Spam Articles by SEO Speedwagon

November 27, 2007

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

Just when I thought I knew exactly what I wanted for Christmas, I get the following e-mail:

We can increase your monthly web traffic and get you the best position on every major search engine guaranteed never to move (ex: Yahoo! , Google, MSN, AltaVista, etc.). For a free informative consultation and site review email us.

Guaranteed never to move!!!!!!!

During my free informative consultation, they also promised that when I die, on my deathbed, I will receive total consciousness. So I got that goin' for me, which is nice.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving
Posted by tom at 09:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

October 17, 2007

The Art of Honest SEO

Next month I will present a webinar on "What is SEO?" Instead of talking about key phrases, links and code, I will talk about what matters to my audience most: They want to know how online marketing can help them sell more widgets than their competitors. I can get into the nitty gritty explanations later. And to be honest, there are very few people out there who are totally unacquainted with the subject. This is my chance to show them a wholistic viewpoint; what my company is all about and how we can partner together to achieve the customer's goals.

I always like to start these presentations with a definition of what we're shooting for: I want the audience to understand that the goal is to improve the site's usability for human beings, along with its search engine friendliness. A no-tricks, no-spam approach delivers the best results over time, as Bruce Clay explains so well in his excellent article "Search Engine Optimization Standards and Spam Discussion."

What we do is part art and part science. I fall fairly heavily on the "art" side myself, and have always believed that creating content with human users in mind also reaps rewards on the search engines. Jill Whalen in her recent article "The Art of SEO" reiterates her longstanding belief that there is no magic SEO formula; in fact being too stringent with SEO "requirements" may likely trigger search engine spam filters. I'd rather get to know my customer and his business so I can apply my SEO knowledge to improve his website, instead of just overloading it with SEO elements.

All of this said, I won't pretend that I don't want to persuade prospects to work with my company. But I want them on board from the start for all the right reasons. Explaining "the art of honest SEO" has always proven to be time well spent.

The Art of Honest SEO
Posted by lisa at 08:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

July 25, 2007

How the U. of Kentucky Web Team Spent Its Summer Vacation

I really don't consider myself a spam cop, but this is too good to pass up. Just one more, then I'm done; I promise.

A few days ago when I was working on a previous post about how small sites are using big, well established sites to "vouch" for them, I showed some examples of SERPs for [cialis]. One thing I didn't get a chance to explore is how the University of Kentucky shows up on page 3 at Google:

When you click over with JavaScript disabled, you get the typical UK search page:

When you click over with JavaScript turned on, you're almost immediately redirected to the Cialis landing page at extra-drug.com:

At first I thought maybe there was some hijacking going on, but a cursory look at the UK Search page shows it was an inside job. Here's the smoking gun:

So we know how the page ranks for the terms. And also note that when you click over to the UK Search page from another UK page -- even with JavaScript enabled -- you don't redirect. So there's some referrer-based server-side magic going on here too. The real nagging question here is, who is making the money? A single guy in the UK CS department, or is it shared among many of them? Surely code like this doesn't go unnoticed for long.

Like the techniques I described in the earlier post, pill sites hooking up with the college web site crowd is nothing new. Danny Sullivan blogged about it over two years ago, after Search Engine Watch users found the Stanford Daily selling text links.

The Stanford editors pleaded ignorance, but that excuse doesn't cut it in the Big 10. These Kentucky guys know what they're doing.

So what's the most interesting angle of this whole mess? The fact that it takes place on the Search page on the University of Kentucky web site. How could this be anything BUT an Oedipal glove-slap to UK's biggest search-focused alumnus?

How the U. of Kentucky Web Team Spent Its Summer Vacation
Posted by erik at 02:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

July 22, 2007

Pharmaceutical Sites Riding In On Established Coattails

While I typically find sports metaphors trite and unimaginative, this one works fairly well, so I beg indulgence. The pharmaceutical game has always been considered a pretty cutthroat environment in organic SERPs, and that's still the case today. Some sites are using the equivalent of offensive linemen to penetrate an otherwise difficult defense and make room for their own site to squeeze through the gap.

Here's the philosophy: If your site can't rank by itself for certain queries, use the broad back of an established site to knock some of the weaker sites down the SERP to make room for themselves.

Take a random but popular drug -- Cialis. The query for [cialis] shows two such instances on the first page of results, in spots 8 and 10.

First case: Alexa
So how does Alexa fit into the Cialis game? The folks at pillls-deals.com (which is where pillsdeals.com redirects) spread guestbook and comment spam across 20,000+ sites and link to ... not their own site, but the Alexa profile page for their Cialis page. The Alexa page gets crawled and begins to rank for [cialis] due to factors like the anchor text dropped in the guestbook spam. If a user clicks over to the Alexa page from the [cialis] SERP, it still requires another click to get to the pills-deals.com site, so I'm curious about the clickthrough on a #8 result that requires an additional click beyond clicking away from the SERP. Still, the rankings portion of the equation seems to be working.

