Google’s Warning - Don’t Sell Text Links
By Bryan Clark on Oct 10, 2007 in News
Most of us have read about the ongoing witch hunt by Google to stomp out those who sell Text Links on their blogs. John Chow had a drop in visual PageRank, as did Andy Beard, and even Courtney Tuttle. Visual PageRank is what appears in the Firefox extensions that you may have downloaded, yet it doesn’t affect your “real” PageRank. What I mean is that it might look like you have a PageRank 5 to a reader, when if they actually checked a PageRank tool they’d see that you were a PageRank 6.
Google’s warning rings loud amongst bloggers.
Many bloggers have viewed this decrease in PageRank as a warning from the all-mighty Google. The message is simple. You sell text links on your site… you get punished. They haven’t gone through the trouble of punishing these blogs by moving them further down the search engine rankings, but this seems to be the first step of Google’s new disciplinary plan.
You’ve got options.
- You could just quit selling text links. While this may be the option that most bloggers take, I really don’t think it’s Google’s place to tell us how we can and can’t make money with a site that we are paying for.
- You could use the rel=”nofollow” tags on your advertisers links. This is an option as well. I think it’s a pretty bad one because most advertisers like text link advertising because it brings them clicks, and it’s good for their SEO campaigns because it counts as an incoming link. I don’t think it’s good for business… and I think it will definitely decrease how much an advertiser is willing to pay for a link on your site.
- You could tell Google to go to hell, and keep doing business the way you want. This is the option that I am going with.
Are you nuts?
Maybe. I see it like this… I pay for the hosting, I bought the domain, I write all of my own content, I come up with ways to make money for my effort - Why would I ever allow Google to take money out of my pocket when I’m putting in all of the work? Google can keep the traffic that they send me. I don’t think that I’ll be doing all that terribly without the 11% of my overall traffic that they send me. Last month that would have been about 3,300 visitors. They can have them! I’ve had more traffic than that in a day just from social bookmarking sites.
I don’t currently have a PageRank, so this may be easy for me to say but I’ll say it anyway. If we as a community don’t stand up for ourselves… what else is Google going to try and take away? What’s next… no affiliate banners? No other monetization methods if we use Adsense? I don’t see why there aren’t more blog posts like the one I’m creating here. Who does Google really think they are? The internet police? This is just another attempt by Google to become the internet dictator. I’m not backing down from the giant here.
Who is Google to say how we can and can’t make money online? We aren’t hurting anyone. They make it sound like we are dealing digital crack. Seems a little hypocritical that a multi-billion dollar corporation would tell us to stop coming up with creative SEO techniques. Wasn’t this a company that was founded on creativity? Don’t they encourage it? But yet when it comes down to it they would rather squash the little guy than to encourage someone else to follow in their footsteps.
Comment and let me know what you think about this one. If you agree with this post, please Stumble and Digg it so that others may read it.
Don’t Forget To Visit My Friends!
Popularity: 5% [?]
37 Comment(s)
By Sutocu on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Even if your search engine traffic isn’t great percentage wise, I’m quite sure that most of your AdSense revenue depends on it. Social traffic isn’t known to be great for AdSense.
That said, you get way more money from other advertising anyway, so you probably shouldn’t care. I definitely agree that we shouldn’t let Google tell us what to do. However, I don’t support selling links just for their PR value, and it may become more difficult in the future with the update going as it does.
Anyway, even the websites which have lost PR (allegedly due to selling/buying links) haven’t lost position in the SERPs, so you shouldn’t be too concerned about that either.
By Bryan on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I’m not at all concerned about the PageRank impact, nor am I concerned about Adsense. Most of my revenue comes from affiliate programs and direct advertising anyway.
But for you to say that you shouldn’t worry about it because there MAY not be any PageRank implications, could be just a little naive. If they were willing to do this, how far will they go? SERP may be next. It happened to John Chow…
It’s a bigger long term problem than you may realize.
By BONTB on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
All I can say “Big Dog” business is business, they always find the way to be on top of everything. TLA pay’s me somethimes more then GA. Anyways I feel your pain as probably other bloggers as well. I hate it my self those two advertising options are my big income on my blog.
Thanks.
By Snoskred on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I’m moving all my gmail accounts to my own server.
I’m changing search engines.
I’m seriously considering switching feed readers. Though I love Google Reader, if thine right eye offends thee cast it out, or something like that.
I haven’t installed Google Analytics on my new blog - I’ll pay for Performancing Metrics instead, it does everything GA does but looks a lot better.
I haven’t put a Google search box on my new blog, nor do I intend to.
I have never used Adsense, and I advise any blogger using it? Get out of it now. Send a message.
If each of us bloggers start looking for other solutions, guess what? We promote what we use. We blog about what we use. We influence others to use what we use.
We made them what they are today. We have the power to undo that, too. Let’s take our power back!
Snoskred
By Jayne on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I couldn’t agree more. Screw Google, and PR. I’m not going to let Google determine what I put on MY website, especially because they sell text links themselves in the form of Adsense! They don’t want the competition for their own adverts.
