Do All "Bad" OBL's Hurt You?

[jawn_tech]

Here's a theoretical. I think it's safe to say there's a consensus that OBL's (outbound links) to 'bad neighborhood' sites can hurt your site's ranking. Specifically, they can possibly get your site removed from search results completely, leaving you begging for reinclusion (not to mention begging for link love back from the ibl's that deserted you).

However, sites can grow to become hundreds, if not thousands of pages -- each containing OBL's. Over time we're now talking about hundreds or thousands of links. This means, over time the possibility grows that perhaps one of those links, if not more, has since become a site that would constitute a bad OBL.

So, maybe the cutting-edge article you wrote on your blog a year ago linked to what was then an informative URL, and now it leads to an illegal gambling site with doorways, viruses, cloaks, and daggers.

Is one to perpetually monitor all outgoing links on their site, no matter how old they are? Is the age of the page a consideration? Is the value of the link a consideration (i.e. 1/1,000,000)? What are the considerations?

[AVC]

It is wise to review your pages, use a link checking tool to remove dead links and so on.

I know that you should also ask your readers to report broken or bad links, that can help you weed out bad links or links that have changed.

For example, I know of a directory owner that I reported a link to, it had changed from a web application tool to a porn affiliate landing page and he had not checked for a long while.

Updating your pages is good SEO.

[inertia]

I suppose, that is what nofollow is for. Maybe you should put it on any link that you're not 100% positive will be good as gold forever!

[tbond]

This a question that is truly impossible to answer, since the Google algorithm seems to be constantly in flux.

However, I'll venture a guess, based on 10+ years of dealing with these issues (so far):

I don't think they do. I've seen thousands of OBL have little or no effect on SERPs and ranking. It seems to me that the effect of only a few good backlinks out-weighs many hundreds or even thousands of bad back-links.

Also, I think newer factors such as internal linking and the last 5 Google patents from last year are more heavily weighted.

ON-site factors now appear more important than OFF-site. For the moment anyway. But as always, stay tuned... tomorrow will bring a new day, and likely new fine-tning of the algorithm.

[janeth]

No,

If it did DMOZ would have been banned along with all the other directories by now.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by janeth

No,

If it did DMOZ would have been banned along with all the other directories by now.

Why?

Isn't that like saying that telephone directories should only contain listings for the numbers assigned to "good" people?

Is not a directory essentially a collection of meta-data?

[deepsand]

While SEs clearly desire that one not link to sites whose content is of a dubious nature, as witnessed by the adoption of the "no follow" tag, it stands to reason that they also recognize that 1) the originator of an OBL granted at arm's length has no control over that content of the target site, that 2) it is not reasonable to expect that such grantor should be able to forever police a large number of OBLs, and that 3) all data, no matter its nature, is of value to someone.

Therefore, it is logical to assume that SEs do in some manner temper their judgements re. "bad" OBLs; what we do not know is the precise manner in which they do so. Still, some reasonable speculations can be made.

Mitigating factors might include, in no particular order:

1 ) The age of the granting site;
2 ) The nature of the granting site;
3 ) The present age of the OBL in question;
4 ) The age of the OBL when it turned "bad;"
5 ) The relationship of the contents of the grantor and target sites at the time the OBL was granted;
6 ) The degree to which the current content of the grantor site resembles that when the OBL was granted;
7 ) The proportion of OBLs that "went bad" as opposed to those which were "bad" when 1st granted;
8 ) The extent to which "no follow" was used for "bad" OBLs at the time granted;
9 ) The reputation of the grantor site as evidenced by IBLs; and/or,
10) The reputation of the site owner/operator.

No doubt others can add to this list.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

So, maybe the cutting-edge article you wrote on your blog a year ago linked to what was then an informative URL, and now it leads to an illegal gambling site with doorways, viruses, cloaks, and daggers.

Lets use common sense here. Does anyone really think if that did happen to one blog post would hurt you? I dont. Now if you did it a 100 times then yes you might have to worry.