Second case: Technorati
Here's a double slap in the face of Google. The crew at xlpharmacy.com (or maybe just an adoring fan) set up a fake Cialis blog -- on Google's own Blogspot.com domain, no less -- and used Technorati tags to tag each post the same way: "Buy Cialis Online. FDA Approved Quality Pills. cialisxl." So queries like [cialis] and [buy cialis online] show sites like the Technorati tag page in their top results, since Technorati tag pages are crawled and indexed by Google. Again, once the user clicks over, it requires another click to get to the actual pill sales site. And even if the user clicks over from the Technorati tag page to the fake blog (cialisbuyonline1.blogspot.com), the user never even sees the blog -- instead, falling prey to a JavaScript redirect to xlpharmacy.com.

Neither of these techniques is particularly new, which is part of the problem. Pharm SERPs seems to be as useless and irrelevant as they've always been, representing one of the biggest problems that engines' anti-spam teams face right now.

Pharmaceutical Sites Riding In On Established Coattails
Posted by erik at 02:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

April 19, 2007

Friends Don't Let Friends 302

Our 300 Series expert James sent out an important warning earlier in the year about 302's that aren't really temporary coming back to bite hard, and here at The Wagon we're starting to believe this may be a new Google theme for Spring.

The gist is there is a ticking clock on temporary, in that, we surmise, Google can tell when a 302 started, and it can certainly tell if it has yet to end. This makes sense. The unknown is what period between is given Google's blessing as truly "temporary" in temporal terms, and what then falls outside that window.

In 2007 so far, though, we are definitely seeing instances of the window slamming shut, loudly. And these are not spammers, no -- just, as can often be the case with a 302, used in a pinch with all intentions to return and fix, then forgotten. A promise written in the sand.

Please make sure any 302 you are using does indeed end, ultimately. If not, it likely will be ended for you.

Friends Don't Let Friends 302
Posted by john at 04:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

April 04, 2007

If I Could Just Insert Something Here...

...certainly you will no longer realize you have just been interrupted. That's the latest note in the bittersweet Old Media symphony of interruption marketing rationalizing away the fact that their advertising vehicles, those dinosaurs eying the glaciers in sight, are -- well -- interruptions:

Fox, in a bid to keep viewers watching during commercial breaks, will begin running short, animated snippets of programming between ads.

The tiny bits of programming will be about a taxi driver called Oleg, who will share words of wisdom and will chat with spoof versions of celebrities like Tom Cruise and Donald Trump, writes The Wall Street Journal. Two eight-second clips will begin airing on Monday.
The other broadcast networks are working on similar initiatives. At its development meetings with advertisers, for example, ABC showed off an idea that it hopes would make the break between programming and commercials seamless. The idea involves having characters watching an ad on TV. The ad would then expand to fill the whole screen.

Good golly if the characters are watching the ad, shouldn't I?

Allow me to insert here my growing belief that a key distinction between Old Media and New -- with each new brand of trick pulled on customers assumed prima facia breathtakingly dumb and devoid of any critical thinking skills whatsoever, collectively -- appears rather unfortunately to be disdain for the customer.

When an audience is telling you they would rather not be interrupted and rather than alter your vehicle you instead devise schemes to either strap them in or trick them out of realizing the route they choose has suddenly changed, what other could that strategy been born of than contempt?

New Media has a word for these tactics: Spam.

If I Could Just Insert Something Here...
Posted by john at 02:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

March 12, 2007

Consumer Privacy Can Be SOOOOOO Annoying!

Perhaps it's simply a matter of having worked so long in a marketing niche that outputs only upon user-initiated input -- and questions seeking answers at that -- individuated down even to the syllable level, transmitted from the mind to the fingertips, each single atomic instance of the exchange a mutual handshake, rather than a phone-ringing, paper-flinging, desktop-hijacking raid.

Perhaps not. Perhaps I value privacy at some hermit-level degree and just haven't left my cave enough to yet realize it. But I find some of the assumptions inherent in this whining blurb about the fictional consumer "Katy" from Do-Not-Mail Movement Gains Traction in State Legislatures to be a particularly offensive note in the bittersweet AdAge symphony of interruption marketing rationalization:

Having clearly established her ability to bad-mouth your brand on her blog, TiVo your TV commercials, stop your phone calls and filter out your pop-ups, now-with the help of the government-she's trying to stop you getting access to her mailbox.

Is this blistering self-parody or have they finally jumped the shark into totalitarianism?

Consumer rights? Let them eat cake!

Consumer Privacy Can Be SOOOOOO Annoying!
Posted by john at 09:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

July 13, 2006

Mr. Request-A-Receipt Spammer

SEO Speedwagon Presents: Real Men of Brazen
(Real Men of Brazen)
Today we salute you, Mr. Request-A-Receipt Spammer.
(Mr. Request-A-Receipt Spammer)
You've given us the real American dream: an unsolicited message, fifteen lines of jabberwocky, and a sign that says, "Would you like to send a receipt?"
(Here's Your Receipt, Buddy!)
Pushing free will heavenward, your prompt for a Yes or NO beckons us all to share in the frivolity.
(Audience Participation!)
Because it's not enough just to get the message. But believe me, Mr. R. A. R. Spammer, we get the message! And the next one. And the next one. And the next one.
(Man I just got another one!)
So crack open an ice-cold Bud Light, receipt boy. You know the way to a man's trashcan…and you're taking a few thousand slightly different e-mail accounts with you.
(Mr. Request-A-Receipt Spammer)

Mr. Request-A-Receipt Spammer
Posted by tom at 11:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

June 23, 2006

Google AdSpam

First, let me just say that I’m very tired of hearing and reading about Google this and Google that, but I’m unfortunately forced to write about them anyway.