We cannot allow Google to control the way the internet works.
I was worried, because your subject heading made it sound like you were saying “do whatever Google says”, so I was relieved to hear your voice in protest.
Stumbled and Dugg the article.
By scott hammond on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Way cool site.
I am really impressed.
Alexa Rating and all!
Hope to call you later and talk about…
scotthammond.typepad.com
Best,
Scott
By Michael on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I’ve decided to stop selling paid links because I can’t risk all of that traffic from Google. I do think that Google is making the wrong decision on this, the best solution would be for them to change the algorithm.
By April on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
If Google just put less emphasis’s on links there wouldn’t be this big problem.
By cooliojones on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I fully agree. I get tired of the big behemoths telling us what we can’t and can do! What’s next, they tell us exactly what types of links are acceptable within a post and which are not? They need to remember where they come from…a dorm room run by two guys back in 1996.
Although I will admit I wish I could have bought about 10,000 shares of their stock @ IPO!
By Blogging Mix on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I’ve made a post in defence to the action made by Google.
http://www.bloggingmix.com/2007/10/defending-googles-action-to-penalize.html
By Jon - Art of Money on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
With all respect, I find your stance, while it will probably be a benefit in garnering Diggs - which may be your intent, a bit naive.
Perhaps your site is too new to enjoy a steady stream of targeted, easy to monetize (they are searching for something after all) traffic from Google. On my site I have a single page that matches your blog’s monthly income, as a result of a few Google referrals a day.
I don’t see being able to make that kind of money from selling text links, so if I was going to choose between Google traffic and selling links, I’ll take the former.
Google is simply following the golden rule: “the one who has the gold, makes the rules.”
The fact is, buying links is a manipulation of the search engines and Google would rather clean the system than change it…their prerogative.
Even though, on a gut level my response to Google’s tactics is (was) the same as yours, from a business perspective I know better than to fight about it, better to adapt to the chancing landscape and keep making money.
And as I’ve reflected on it further, I have seen that in all honesty, if I was running Google, and concerned primarily with the quality of results being shown to my visitors, I’d probably being doing the same things they are to keep the playing field level.
By Bryan on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
While I respect your opinion, I couldn’t disagree more. Google has other options, and just like cooliojones said in his comment, these guys have to remember they started in a dorm room. I think they’ve lost touch with reality.
By dcr on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Good for you for telling Google where to stick it. I’m starting to use Ask.com more and more.
I think Google wants to be able to get a cut of anyone selling links. That would explain why putting AdSense on a site is okay, but selling ads (i.e., links) directly is a no-no in their eyes.
Yahoo was once synonymous with search. Now it’s Google. Google won’t stay there forever.
By Ognjen on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
As you said, you get more money from other sources and why would you care about them. You have my support with this.
By Bryan on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Thanks guys! I think people forget that Google isn’t the only search engine in existence. In the tech world it takes a lot to stay on top. I don’t think bullying tactics are going to keep them there.
By Jason on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Bryan,
You’re obviously kicking butt without much help from Google, but I get 30 to 200 hits per day from Google on one of my sites. I don’t play the social bookmarking field too much. Google is like 90% of my traffic, so in my case, I bow to thee.
I also don’t sell links on my sites because I don’t know if I can trust the sites. What if they get blacklisted for example? I might too.
By doug m on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
it seems like a lot of blogs that get big enough drop adsense anyway as it doesn’t come close to what their affiliate links and other advertising sales bring in.
By Jill on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
I have a question - are we talking about paid links as in Text-Link-Ads, or are we talking about any kind of paid links, like your Sweet Spot ads?
By Snoskred on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Jill - That is part of the problem. Nobody knows what we are talking about. We just know people are having their page rank dropped as some kind of penalty - for what Google has not said and probably won’t say. Because how illegal would that be, to say you can’t have links from this company or that company on your site? In Australia that breaches the trade practices act. In fact Google are currently in trouble with the ACCC here re their sponsored links at the top of a search result. Here’s some more info on that -
ACCC Alleges misleading and deceptive conduct by Trading Post and Google
It is entirely possible that if Google penalises bloggers from Australia, the bloggers will be contacting the ACCC to see what can be done about it. And this is probably what they should do, because I think it does breach the trade practices act. I’m no lawyer, though.
Snoskred
By Bryan on Oct 10, 2007 | Reply
Jill- It’s both. Google doesn’t allow you to charge for text links period. They seem to go light on the people at TLA though. It’s hypocritical since Google is in the business of SELLING TEXT LINKS (Adsense).
From my understanding you can sell links on your site as long as they have a “nofollow” tag. Google doesn’t want you spreading link juice to your advertisers. But the problem is that many advertisers are only in it for the SEO benefit.
By Jenny on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Exactly what I say! Screw google! I got a PR of zero so I’m all whatever now.
By Bryan on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
By Chris Lodge on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Good for you, and I quite agree.
Google aren’t doing this to improve their search results (no-one buys irrelevant text links, so it hardly affects the quality of the returned results), they’re doing it to protect their income from the most irrelevant search results of all - the ’sponsored links’ Google places at the top of every search you do.