[Feydakin]

As incredible said, I think it's all a matter of thresholds and patterns.. Random "bad links" aren't likely to hurt a well built site unless there is an ongoing pattern of abuse, according to Google that is..

[AVC]

Deepsand, dead links or outbound links that have changed, as I pointed out in my first post can no doubt hurt you with Google.

Google applies an age factor to pages as a quality and relevancy score and old pages can get pushed to the invisible supplemental index or simply be de-indexed (not crawled any longer).

When you add bad links (websites that have been sold and the URL now is redirected to a porn affiliate page), you can bet your pages will be finished for good.

If a webmaster does not bother to update his pages, Google will certainly drop these pages, bet on it.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by inertia

I suppose, that is what nofollow is for. Maybe you should put it on any link that you're not 100% positive will be good as gold forever!

That is not what "nofollow" is for. And I fully agree with Incrediblehelp.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

That is not what "nofollow" is for. And I fully agree with Incrediblehelp.

When i say "thats what its for" i mean: you should add nofollow to any link which heads to content which you cannot fully vindicate. Am I right?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by inertia

When i say "thats what its for" i mean: you should add nofollow to any link which heads to content which you cannot fully vindicate. Am I right?

First I do not use the nofollow attribute on my site at all. Myself and my team have developed a 100% better and secure alternative for OBLs which we do not want to share PR or can't trust.

Still I will explain.

You may use the "nofollow" attribute for OBLs to sites like affiliate, ads or irrelevant to your site theme. Also for comment spamming on forums or blogs, if you could not implement a better solution.
Check what Google advises: Tips for avoiding comment spam on your site

Google in their webmaster guidelines state:
"Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or "bad neighborhoods" on the web, as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links."

For me it is questionable if they would be really forgiving if you link to such sites even if you use "nofollow". I am not necessarily talking about being hardly penalized or banned, but for example your site losing trust.

At last, I would never use the "nofollow" attribute for a site's internal pages, for i.e PR sculpting, etc. There are better ways to deal with this issue.

[ctabuk]

The whole point of having a website is to make it as interesting and userfriendly as is possible. I use masses of OBL's and have done for years and years. I guess I have outgoing links to certain sites that are 'massive' but they all have one thing in common. UK Housing.

[AVC]

The bottom line is, if you forget about your pages, so will the search engines, they will just quit crawling your website if your pages are never updated or if they are not properly maintained.

Search engines want to give users relevant results, not dead links or lead them to porn sites by deception.

Spam botnet operators have set up forums that are for nothing other than dropping spam affiliate links on for their network of fellow spammers, I have seen many such forums, we should all report this sort of thing to all the search engines when we see it, not just Google.

[inertia]

Originally Posted by AVC

The bottom line is, if you forget about your pages, so will the search engines, they will just quit crawling your website if your pages are never updated or if they are not properly maintained.

Hhhm, don't agree with that fully. My hip hop site never gets changed! Well not for the last year and a half anyway. I still build links to it (at a snails pace) but it still ranks and its still going up!

Maybe my niche has something to do with it but I'm sitting in between big sites with regular content updates.

[AVC]

Believe me, age is a relevance factor for ranking, if your pages are outdated by bad or dead links, in the end it will be the end for you showing up in the SERP's.

[inertia]

So you're saying that you need to add new content to long established pages or they will fall down the serps?

[AVC]

YES !

Date of late update or change is a factor in ranking.

Put yourself in Google's shoes, this is a dynamic business, your pages should not be etched in stone, content should be updated, comment spam removed, dead or bad links taken down.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

Re: Do All "Bad" OBL's Hurt You?

1. What do you mean by bad? Broken, bad redirect, disturbing pop up, irrelevant etc?
2. What do you mean by hurt? Hurt your PageRank, SERP position or online reputation, that is your trademark (most important to me).

Originally Posted by tbond

This a question that is truly impossible to answer, since the Google algorithm seems to be constantly in flux.

In my opinion there is truth in that statement.

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Lets use common sense here. Does anyone really think if that did happen to one blog post would hurt you? I dont. Now if you did it a 100 times then yes you might have to worry.

