Written by Eric Ward
August 2, 2007
Want Absolutes? Linking Ain't That Easy
Regarding Phil Scimone's excellent thoughts on link exchanges
(issue #2460), there were a couple of points made that I really can't ignore.
> Unfortunately you can't control the anchor text used
> in natural linking, which, in my opinion, might have
> an unwanted effect of diluting your site theme.
The exact opposite can also be the case, because the very essence of natural linking is that you CANNOT control the anchor text, therefore producing a potentially more trustworthy link. Nothing is more unnatural to me than keyword laden links on sites that would not have linked in that manner if not for the belief an algorithm would reward them. To quote Elaine Benes from Seinfeld: Fake fake fake fake.
> Are you really telling me that a link to a dating site
> from the camping site is in some way useful?
Define the word "useful". Useful for rank improvement? For click
traffic? For sparking someone to think in a way they hadn't before? And
also tell me more about both the camping site and the dating site. Is
the camping page on a site with a large collection of family and
relationship resource links based on a eleven year old public library
web site selected and maintained by a librarian, and that page now
links to a page devoted to unique dating ideas for single parents with
children, based on a dating site run for 7 years by the Christian
Singles Association?
My point is the same point I have screamed from the mountains for 14
years. Every linking scenario can be good or bad, depending on
multiple factors that, like it or not, most people simply do not want
to hear. They want absolutes. This is bad, this won't work, this is
spam...
It isn't that easy.
> It's easy to imagine scenarios that look like they might
> work. Using this "it's all good" logic, then anything and
> everything is beneficial, and, I suspect it isn't. Unfortunately,
> the internet is littered with this type of thinking, and, as a
> result, finding quality information becomes a tedious and
> frustrating task for most of us.
I assure you it is not "all good", and many link opps I see are useless
for any purpose. The challenge and skill is in recognizing what
constitutes a seekworthy link target, and what constitutes linkworthy
content from that seekworthy link target. There is also a continuum of
sorts within the ecommerce sector. The more a site is purely for
selling product, the less likely it will be to engender high trust
natural inbound links. I know, duh. But the truth many ecommerce
sites don't want to face is they might just be better off accepting
that they are NEVER going to achieve a significant and legitimate
trustworthy natural inbound link profile if all they do is slap a
catalog of products on the web. There are hundreds of sites that sell
golf clubs. The sites rank well organically for the term golf clubs do
have a significant and legitimate trustworthy natural inbound link
profile, and take a look at those sites. They also have the kind of
content that goes beyond products only.
Ranking #1 - http://www.golfsmith.com
Ranking #30 - http://www.golfcow.com
A good content developer and link builder will see the key differences
between these two very similar sites which cause one to rank so well
and the other to rank poorly. And those selling linking related
services will not force a cookie cutter or packaged approach to all
sites. Any scenario can be contrived, and any scenario can be legit.
I feel the ethical response from us link builders must include
educating the client as to what constitutes a disciplined, logical, and
effective linking campaign for site A vs. site B vs site C.
Eric Ward
http://www.ericward.com
 this post appeared in
LED Digest 2462
 |
