The problem is -- writing content and waiting for people to show up is ridiculous. "Building it and they will come," only works for Kevin Costner when acting in the movie "Field of Dreams." It's make believe and g##### knows it. Why they won't admit it later…….
So we all know that we have to market our sites, just like any other business. That means you have to initiate the process of getting the link -- it doesn't happen naturally like the rain or naturally like the seasons, or naturally like any other metaphor. The idea that links happen naturally, at least to start, is bull*&#$! This idea of just writing really great content and its existence will be known by people that need it through some invisible force that is with you because you're using g##### and matt cutts said it shall be so.....it's crazy! "Editorially given" is the dumbest term I've ever heard. Most of the terminology that seo experts talk about in their blogs is just mumbo jumbo voodoo that has no real application; it's designed to make them look smarter than you so they can market their blog.
And g##### knows that you can't "build it and they will come." Why else would matt cutts let Eric Ward (who really is worth listening to) post a testimonial from matt on Eric's site -->
“Eric follows the right link building approach. He's interested in links that
are given based on merit and those are the links that stand the test of time” — Matt Cutts
It's because matt knows that the way Eric creates links is the only possible way to do it – you have to ask for it in many, if not in most cases. Note: although some links Eric creates may be given editorially as a result of competent marketing, many are asked for and received based on competent marketing. No links are given until the prospect knows you exist and they want what you have -- this is the basic purpose of marketing. This is the only way to start a business, launch into new markets for existing businesses, or cut into your competitor’s business. It’s what we do offline, why wouldn’t that apply online? Duh…….
So why don't we cut the bull*&#$! and say that specific types of links are not acceptable and for every other link, have at it and turn your marketing department loose, as long as your work is ethical and serves the purpose of providing products to customers that have a need and want to buy them. Yes and cut all the "see how intelligent I am because I know the true meaning of these terms that have nothing to do with you marketing your business and ranking your site, they just make me look 'Einstein' smart" nonsensical, gobbledy gook language. There is no way to apply that non-sense, it has no practical application. It’s just talk, theories, and guesses at best and it doesn’t sell anything!
So why does g##### continue this ridiculous masquerade which results in masses of seo excerpts opining that they know the right kinds of links that are acceptable to g##### -- you know, the ones that are so great that all you have to do is write content and everyone will know to link to you because you did what matt cutts said and it will work every time unless matt cutts says he doesn't think those links are what g##### considers to be ethical (which means you’re screwing up g#####’s business plan) and which the masses of "do gooder" seo's (which, in my opinion, are mostly found over at seo moz - or moz now because they're too embarrassed to say they do seo anymore) say are righteous and only they know what is right for the good of the community and usually that is to gain the favor of matt cutts and g##### so he will bless their blog or seo business all while acting like a bunch of spoiled, selfish teenagers and outing their competition to further their business? Note: this isn't pointed at Eric Ward who really is a class act and really does understand how to market a business and avoid g##### in the process. His business and character is solid – he doesn’t need to point fingers at others and wouldn’t dream of doing it under any circumstances.
I'm talking about the rest of the nonsensical babble the comes from so many other sources and comes along with terms like editorially given, link authority, domain authority, relevance, influence, blah, blah, blah. These people don't know the first thing about what it takes to run a real business.
So back to why g##### does this......
But first, I do want to give credit where credit is due. g##### has never given as specific guidance on links as they have after penguin hit the stage. I applaud them for that.
Buuuuuuutttttt, while g##### makes an attempt to have rules that are actually clear and can be followed, they continue their nonsensical verbiage with statements like this -->
Any links intended to manipulate a site's ranking in g##### search results may be considered part of a link scheme.
(So I take back my applause, ziiiiiiiiiippppp, just like that, gone. Kind of the same way g##### burns your site with no explanation and for tactics that they have endorsed all along, slinking their way through the night and arbitrarily applying their ridiculous algorithm.)
Translated -- any link g##### decides will cut into their revenues whenever they feel like going after it and they won't give you any warning that they are going to do it. And, they won't tell you why because they don't want to tell you that they're spamming you with their PPC fees and other tactics to shore up their advertising revenue.
I will qualify the prior paragraph by noting g##### just announced a new policy that intends to provide more specifics as to why they are penalizing your site. It falls far short, however, and matt cutts explanation is ridiculous – he says if they tell you everything that is wrong, the spammers will decode the g##### algorithm. Pleeeeeeeaaase, I can’t take it anymore. Moreover, as I get older, I don’t listen to what people say; I watch what they do. Quite frankly, what they say they will do isn’t nearly enough, and I suspect what they actually do will be even less.
Edited by chuckfinley, 18 June 2013 - 02:34 AM.