Of my many thousand links, it has happende to much more than 100, when I manually check them from time to time.

Originally Posted by AVC

Search engines want to give users relevant results, not dead links or lead them to porn sites by deception.

Have you used that search term on dmoz?

My experience:

1. Automatic link checking tools are only part of a "link quality" analysis and far from enough.
2. Be carefull with who you link to, especially articles.
3. Making / copying content and redirecting to another site after a while is a fairly much used technique to drive traffic and acquire pagerank. That make that link irrelevant and unsemantic. If you link to the page without rel="nofollow", you give away pagerank and get an irrelevant link back. That is a zero effect for a Bot, but an irrelevant result for a human surfer. It degrades your trademark. An argument for link buying / selling (with a rel ="nofollow" attribute), since traded links should be more serious and they may be semantic and relevant if placed on the right place.

You are who you link to.

Related links:
Penalties: How many are there?

Locating broken links in a site.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by AVC

YES !

Date of late update or change is a factor in ranking.

Is this the SEO joke of the year 2008?

[inertia]

Originally Posted by AVC

YES !

Date of late update or change is a factor in ranking.

Put yourself in Google's shoes, this is a dynamic business, your pages should not be etched in stone, content should be updated, comment spam removed, dead or bad links taken down.

So, are you saying that once I've added a new page or story or whatever to my site i have to keep adding to that page or it will disappear? So as time goes on and my site gets bigger i will eventually get to the point where I'm updating 1000s of pages every day/week/month?????

[AVC]

No, I'm saying as your page ages, the less relevant it is to Google and other engines, especially if it is filled with links that lead to "error pages".

The joke is on you Webnauts as you will find all your pages moved to the invisible supplemental index if they are never updated.

[kgun]

What are the difference between this content 22 mai 2008?

Matt Cutts: Gadgets, Google, and SEO

A peek behind the curtain at Google

Also note the

Permalink

at the bottom.

That is how articles should be written on the web. Additional information like:

• Stable link.
• Final article.
• Will be updated with additional related content.
• May redirect to related content later.

should only be an advantage if you want a semantic stable link.

Why is this adaptive path » ajax: a new approach to web applications an authorative link that will bring traffic for years unless it is changed?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by AVC

The joke is on you Webnauts as you will find all your pages moved to the invisible supplemental index if they are never updated.

Just to clarify this, since now the discussion is getting seriously ridiculous and far beyond my level.
Did you ever hear something about the HTTP headers If-Modified-Since? Can you explain us here what it that about and why Google REQUIRES that in the Webmaster Guidelines?

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

Here's a theoretical. I think it's safe to say there's a consensus that OBL's (outbound links) to 'bad neighborhood' sites can hurt your site's ranking. Specifically, they can possibly get your site removed from search results completely, leaving you begging for reinclusion (not to mention begging for link love back from the ibl's that deserted you).

However, sites can grow to become hundreds, if not thousands of pages -- each containing OBL's. Over time we're now talking about hundreds or thousands of links. This means, over time the possibility grows that perhaps one of those links, if not more, has since become a site that would constitute a bad OBL.

So, maybe the cutting-edge article you wrote on your blog a year ago linked to what was then an informative URL, and now it leads to an illegal gambling site with doorways, viruses, cloaks, and daggers.

Is one to perpetually monitor all outgoing links on their site, no matter how old they are? Is the age of the page a consideration? Is the value of the link a consideration (i.e. 1/1,000,000)? What are the considerations?

The consideration is more related to a "link profile" than to individual links. So if a site is huge with thousands of outbound links, one or a couple of links aren't the end of the world. Of course if a site you link to does go really bad, and you find out about it, you better remove the link.

[AVC]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Just to clarify this, since now the discussion is getting seriously ridiculous and far beyond my level.
Did you ever hear something about the HTTP headers If-Modified-Since? Can you explain us here what it that about and why Google REQUIRES that in the Webmaster Guidelines?

You explain it, you are the one who claims that time of last update is not a factor.