Is it just me or is Google search results continuing to get riddled with tons of Spam sites? For months now, I’ve seen tons and tons of spam sites and alike taking up first page listings for hopes that people will click on their stupid AdSense-only-and-nothing-else-relevant-or-unique-about-this-page web pages for generating revenue from Google via Google AdSense.

For a company that prides itself as the most relevant search engine, I’m starting to feel like Google is allowing this and perhaps wanting this to happen because Google makes money regardless. I don’t get it. Their stock continues to climb to record numbers and everyone (except perhaps myself) loves them, yet their diversification is causing their core product (search) to truly diminish in quality and they seem to be forgetting their roots.

There are so many examples of AdSense-riddled top tens on Google that I’m not going to offer any examples to show our fellow Wagoneers. Instead, I’m wanting feedback from our readers with perhaps links to example search results showing just how pathetic Google’s so-called “relevant� search results are with solid examples of AdSense-only type sites populating most of the top ten real estate.

The more comments we get for this post, the better. AdSpam (aka Google AdSense) is a growing problem and I just don’t hear enough people talking about it. Perhaps this thread can start people talking and more importantly, allow Google to see that people are taking notice of their lack of attention to their core product and audience and just wanting to please share holders.

Now’s the time to chime in boys and girls!!

Google AdSpam
Posted by sean at 04:23 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

June 20, 2006

Hey, Look At Me! I’m Ethical! (There, I Said It)

I’m becoming a fan of David Spade’s new show on the Comedy Channel called The Show Biz Show. My favorite segment is right after the news and is called “There, I Said It�.

So, here’s to you, little guy Mr. Spade as I tip my cap and say:

I’m getting a little irritated with SEOs calling themselves an "Ethical SEO Company". In fact, it may even be un-ethical calling yourself ethical.

First of all, who runs around saying, “Hey, look at me. I’m ethical.�? Really, have you ever in your lifetime ever heard someone arrogantly say, “I’m ethical�. And isn’t it most often when someone is un-ethical that it gets pointed out?

As for what SEOs do and how it relates to the definition of “ethics�, there are no accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of SEOs. In other words: It’s not a matter of ethics.

Perhaps some SEOs allow their sales staff to tout their company as an “Ethical SEO� simply because it sounds so honest, pure and safe. It really does, doesn't it? ..... [pause for momentary reflection] ..... After all, who would want to hire an un-ethical SEO company? This is just silly. I’ve seen hundreds of SEO RFPs and never once have I seen one with the must-have requirement: Ethical.

Are white hat SEOs ethical companies? Maybe. Are black hat SEOs unethical? Maybe. If an SEO claims to have a black box proprietary technology or techniques that mimic Google’s algorithm, are they ethical or unethical?

The bottom line is that all SEOs have methodologies and techniques that they recommend to their clients. Some of these techniques may be controversial and others may not be controversial. They are one or the other and the industry has done a pretty good job of making it clear which are which.

Ethically speaking, SEO techniques are neither right nor wrong so please, let's keep ethics out of it.

There, I said it.

Hey, Look At Me! I’m Ethical! (There, I Said It)
Posted by doug at 01:00 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

May 24, 2006

A Reminder To Small-Medium Size Players Seeking Google Love

Early in my career, I spent several years managing a 5 physician family practice in a small Missouri town.

Perhaps the most embarrassing moment of my life happened inside the walls of that clinic. That was the day I thought I was interviewing a gal for a receptionist position when actually she was there for a pap smear. You see, my office was occupied and I had to use one of the physician exam rooms for what I thought was going to be an interview. It was her first visit to the clinic and she thought I was the doctor. Talk about mistaken identities. You should have seen the look on her face when she asked if she should sit on the exam table and I said, “No, that chair over in the corner will be just fine.�

Rural health clinics (RHCs) are formed in Missouri and other states in order to get quality health care into medically underserved rural areas. Physicians can actually get a better reimbursement rate from Medicare, Medicaid, etc. by choosing to practice in a rural setting. The official designation as an RHC comes from the Department of Health and there are rigid guidelines to achieving this determination including an exhaustive “site visit� inspection.

I remember the preparation for this inspection was excruciatingly detailed and went on for months! One of the things I remember is that all 16 of our exam rooms had to meet 3 or 4 pages of criteria … everything had to be exactly per the requirements if we were to pass the inspection and be awarded the RHC designation. I even recall someone saying that if one room didn’t contain a particular Policies & Procedures manual, the entire clinic would fail the inspection….just that one little thing!

This small piece of my past recently came to mind while talking to a client this week. This is a client that if you put their site into a large aquarium with other sites in their industry, they would be a small to medium size fish in an aquarium with lots of very small plankton, a few sharks, and one giant sperm wale.

Google was giving some “special treatment� to the sperm whale (imagine that) and our client wanted to also be considered for this Google Love. Google has made some positive comments to them, but has yet to officially consider them alongside their competitor.

