some one. You don’t have to go to the trouble of hiring an SEO or adding pages and pages of content or seek out links. You can pay some one to make sure you are on the SERPS everytime. The same company will even help you protect your investment.
It will make sure that a site “paying” for page rank will not out rank you. You will even appear ON TOP of older sites, more relevant sites. A competitor may not even rank anymore regardless of the value of his information if he was found to be “selling links that pass page rank”.

The whole point of buying page rank is to make to top of search engine results pages. You can pay GOOGLE to place you there. You can pay a fee to have your link ON TOP OF EVERYONE ELSE and get rid of all those other pesky sites trying to do the same things. You don;t have to pay to get page rank and be #1- you can just hand over your cash and Google will put you there.

As for the user?

Well according to Matt Cutt’s when I commented on the apparent hypocrisy of the system:

Lisa, we do think of ads as a type of search and try to show the most relevant ads we can (not just the ones where the advertiser is willing to pay the most). We also apply relevancy tests on whether to show ads on the top vs. the side, so that we only promote ads from the right-hand side to the top slot if we think that they’re very useful.

So.. there ads are relevant to the end uses research process and provide a useful purpose. These are results that are posted at the top of every single search you ever do when you are asking them for the best information.

When you pay Google money for placement on the top of search engine results page it refers to those ads “as a type of search”.
When you pay anyone else other than Google to place in top of the SERP’s your site is no longer relevant and given a Page Rank zero.
This is why the sudden change in semantics. Paid Links are now ” Paying for Links That Pass Page Rank”.

Follow The Money

follow the money
It is not the right or wrong of pay per placement in a results page- its who you gave your money to.