[Webnauts]

Google Webmaster Guidelines:

"Make sure your web server supports the If-Modified-Since HTTP header. This feature allows your web server to tell Google whether your content has changed since we last crawled your site. Supporting this feature saves you bandwidth and overhead."
Source: Webmaster Guidelines

My site supports that: IfModifiedSince / Last-Modified Date chacker :: oy-oy.eu search engine tools

Does yours?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Did you ever hear something about the HTTP headers If-Modified-Since? Can you explain us here what it that about and why Google REQUIRES that in the Webmaster Guidelines?

John, that is for the BOT.

[AVC]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Google Webmaster Guidelines:

"Make sure your web server supports the If-Modified-Since HTTP header. This feature allows your web server to tell Google whether your content has changed since we last crawled your site. Supporting this feature saves you bandwidth and overhead."
Source: Webmaster Guidelines

My site supports that: IfModifiedSince / Last-Modified Date chacker :: oy-oy.eu search engine tools

Does yours?

So you say that page age and update status is not a factor in ranking in the permanent record, right ?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by AVC

So you say that page age and update status is not a factor in ranking in the permanent record, right ?

I think it is for the Google NewsBOT.

[incrediblehelp]

Modifying pages is not factor in rankings. Millions of pages stay the same and are never updated and rank just fine.

[kgun]

But modifying the page / site can make content better (up to date) and as such get more IBL's. Some pages like the above AJAX article (link) should not be modified IMO.

It is a classic.

[AVC]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Modifying pages is not factor in rankings. Millions of pages stay the same and are never updated and rank just fine.

That is completely false !

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

I think it is for the Google NewsBOT.

That is not true!

More about: Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Better details about when Googlebot last visited a page

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Modifying pages is not factor in rankings. Millions of pages stay the same and are never updated and rank just fine.

Thanks Jaan.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by AVC

So you say that page age and update status is not a factor in ranking in the permanent record, right ?

Page age may be factor. Update status is definitely not. Am I clear enough?

[AVC]

Believe what you wish, that does not mean others are taking your word for it Webnauts.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by AVC

That is completely false !

You are very confused.

It is NOT the act of modifying that helps web documents or website rank. It is the modifying or improving of various elements on the page or website. Two separate issues.

If what you were saying was true then everyone would change the last modified date on all the documents across their website, everyday to help rank. LOLOLOL

[AVC]

You can change the date, but not make changes and get de-indexed too!

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

If what you were saying was true then everyone would change the last modified date on all the documents across their website, everyday to help rank. LOLOLOL

Are you wrong too Jaan?

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by AVC

You can change the date, but not make changes and get de-indexed too!

I appreciate you trying to give your experience at WPW, but please try to provide proof of you findings.

[AVC]

Making a joke out of being wrong is not going to make your opinion "right" Webnauts !!!

PS: You guys are a riot, I wish I could have fun with you all the rest of the day, but I actually have some real work to do, I imagine you will all keep having fun though !

[kgun]

Originally Posted by AVC

So you say that page age and update status is not a factor in ranking in the permanent record, right ?

Originally Posted by kgun

I think it is for the Google NewsBOT.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

That is not true!

More about: Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Better details about when Googlebot last visited a page

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Modifying pages is not factor in rankings. Millions of pages stay the same and are never updated and rank just fine.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Thanks Jaan.

1. I don't know how and which sites the NewsBOT that I have heard of crawl pages, but for a news site that is obivous.
2. Have you experienced that once a page comes online, it is ranked in the top 10 positions? Later it drops.
3. What does incrediblehelp mean by a ranking factor?
4. How could incrediblehelp know that it is not one of the more than 100's of SERP position factors? But the effect should perhaps be marignal. That is also one reason why it may be difficult to draw a firm conclusion.
5. That millions of billions pages like the AJAX page above stay the same does not prove that other millions do not change position.

I relate update status to content and not to code.

Thoretically, a classic page can change postion if it is moved to another server. Wheter that is due to a new server (IP and / or geolocation) or changed dating is another question. For the same reason it may be identified by a BOT as a spam site and even deindexed.

