Marketing Pilgrim's "Content Marketing" Channel

Sponsor Marketing Pilgrim's "Content Marketing" Channel today! Get in front of some of the most influential readers in the Internet and social media marketing industry. Contact us today!

Google vs the Press Release: Manipulation or Good Business?




mgylInqGoogle thought it was time to remind everyone that link schemes are a violation of their webmaster guidelines and anyone caught trying to game the system will be severely dealt with.

Of course. We get it. We all know about black hat SEO and about Panda and Penguin and the rest of the zoo. We got the message and most of the marketers online have fallen in line and have nothing to worry about.

Or not.

Google’s latest update contains a few paragraphs that will make even the most by-the-book marketer lose a little sleep. For example:

Additionally, creating links that weren’t editorially placed or vouched for by the site’s owner on a page, otherwise known as unnatural links, can be considered a violation of our guidelines. Here are a few common examples of unnatural links that violate our guidelines:

    • Text advertisements that pass PageRank
    • Advertorials or native advertising where payment is received for articles that include links that pass PageRank
    • Links with optimized anchor text in articles or press releases distributed on other sites. For example: [I removed Google’s links, so imagine a link on every underlined phrase)
      There are many wedding rings on the market. If you want to have a wedding, you will have to pick the best ring. You will also need to buy flowers and a wedding dress.

Yes, they just took a shot at press releases – the workhorse of the business world. Now, I understand that a press release with twenty linked keywords is probably nothing more than an attempt to scam the system but this paragraph makes it sound like linked text must be completely banned.

And can we talk about the phrase “distributed on other sites?” So if you post a press release to your own company blog, that’s okay but if you release it through a wire service you’re going to get dinged?

Even if we agree that the rules leave room for interpretation, Google ends their lesson on Link Schemes with this:

The best way to get other sites to create high-quality, relevant links to yours is to create unique, relevant content that can naturally gain popularity in the Internet community. Creating good content pays off: Links are usually editorial votes given by choice, and the more useful content you have, the greater the chances someone else will find that content valuable to their readers and link to it.

That’s pretty clear. It says, post your own content and hope that someone with influence comes along, finds it and decides to share it. Imagine if I, as an author, took that advice. I write a book and I publish it on Amazon. Now, I just sit and wait for someone to find it and talk about it to their friends. I’m not supposed to put out a press release or give a copy to a blogger to read and review. That would violate this policy:

Buying or selling links that pass PageRank. This includes exchanging money for links, or posts that contain links; exchanging goods or services for links; or sending someone a “free” product in exchange for them writing about it and including a link

Am I reading that wrong? I can’t ask a blogger to link to my website or my book when they review it? That’s crazy.

I understand that Google is trying to weed out the spammers from the people with helpful content but even good content needs a shove to get started. And as a reader, a blog post or press release without links is useless. I guess I’m supposed to copy and paste the relevant phrases into Google and search for the link myself. Bizarre.

I’m hoping that Google’s real intent here is to stop people from trying to cheat the system. That’s fine. But if they knock down my page rank because I link to the Amazon page for the DVD I just reviewed, I’m going to get really angry.

I’m not trying to manipulate the system, Google, I’m just trying to make a living.

What do you think? Is this anything to worry about?

  • http://www.archology.com/ Jenny Halasz

    Good article! Google’s official response is that of course they don’t want you to stop promoting your website, but you should just add nofollow to all your links. Because the average person has any clue what nofollow is… :-p

  • Gary Chesnut

    I believe the days of link farms and other Black Hat tactics are
    nearing an end. Sooner or later people will realize that it is easier
    to just give the website visitor what they came to your website for.
    And that is great relevant content that helps them. Isn’t that what all
    businesses are supposed to be about… helping people.
    If you give good information, products, or services that help people then the
    traffic will find its way to your website. Information travels fast on
    the web and good ol’ word of mouth is invaluable.

    Gary Chesnut
    http://garychesnut.com

  • http://www.terryreeves.com/ bartimus

    It has been obvious for quite some time, Google thinks all referral traffic should come from Google and you will probably have to pay for that traffic. Anything you could do to acquire traffic from anywhere else better fall in line with Google’s guidelines or someone is gonna pay the penalty. Google created the links for rankings monster and now has to tame it one shot at a time. And I can tell you, black hat tactics are still putting up a successful fight. The Big Brother attitude is not attractive from any source. It is what you get from entities that have gotten too big.

  • Renee Nicole Girard

    This is nothing new…it all goes back to do what’s natural and makes sense. If people are looking for book reviews, then Google should understand that those reviews in exchange for free product, although gray hat, are providing value for readers.