Our client is smart. Before I even had a chance to ask them, they had already started to double and triple check their site, making sure all their ducks are in a nice, uniform row. They know that if Google does consider them, they need to be prepared right now.

Google isn’t as strict as the rural health clinic above, however, it’s incredibly wise to make sure your site isn’t in the black or even gray when it comes to Google’s inspection.

Just a reminder to all you small or medium size fish, check your site using Google’s “No No� list routinely -- especially if you want to be considered along with the bigger fish in your industry.

A Reminder To Small-Medium Size Players Seeking Google Love
Posted by doug at 01:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

May 09, 2006

Pagejacking and Vanilla Ice

Word Pictures – Yeah!!!

I know they wouldn’t admit it, but I’m sure some of my friends say I have a slightly irritating knack for comparing things and noting similarities. I call them word pictures and it’s something I learned a long time ago in sales training. I have yet to meet someone who doesn’t like or appreciate even a moderately good word picture. If you’re the first one, feel free to comment below.

Sometimes when explaining the intricacies of the world of SEO, I like to use word pictures. Technically stated, a word picture is defined as a graphic or vivid verbal description. Simply stated, a word picture explains something in a way that makes it easier to understand. When you hear someone say, “Let me put it this way…�, it’s highly likely that a word picture is about to follow.

If you’ve read some of my Wagon Posts, you can probably tell that music and SEO are two of my loves, thus the “musical SEO� posts and accompanying word pictures. Hey, it stays true to the “SEO Speedwagon� name coined by our very own quick-witted Link Building Director, Tom Lustina. Tom, I continue to salute thee!

And now that I can’t disappoint my adoring throng of readers (thank you, all six of you), here we go again.

Pagejacking

Plagiarism is a word that most people are familiar with. A much cooler, hip, web version of plagiarism is called pagejacking. Pagejacking is basically copying/stealing content or code from another web site and putting it on your web site with the intent of also stealing some of the other site’s traffic. The word “pagejacking� is a combination of “hijacking� and “web page�.

If it were me, I would have called it “pagelarism�. But, as usual, no one asked me. Sigh.

So, a pagejacker sees a page performing well at a search engine for a particular phrase they also want to do well for, they grab some or all of the content on the top performing page and copy it to their web page, hoping to also perform well at the engine. Sometimes pagejacking is exact copying and sometimes there is a minuscule change to tweak the hijacked page’s code or content, of course, in the pagejacker’s favor.

Pagejacking really caught fire with the Internet’s boom in the late 90s and is still very common today. In fact, when we perform our comprehensive site analysis of a web site prior to optimizing it, we spend much time investigating if our client’s site has any hijacked content on other web sites. We’ve seen some pretty wild cases of pagejacking over the years – even on Intrapromote’s web site.

In a 1999 case of what I’ll be kind and call “blaringly ugly pagejacking� which was settled out of court, one pagejacker found himself up against the FTC who charged him with violating the FTC Act. This particular case was of the variety mentioned above where there was one small change in the code which redirected the visitor to, let’s say, a highly undesirable site.

And now, what you’ve all been waiting for….the pagejacking word picture.

No, My Version Goes “Da, Da, Da, Da, Da-Da, Da-Da�

“It’s that extra Da at the beginning that makes it different!�

Those were basically the words of Robert Matthew Van Winkle, a.k.a., Vanilla Ice when asked about his music sampling of David Bowie and Queen’s song Under Pressure. He argued that one little note added to the beginning of Queen and Bowie’s version made his only hit Ice Ice Baby different than Under Pressure. There was no album liner notes thanking the writers or giving credit to the original song.

Today’s pagejacker is yesterday’s Vanilla Ice. As with the 1999 pagejacking case mentioned above, it has been long rumored that Bowie/Queen vs. Van Winkle was also settled outside court walls.

If you find the content you suffered Blood, Sweat, and Tears to create has been pagejacked, I recommend spending a few minutes reminding yourself that some of the greatest writers, both authors of book and song, have had their compositions copied.

Then, ask the pagejacker to remove the jacked content within 48 hours or they’ll find themselves "under pressure" from your attorney.

Pagejacking and Vanilla Ice
Posted by doug at 10:27 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

March 03, 2006

Google: Stop Caching that Czech!

Last week I wrote about a Czech site cloaking its way to an above-the-fold spot for a query to which I feel quite attached. I reported it and a few days later, it was gone. That's where the post ended.

But a day or two after that, it was back. Sort of. Same domain, but a different folder. A similar stuffed page was visible if you had JavaScript shut off, and the same ad-loaded scraper site was where you ended up if JS was turned on.

I was about to report it again, but instead, I decided to see what would happen if I didn't. And just like before, two days later, it was gone again. This time, without my reporting it.

So this doesn't necessarily prove anything, but it leaves me with some possible theories. Maybe the algo caught it both times, and its disappearance after my initial spam report was merely a coincidence. (I even suspected as much when I wrote the first post.) Or, maybe someone else reported it this time, and Google plucked it manually.

I'm leaning toward the algo catching it both times. It's probably hubristic, given the amount of spam reports Google must receive, to think they'd act on my recommendation so quickly. But since Google now longer denies hand-involvement in site-pulling, anything's possible.