Also note: This is the SEO and not Google subforum.

[ctabuk]

Originally Posted by AVC

That is completely false !

Sorry AVC he is completely correct. We had one site that we left alone for years and it was in a competitive market. It simply stayed up in the SERP

[inertia]

Originally Posted by AVC

Making a joke out of being wrong is not going to make your opinion "right" Webnauts !!!

PS: You guys are a riot, I wish I could have fun with you all the rest of the day, but I actually have some real work to do, I imagine you will all keep having fun though !

Its obvious really. If a page is still the most relevant then it will rank number 1, or third relevant or fourth etc... Maybe you think pages are dropping because they are getting old but maybe its down to other factors like competitors pushing it out or algos changing?

In fact i think the complete opposite of you, the older a page gets the more trust is placed on it. I still see crappy frontpage sites from '99 all over the place!

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by kgun

1. How could incrediblehelp know that it is not one of the more than 100's of SERP position factors? But the effect should perhaps be marignal. That is also one reason why it may be difficult to draw a firm conclusion.

Looking at 10os of rankings every day can tell me that.

Lets all not be confused by freshness factor. Sure when a page is first created it does get a boost in the rankings for 2-3 weeks, but we are not talking about that here.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

[/list]Looking at 10os of rankings every day can tell me that.

Lets all not be confused by freshness factor. Sure when a page is first created it does get a boost in the rankings for 2-3 weeks, but we are not talking about that here.

The time that Google needs to calculate PR for that page.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

The time that Google needs to calculate PR for that page.

Yup that is why people come to the forums and say, "we had great rankings for 3 weeks an then dropped on the face of the Google planet. During these three weeks if the document is not acquiring the necessary links to stay in that position that is was given then it will drop.

[tbond]

Life is like baseball. Let me explain...

When you knock-in a run with a pop-up fly, everyone cheers. You're the hero of the ... hour? No. The minute.

Until the next time someone else knocks-in a run. Then he is the hero of the minute.

But, when you hit a home-run with bases loaded, you're the hero of the hour, and the game (usually). And when that game is the final game of a 7-game playoff or series, you're the hero of the Season! And, when that Season is itself memorable due to a convergence of great games, great players, and close calls... you're the hero of a LIFETIME... and you get into the Hall of Fame!

Now, why is that relevant?

Because when we ask these questions about popularity, the issue of popularity ALWAYS is related to timeliness. You can't answer the question without reference to the time frame. So, in the web and life, like in baseball, your popularity will always be related to:

1. How long a period you are examining -- a few minutes, an hour, a day, a week, a month or a year, etc.

2. What else is or was going on in this period -- look around you and see if what you are/were doing makes you a stand-out player in this time frame

Strategically, the decision you have to make is this: Do I want to try to make hundreds or thousands of plays of the minute or hour, so that I can continuously be on top of whatever is happening? Or, do I want to make only a few "plays of a lifetime" that will garner rewards (in traffic and hopefully income) for years to come?

Personally, I use a mix of both.

However, as the years roll by, I'm leaning more and more toward the second goal; I see the value of building major pages that yield traffic and accumulate 'trust' or ranking for years and years. Thank heaven I do have a few hundred of those pages. They are the big players in whatever success I have from day to day.

So, if you can write, if you can manage a writing team creating WONDERFUL CONTENT, then do it. Don't waste time trying to be only the player of the minute by knocking-in a few runs here and there. People who do that, even for twenty years are always forgotten players. The players who make dramatic achievements -- the MOST homeruns, the MOST of almost anything -- are remembered. For a long time.

How long you are 'remembered' in the game of web marketing and page popularity depends on whatever else is happening. That you can't control, the whatever else. But you can control what you do.

Aim for the cheap seats.

PS: The cheapest seats are at the top of the bleachers. Aiming at them CAN put you in the history books. Aiming lower will GUARANTEE that you never get a mention above the footnotes at the back of the books.

Work like you're playing in the final game of the World Series. Because, on the web, you are.