It seems Google has started pointing out Paid Links

[saikatblogger]

It seems Google has penalized a lot of directories for buying Mega PR links.

What's going to happen to the sites listed on those directories? No incoming link value for sure, but what else?

[freetraff]

Google is not capable to stop all sites that sell backlinks. Some sites are doing it in such a professional and "naturally looking" way, that Google's algo will have very big problems to tell a natural site with outgoing links from another natural site that is selling part of the outgoing links.

So, in my opinion Google will catch only stupid link sellers, but they would fail in any case. And even the wise feature to "report a site" that sells links to Google team (wise step indeed) cannot help much.

This is personal opinion, I am not Google. If you wish, I had some other ideas about this very issue but in more details on this post Link Exchange Tips: Google's Promises to Punish for Selling Backlinks - Myth?

[angrypenguin]

Would be nice to see this some of the worst offenders penalised here. There are companies in the UK now flooding the market with web directories, so that local businesses stand little chance of getting near the front page without enlisting the help of an SEO expert, which is usually beyond their budget. I suspect the long term goal of some of these is to flood the front pages of Google enough so that small businesses are forced to pay for listings.

A few of my SEO customers now are the only business showing organically on the front page and the rest is all business directories.

Where honest link building is concerned, it always works better when the link is organically embedded in relevant text (something that is well known). So maybe at some point in the future, the stakes wil be hiked up and link sellers will need to provide relevant contextual links. This will start to blurr the distinction between gratuitous link sellers and the providers of genuine quality content, and the search engines will have to react and adapt again. Just a prediction, but maybe...

[freetraff]

Originally Posted by angrypenguin

So maybe at some point in the future, the stakes wil be hiked up and link sellers will need to provide relevant contextual links. This will start to blurr the distinction between gratuitous link sellers and the providers of genuine quality content, and the search engines will have to react and adapt again. Just a prediction, but maybe...

Agree, but just wanted to comment that professional link sellers whom I've seen sell backlinks to relevant sites only. And this is just one part of the puzzle into their power of looking really naturally. That is why I am more and more convinced that either Google will need to get down to checking backlink selling manually or all talks about algo catching backlink sellers will end up with catching some naive, inexperienced sellers.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by freetraff

Google will need to get down to checking backlink selling manually or all talks about algo catching backlink sellers will end up with catching some naive, inexperienced sellers.

Google is doing that already! My guess is that if they will not manage to achieve their target, they might will discontinue the Green Toolbar, and then... you know.

[ctabuk]

This was always going to be the basis - and I posted that months ago - did many respond? No - thought I was rambling. Well some of us knew this ages ago

Bye Bye toolbar PR

[martty]

Originally Posted by saikatblogger

It seems Google has penalized a lot of directories for buying Mega PR links.

How do you actualy know that they have been penalized for buying PR links? How do you know that Google has not decided to algorithmically target directories to rank them lower?

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by martty

How do you know that Google has not decided to algorithmically target directories to rank them lower?

That is what I was thinking too!

[wige]

But - Google will not penalize you if you buy a link. They will simply not give you pagerank for bought links they detect. If you buy a text ad on a web site, and mark it clearly, Google has no problem with that. True, you don't get the value of the link, but your site is not "punished" for buying the link.

The penalty comes in when a link that is bought is disguised as an editorial link. This is what Google is trying to filter out (using the argument of deceptive business practices, and quoting a 2006 FTC press release) and which will, at the very least, get the selling site penalized if detected.

Basically, if you buy a link on a web site to advertise or drive traffic, and you mark that link as bought ("sponsored link" in the nearby text, for example), you won't get in trouble. Every single one of your competitors can file a complaint about buying links, and there will not be a penalty.

(The presentation: http://www.mattcutts.com/files/paid-...esentation.ppt)

As far as doing away with the green bar, I honestly can't see Google going that far. The original intent of this bar according to Google, as I recall, was to give users a relative indicator of how important other web sites found a specific page. Although changes to the toolbar, slow updates and outdated information make the toolbar PR value almost worthless, it can still show a relative ranking of established pages, and give Google a list of the pages surfers are actually visiting.

[saikatblogger]

Absolutely right...the problem is link buyers are not following paid link guidelines, like nofollow and all...

No one can comment for sure whether Google has introduced new algo, or someone from Google ran a manual check...we can only assume.

The WebProNews article says that chances of manual checking is high...though the directories that have been penalized have lots of things in common, so an algo can easily find it out...