Note: I'm fully aware that an update to a spam report post isn't particularly compelling. But I had a post title with a double pun, and I wasn't about to give that up. I can't live on sonnets alone.

Google: Stop Caching that Czech!
Posted by erik at 07:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

February 21, 2006

Truth and Consequences in Spam Reporting

When it comes to spam reporting, I'm like the annoying art student cliché: I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.

Last week, I was doing a manual check for a pretty competitive phrase, for which my client has worked its way up to anywhere from the third to the fifth spot at Google. I noticed a site I'd never seen before, sitting in the top three. The description looked valid, but the URL was a red flag - a .cz (Czech) country code. The Czech Republic represents a strong, beautiful people, but let's just say that it's not particularly known for the query terms I typed.

I clicked through the link, and after a bit of address dancing, my browser settled down at a URL whose very name proclaimed its expertise in "meds." There, the left column treated me to numerous options for curing what ailed me, from Levitra to Viagra to Lipitor and Phentermine. The right column offered me ads relating to my original query, scraped from several third-tier PPC engines.

But this wasn't what Google saw. I went back to the original Google SERP, disabled JavaScript (thanks PrefBar), and clicked the result again. Now I saw it. A plain vanilla page of about 1000 words, about 530 of which were terms from my two-word query. That's what Google saw, and that's what made the page rank in the top three.

I hate scrapers. They're the shifty kids who leach onto smart kids and copy their homework right before class starts. The thing about scrapers is, the searcher almost never ends up seeing content that she's searching for. To me, that's the line in the sand. Hyper-aggressive SEO - whether it's IP-based cloaking, JavaScript doorways, or old-school keyword stuffing - is something I generally don't report - as long as the query intent is eventually satisfied with real content. (And I don't even report scrapers unless they're beating a client, because I don't have the time.)

Some SEOs would criticize me for reporting any sites at all. Some would criticize me for my lax attitude and not reporting enough. NPR's Daniel Schorr says that when you anger people evenly on both sides of the issue, you're probably on the right track.

I reported the site within a couple hours of finding it. A few days after I made the spam report, the Czech domain had disappeared, receding into the cold Prague night. I would love to take full credit for its exit, but I can't. I'll never know whether it was my reporting, or if Google's algorithm caught the site on its own.

Truth and Consequences in Spam Reporting
Posted by erik at 11:27 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

February 14, 2006

Search Engine Spam Amnesty Bins

I was in the security checkpoint line at the Cleveland airport last week when I noticed an amnesty bin about half way through the line.

Am I the only one on the planet that hadn't seen these before? These containers were actually introduced in 1993 as a way for the U.S. Department of Agriculture to encourage overseas travelers to dump undeclared plants and exotic living things forbidden from entering the states.

For the last 12 years, amnesty bins have been used to dump everything from dirty diapers to drugs to python snakes.

Believe it or not, people have even used amnesty bins to relieve themselves. Wow, that must have been a very long line!

Coming soon to an amnesty bin near you, additional verbiage: “Please do not pee in our amnesty bin.�

Apparently they have evolved into more than just amnesty from forbidden plants and such. In 2006, an amnesty bin can now forgive the transgression of knives, guns, scissors, and other weaponry like the dreaded fingernail clippers. And the bins are clearly marked that if you drop your stash, there will be no fine or prosecution. Sounds like a good deal doesn’t it?

What does this have to do with SEO you ask?

I hereby propose that search engines introduce amnesty bins for search engine spammers and companies that have unknowingly hired a company that used spam techniques on their site. Across the front of the Search Engine Spammer Amnesty Bin would be: “Confess Spam. Dump Spam. Avoid Search Engine Delays and Penalties.�

“Attention all search engine spammers and unknowing passengers, for your convenience, amnesty bins are located at the nearest security checkpoint.�

I think we all know that for the most part, search engine spammers themselves would not use this amnesty bin (except maybe to relieve themselves). They’re spamming and they know it and most would laugh at the idea of search engine amnesty. However, it’s the companies mentioned above that I feel deserve the right, at least one time, to ditch their prohibited spam, no questions asked, say a few “Hail Googles� and be forgiven of their sins.

Do I hear an Amen?

Search Engine Spam Amnesty Bins
Posted by doug at 05:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

February 07, 2006

Ode to a German Auto

A stable grows, but not all steeds the same
They know my new, but no one knows my used
My jockeys came to me to boldly claim
Disable JavaScript and be amused

Yet viewed through lenssen (not of rosy hue)
My stable's fate rests in the whim of Man
Depends which country code you're looking through
My doors are lock'd because of irksome ban

But when the sun sets here it calls to thee
My stallions' lovers will demand their say
And hit the track to once again run free
When new moon's passing seems like just a day

I tremble when I find myself between
Gott und Die entscheidende Suchmaschine

Ode to a German Auto
Posted by erik at 11:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

November 30, 2005

Diagnosing Potential SEO Problems - Without Guilt

From a psychological perspective, it turns out that asking a new or potential client, "Have you ever engaged in any spammy or controversial SEO activity?" is quite a loaded question - somewhere between "Have you stopped beating your spouse?" and "Are you really going to wear that tonight?"