By CFernandes on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Hi,
I agree with you almost 100%. I also have an interesting post on my blog title:
“PageRank? Google you can keep your stupid number!”
And I did “Digg” and Stumble the article!
By Dee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Googles double standards.
What are my thoughts? Well I am just a girl trying to make crumbs to survive. What I deal with and battle with daily is rank and position. Google traffic for some, is life and death for beginners. I think Google has more of a “do as I say, not as I do” set of policies. If you generate enough traffic and revenue for us we will look the other way. If you snub your nose at us we will take your PR away. That being said, I will lay the grounds for my thinking. I am a Thai girl so please forgive my English. I am in a niche market with Thai dating and have a blog. My main keyword is “Asian girls”
If you hit this keyword on Google you will see the battle I face with porn. Keep in mind you can not display adsense ads on site containing adult content or porn, yet look to the right and you will see they post ads on their own site under these keywords. My adsense was suspended from my blog, at the time due to using the word “sexy asian girls” no nudity or sex or dirty talk. They didnt kill my account just suspend from that blog. All they would ever tell me is adult content.. Ok I keep quiet. I am a tiny pea so I don’t matter and have no voice.
I can’t do that because I do not have enough traffic. If you will look at the links below, You will see that if you are big enough they will look the other way I have to look a little sexy to battle porn and I am bad yet olx friendster since their volume is super high they can display adsense right below PORN and it is ok.
ADMIN EDIT: No porn links please!
Those are just 3 samples I think and shows a clear double standard. Not to mention the munipulation of the ads to stretch the URL across the entire page so when click a blank portion of the page they still earn a click. This has been brought to google many times and simply ignored. But don’t let anyone see a nipple shadow under a shirt if you are a little blogger or they smack you. I hope my words not too long. I love your blog and love what you are doing. Thank you and thank you for ‘dofollow’
Please dont delete me Im not spam.
Dee
By Susan Suarez on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I’m not too worried about it. I think Page Rank is dead — Google has probably tossed it (PR update is late) as many people have learned how to “beat the system”. I’m glad to see you doing it your way too
By Dee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Sorry About those links, They were only examples
of the double standard.
Please forgive me.
By Bryan on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Dee - It’s not a problem. And they probably wouldn’t even be considered porn. Just a little riskier than I’d like on this site. Thanks for understanding. And the points you made were spot-on!
By Sutocu on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
“But for you to say that you shouldn’t worry about it because there MAY not be any PageRank implications, could be just a little naive. If they were willing to do this, how far will they go? SERP may be next. It happened to John Chow…”
The truth is, most blogs in the ‘make money online’ niche sell links. Google can’t just go and ban them all, or the quality of their results will get worse. Them dropping John Chow from the SERPs was a bad decision in my opinion. It just looks ridiculous when you don’t see his site for “John Chow”.
Yeah, they might do another round and ban the people who did not care about the warning, but even then… I’ll just mean that I turn to Yahoo! when I need to find something SEO related.
By Watch Prison Break Online on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
I think Google is operating to ruff, if we have to we will go back to Yahoo …
By Karen Zara on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Great article. Congratulations on your courage. I totally support your point of view. While I’ll still use some Google services because I truly enjoy them, I won’t let Google tell me what to do with my sites. They’re mine, after all! Otherwise I might better sell them to Google and look for something else to do.
I’m going to stumble this article.
By CHESSNOID on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Hey Bryan,
You make a good argument. I stumbled this too. More people need to read this.
Cheers!
By Dee on Oct 16, 2007 | Reply
here is a funny, Don’t sell links or buy links…. right, google will sell ads to someone selling links?? no no they wouldn’t http://thaidarling.blogspot.com/2007/10/paid-links-death-of-page-rank.html
By TBC on Oct 26, 2007 | Reply
I was just dropped today from a 3 to a 2 after expecting to go to a 5. I do sponsored posts on my blog. My other blog went from a 0 to a 3 today however there are less sponsored posts on that blog. I know of several other bloggers who have gotten the PR boot as well…all with sponsored posts. I read somewhere on one of google’s pages that they consider sponsored linking to be an attempt to “buy PR”. I wasn’t attempting to buy PR with my sponsored posts. I was buying groceries and clothes and shoes for three 8 year olds and paying electric bills and water bills. I’ll get buy with my PR 2 and if they drop me again, so be it. I’m doing a total protest of Google and if more people stand up and do the same, maybe they’re realize that they aren’t the gods that they think they are!
By Eric on Oct 27, 2007 | Reply
This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title s Warning - Don’t Sell Text Links. Thanks for informative article
By Demetrius Pinder on Nov 18, 2007 | Reply
I stopped playing and paying the Google game awhile ago. Their whole “Don’t be evil” mantra seems to be a thing of the past.
Google, don’t become Microsoft, ok? Microsoft has actually gotten “softer” throughout the years.
By Best Loan Consultant on Mar 10, 2008 | Reply
This really much disturbing.