[zycon5000]

Originally Posted by martty

How do you actualy know that they have been penalized for buying PR links? How do you know that Google has not decided to algorithmically target directories to rank them lower?

I do feel some directories themselves are getting targeted and, IMO, feel it is more of a penalty. A good point of this is the Aviva Directory. Searching "aviva directory" in Google (without the quotes) doesn't even bring up the actual directory until around position 60-70 or so. Searching "aviva" (without directory and without quotes) doesn't even bring up the site in the Top 100! Is Google doing this because, in their eyes, Aviva Directory is of little use, is it because they just don't like Directories overall, or is there some other reason?

Whether or not it is a true penalty and for whatever reasons, depending on the directory, the end result may not be a bad thing. I think the directories that will be most affected, if they aren't already, are those primarily set up to sell links (i.e. have little to no freebies) and that have no real substance to them. How many DMOZ-ish directories can we possibly have? As for AdSense-based directories, those are generally garbage.

Although my site, Zycon, is a directory too, it is more involved than just being a list of links. I feel specialized "vertical search" directories such as ours do serve a purpose and do not seem to be penalized.

I'm curious what other people think about Google's initiative to lower or penalize paid links and directories themselves.

[freetraff]

Originally Posted by martty

How do you actualy know that they have been penalized for buying PR links? How do you know that Google has not decided to algorithmically target directories to rank them lower?

That's the point! Do you really think that only directories sell backlinks? Come on! The best backlinks that I bought have been from very reputable forums and/or top sites that are not directories. And to have them algorithmically identified means to catch all types of sites in the net.

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by ctabuk

This was always going to be the basis - and I posted that months ago - did many respond? No - thought I was rambling. Well some of us knew this ages ago.

Exactly. What's happening now is nothing new. Google has systematically sought to identify and nullify paid links from the outset. The current activity is part of their stepped up campaign which in itself was announced some time ago. No one should be surprised by this.

Originally Posted by martty

How do you actualy know that they have been penalized for buying PR links? How do you know that Google has not decided to algorithmically target directories to rank them lower?

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

That is what I was thinking too!

1. because not all directories are affected
2. because the ones that are affected have been blatantly buying and selling links and heavily interlinking with their buddies in the directory "business", by their own admission and by the evidence of the dirctories themselves
3. because Google has openly stated they don't have a problem with directories that follow Google's guidleines for webmasters
4. because Google isn't about to penalize anyone for advertising - only for engaging in the PR trade by nullifying PR transfer and by penalizing sites that advertise selling links to improve PR - for Google to even think about penalizing advertising would be an open invitation to restraint of trade litigation

Originally Posted by wige

But - Google will not penalize you if you buy a link. They will simply not give you pagerank for bought links they detect. If you buy a text ad on a web site, and mark it clearly, Google has no problem with that. True, you don't get the value of the link, but your site is not "punished" for buying the link.

Exactly. You are left with the advertising value but not the PR value.

Originally Posted by wige

As far as doing away with the green bar, I honestly can't see Google going that far. The original intent of this bar according to Google, as I recall, was to give users a relative indicator of how important other web sites found a specific page. Although changes to the toolbar, slow updates and outdated information make the toolbar PR value almost worthless, it can still show a relative ranking of established pages, and give Google a list of the pages surfers are actually visiting.

I don't know. If I were Google, that's exactly what I'd do to try to furtehr discourage PR selling - simply stop updating public PR.

Originally Posted by freetraff

That's the point! Do you really think that only directories sell backlinks? Come on! The best backlinks that I bought have been from very reputable forums and/or top sites that are not directories. And to have them algorithmically identified means to catch all types of sites in the net.

Google is after all paid links, not just directories. They'll get to you eventually, if they haven't already.

[innominds]

May be Google is soft on one-time paid directories and tough on yearly paid ones.

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by innominds

May be Google is soft on one-time paid directories and tough on yearly paid ones.

Possibly. Matt Cutts has stated that he sees nothing wrong in charging a review fee as a quality control measure. If you read between the lines, you might interpret that as saying there's nothing wrong with a one-time review fee. Either way, the justification for charging annual fees is dodgy at best and begins to look more like a "pay to stay listed" fee - which might well attract the attention of Google's PR selling police.

But I don't think that's the major target currently. The directories that have been hit were quite blatant in their PR manipulation attempts. I think that's primarily what drew the heat.