While we ask this question for diagnostic reasons only, it elicits immediate defense from most marketing managers. "No - of course not!" they interject, before we can even finish the question.

Too bad. I actually enjoy unthreading the spaghetti-like mess that some clients bring to us. I have fun looking at things like doorway pages, scripts that create cloaked pages, and complex link networks to see exactly how they're sculpted, and to compare the intended result of the technique versus the actual results attained. What I don't enjoy is finding out about these techniques six months into a campaign.

So recently, I recognized the error of our ways when we discovered a client, who had previously promised that all was on the level, had several additional domains, all on the same IP block, using a meta refresh to point to the main site. This was the likely cause of rejection from a few human-edited directories.

So why was it our error? To the client, it was on the level. Long ago, they had purchased domains that they either intended on using, or that they didn't want their competition to buy, and they simply pointed them to the main domain the only way they knew how. Fast-forward to the last few years, when the specific technique you use in redirection is a critical component of SEO strategy.

So now I phrase it differently. "Tell me about your site's history," I say. "What have you done in the past, and how did it work?" It's a little bit clinical and sterile, but we end up finding out much more helpful information.

As a post-script, to phrase it in terms free of the slightest hint of judgment, here are some site activities that, while we're sure they were done with ONLY THE BEST OF INTENTIONS, might cause you some eventual grief in the indexing and ranking processes:

• Exchanging links with a site or group of sites whose sole criterion for offering a link is verifying your willingness to offer a link in return.
• 5000 (or any-thousand) doorway pages with 75% keyword density that redirect to your normal site.
• Any activity whose description was punctuated with, "Don't worry, no human will ever see this anyway."

(Humans, we keep finding, are one of the most annoying factors in web usability.)

Diagnosing Potential SEO Problems - Without Guilt
Posted by erik at 02:14 PM | Comments (0)
Printer-friendly version

November 28, 2005

Comment Spam the Wagon? ITSOK with Me

Maintaining the SEO Speedwagon is not quite as glamorous a task as, say, Alfred might have with the Batmobile, or Q with his fleet of Aston Martins. In fact, our version of machine guns hiding behind headlamps is a simple button marked "Ban IP Address," which we reserve for commenters and trackersback who attempt to hijack our fair vehicle to carry dirty links across the border.

I'm not the first one to notice a new, two-tiered spamming tactic among blog comment spammers. First, the links these spammers are pointing to are usually large, legitimate brands, such as Apple or Microsoft. Second, they include the rel="itsok" attribute on a link. Of those sites that have noticed this approach, however, not too many have figured out exactly why spammers are using it. Surely, SURELY, they're not dumb enough to think that it's overriding the rel="nofollow" attribute (definition), about which I became all sappy last week.

Turns out they don't believe that at all. A very articulate explanation at Concurring Opinions reveals the motive - which only hardcore spamhunters (or hardcore spammers) would naturally intuit:

These comments are a funny sort of trojan horse. They are designed to be easily and readily flagged as spam; however their links are to popular and legitimate sites. Spammers do this so that popular legitimate sites will be added to the blacklists, corrupting them. If the blacklists are full of mainstream sites, and kill comments that use links to apple.com or yahoo.com, then bloggers will stop using the blacklists. And they will once again be easy prey for the spammers.

Sigh. No wonder I thought spammers were lousy at checkers; turns out they've been playing chess the whole time.

Comment Spam the Wagon? ITSOK with Me
Posted by erik at 03:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

November 23, 2005

No Fearing the Nofollow Link Attribute

While I believe that sites that are ultimately successful do have high quality, user-focused content, many people incorrectly infer the converse of that statement: that if they have high quality, user-focused content, they will be ultimately successful. I don't necessarily believe that, because the demand is simply not great enough for all the high quality, user-focused sites out there. Many will do great, but not everyone is going to get rich.

But my pessimistic outlook is still no reason to avoid creating the best content you can - both at your own site and elsewhere. Think about the "nofollow" link attribute and its recent influence in SEO.

The mass adoption of the "nofollow" attribute about a year ago meant that site owners now had a way to illegitimize comment and trackback spam, even if they couldn't control its spread. If a link on your site has the "nofollow" attribute, engines know that you don't "vouch" for the authenticity of the link. Consequently, the engines won't reward such sites with any rankings benefits.

This effectively squashes a spammer's chances of benefiting from your site's status. He can add all the comments he wants to your PR4 post, but the links back to his site don't get a vote of confidence like they would if you made the exact same link in your post.

Unfortunately, however, many people promote their sites via forum and blog comments that are well reasoned, helpful to the discussion, and quite informative. And many of these people now feel that their sites no longer benefit from the links in comments. A mass exodus from SEO Chat forums is a recent example. While the introduction of the "nofollow" attribute was only a small reason for the members leaving, it was certainly a factor.

But if you think back to the days before link popularity was a religion, it's no different now. If you have something intelligent to say, if you're contributing to the discussion, and if you're offering a fresh perspective - and you do this long enough - you'll earn links the old fashioned way: By earning them. People will click through to your site via your profile, and eventually, if you impress them long enough, they'll want you to be a part of their community.

You've always had to impress potential customers with your intelligence and perspective. Be glad that "nofollow" is here, because all it has done is allow the specter of easily gained popularity to find peaceful rest.

No Fearing the Nofollow Link Attribute
Posted by erik at 11:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

September 08, 2005

Vintage Search Engine Spam

I am amazed at the number of web sites who still use invisible text to keyword stuff their web pages. This antique, black hat, SEO spam technique is like a nagging, 4-year-old canker sore that won't heal.

One of my favorite examples is the Gulf Coast Spas site.

On their home page, scroll down to the bottom of the page. See the light blue horizontal bar? Now hold down the Control and "A" buttons on your keyboard (this will show you just the text on the page).

Ba da bing! Your browser should now show you the hidden text that makes its home in that blue horizontal bar. This text is the exact same color as that blue bar. In HTML-speak, it's font color="#d2d2d2".

What text does a search engine spider see when it visits this page? Exactly what you see when you hit Control-A:

gulf coast spas gulf coast spa coast gulf spas coast gulf spa gulfcoast spas gulfcoast spa superior spas auqaclara spa covers hot tub covers spa filters hot tub filters aquaclara home spa jacuzzi sundance spas dealers nation wide Gulf Coast Spas Gulf Coast Spa Coast Gulf Spas Coast Gulf Spa Gulfcoast Spas Gulfcoast Spa Superior Spas AquaClara Spa Covers Hot Tub Covers Spa Filters Hot Tub Filters Home Spa Jacuzzi Sundance Spas Dealers Nation Wide gulf coast spas gulf coast spa coast gulf spas coast gulf spa gulfcoast spas, gulfcoast spa superior spas superior spa spa covers hot tub covers spa filters hot tub filters aquaclara home spa jacuzzi sundance spas dealers nation wide Gulf Coast Spas Gulf Coast Spa Coast Gulf Spas Coast Gulf Spa Gulfcoast Spas Gulfcoast Spa, Superior Spas Superior Spa Spa Covers Hot Tub Covers Spa Filters Hot Tub Filters Home Spa Jacuzzi Sundance Spas Dealers Nation Wide gulf coast spas gulf coast spa coast gulf spas coast gulf spa gulfcoast spas gulfcoast spa superior spas superior spa spa covers hot tub covers spa filters hot tub filters aquaclara home spa jacuzzi sundance spas dealers nation wide Gulf Coast Spas Gulf Coast Spa Coast Gulf Spas Coast Gulf Spa Gulfcoast Spas Gulfcoast Spa Superior Spas Superior Spa Spa Covers Hot Tub Covers Spa Filters Hot Tub Filters Home Spa Jacuzzi Sundance Spas Dealers Nation Wide gulf coast spas gulf coast spa coast gulf spas coast gulf spa gulfcoast spas, aquaclara superior spas superior spa spa covers hot tub covers spa filters hot tub filters aquaclara home spa jacuzzi sundance spas aquaclara dealers nation wide Gulf Coast Spas Gulf Coast Spa Coast Gulf Spas Coast Gulf Spa Gulfcoast Spas AquaClara, Superior Spas Superior Spa Spa Covers Hot Tub Covers Spa Filters Hot Tub Filters Home Spa Jacuzzi Sundance Spas Dealers Nation Wide AquaClara

Pathetic. Notice they even include competitor names. And yes, if you click on the main navigation links on the left, the same invisible text resides on these pages as well. Hey, if you're going to spam, why be shy about it?

All the major engines tell web designers to "avoid" hidden text and call it search engine spam. I guess with the billions of web pages that now reside on the web, you're bound to still find pages like this. But, I still sigh and grin a little when I find one.

Do you know of a site that still uses vintage search engine spam techniques? Let me know.

Vintage Search Engine Spam
Posted by doug at 05:06 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

August 29, 2005

Content spamming the search engines is just pathetic

I know I promised to follow up on my previous post on search engines using Meta Tags in their algorithms, but I just have to write about something else today instead.

I was doing some research in the Fastener vertical when I came across this site. The actual search on Google was for [cold forged wing nuts]. The first resulting website looked good, but the second site on the SERP (which could probably use a search engine friendly website redesign IMO) looked OK until I noticed the Description on Google's search result page didn't match any of the content on the actual web page itself. That is, until I discovered hundreds of stuffed keywords and keyword phrases that where invisible to the end-user.

Heres a good exercise for finding invisible text spam:

Go to the CMP Brass Screws & Fasteners website.
Now scroll down the page until you start to see nothing but white background.
Once you've reached the white section of the page, start from the left of the page and do a left click drag all the way down the page and to the right.

So, what did you see? I bet my entire Baseball card collection that you saw a whole bunch of text pop up that you didn't even know was there.

Don't these webmasters or website owners ever read Google's Webmaster Guidelines? Last I checked, Google and all other SE's for that matter don't like hidden text on web pages!!!

Sigh

Perhaps someday webmasters and website owners will actually read SE guidelines and maybe, just maybe, use Best Practices SEO techniques as their way of optimizing website assets. Until then, black hat techniques like invisible text spam will continue to plague search results indefinately.

Content spamming the search engines is just pathetic
Posted by sean at 04:21 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

August 24, 2005

The Quest for Quality Content (Just Got Tougher)

I do a lot of Technorati searches; I'm always impressed by the speed at which it crawls and indexes blog content.

For some searches on big brands, I'd seen some interesting similarities crop up: search results showing pages that were not duplicated, exactly, but so similar as to pique my interest. I traced them all back to one spot, the Blogger profile of Dan Hollings, which appears to be the hub of one of the most ... well, prolific content generation systems available.

I found Dan again later, this time leaving an article-length comment at Matt Cutts' blog. In it, Dan discusses his 100 Blogger blogs, "each with a core topical theme, but yet, each is targeted and personalized to a target audience."

Dan has created a blogging content creation system called Blog-Zilla. Far from the bottom-feeding tactics of content scraping and copyright violation, Blog-Zilla enables you to, among other things,

Never steal content, instead generate your own and let Blog-zilla hatch unlimited variations all with your blog's target audience in mind. (maybe you should read that again!)

He's right. Maybe you should read that again. "Unlimited variations." Here's an example of those variations. First, a paragraph from this post at the "Internet Marketing Tips for Lexxus" blog:

I recently checked the "gender stats" available from the Direct Sales Association, 79.9% of people in "direct sales" are female. Do the math and the boys total a paltry 20.1%. Many of the women in our industry (and customers we seek) are current or future moms. It seems natural that a new term has come on the scene: Mompreneurism.

Now here, fresh from Blog-Zilla's fiery belly, is the corresponding paragraph from this post at the "Internet Marketing Tips for Multi-level Marketing" blog:

Based on statistics available from the Direct Sales Association, 79.9% of people in "direct sales" are female. Guess what that means? Yes, the guys total a paltry 20.1%. Many of the women in our industry (and customers we seek) are current or future moms. Just when we thought the dictionary had all the words we needed a new term has come on the scene: Mompreneurism.

Make these subtle variations - 100 or more times - and ping a hundred blog engines, and imagine the results.

In his comment to the Cutts blog, Dan admits that

... because each lesson or tip I post has common elements, there is some overlap. My test indicate posts are between 25% to 75% different from blog to blog to blog and all content is author originated.

I did not major in math, but I know that "25% to 75% different," coindicentally, also means "25% to 75% identical."

Dan also asks Matt to "make note I’m not specifically blogging for search engine rankings," shortly after dropping four links into his comment post.

As far as editorializing, I don't know where to begin - so maybe I shouldn't. This isn't about "outing" Dan; with an 800-word comment to a Matt Cutts blog, he's pretty good at outing himself. I just believe that despite Blog-Zilla's claims of wanting foremost to help people reach niche audiences, this is the type of content creation that engines are working night and day to avoid.

The Quest for Quality Content (Just Got Tougher)
Posted by erik at 08:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

August 16, 2005

Coca-Cola and Breaks for Big Brands

While the relevancy of engines like Google and Yahoo goes more or less unnoticed by most people, gripes often surface among hardcore webmasters and SEO types.

Often, they say, big brands get some breaks that the little guys don't. Whether it's coincidence or an algorithm in action, only a few people know for certain. But here's an example.

A Google query for [coke] offers three different domains in the top four results: www.coca-cola.com, www.cocacola.com, and www.coke.com. Now it's not surprising that several domains from the same organization come up. The same happens with all types of big brands, such as [ford], [honda], [microsoft], ... you name it. That's the benefit of a large, global footprint.

What differentiates the [coke] result is that all three domains have mirrored content. Clicking any of these results takes you to the same Flash file. You won't find too many small-ish brands that can pull that off - not for long, anyway.

The first thing that most SEOs would tell a company like Coke is to consolidate their URLs into one, probably using a 301 to point the two lesser sites into the domain with the largest index and IBL (inbound link) count. But with results like this, why should Coke listen?

And don't blame Coke or label them "spammers." They're simply covering their online bases. Registered no later than 1997, each of these three domains has been around far longer than Google, so owning the above-the-fold area for a brand search isn't necessarily their motivation.

In my next post, I'll discuss how Yahoo treats the same query. Foreshadow alert: It surprises even me.

Coca-Cola and Breaks for Big Brands
Posted by erik at 04:08 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version

July 15, 2005

Someone isn't reading Google's webmaster guidelines!!

I just can't stand it when websites use spam tactics to artificially inflate rankings @ Google. I came across a site today that one of my prospects told me was a leading competitor in their vertical.

As I drilled down the home page of the competitor site, everything looked fine until I reached the bottom of the page. I noticed there was empty white space under the footer section. So, me being the curious individual that I am, I started under the footer section and did a good ol' left click drag down and to the right. Wouldn't you know it? A whole bunch of incredibly small font text/links popped up. The text was so small that I couldn't even read the words!!! When viewing the source code, I noticed that there were literally hundreds of hyperlinks to other pages within the site with keyword rich Alt text to inflate the keyword densities of the page. The link to this page can be found Here

Heres an excerpt from the Google Quality Guidelines page:
"Avoid hidden text or hidden links."

I wonder what Google would think of this page? Hmmm.........

Someone isn't reading Google's webmaster guidelines!!
Posted by sean at 11:36 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Printer-friendly version