Saturday, December 31, 2005

Google Blog 2005 Year in Review, Most Popular Topics and Vistor Demographic Highlights

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/12/year-of-google-blogging.html

The most popular posts? Here are a few that have yielded scores of linkbacks:

- Our explanation of “Googlebombing”
-
A celebration of email and Gmail
-
Google Earth’s partnership with National Geographic about Africa

Several on Google Book Search (formerly known as Google Print), including:
-
Preserving public domain books
-
Our statement on the Authors’ Guild suit
- and
Eric Schmidt’s op-ed about Book Search

The most popular posts? Here are a few that have yielded scores of linkbacks:

- Our explanation of “Googlebombing”
-
A celebration of email and Gmail
-
Google Earth’s partnership with National Geographic about Africa

Several on Google Book Search (formerly known as Google Print), including:
-
Preserving public domain books
-
Our statement on the Authors’ Guild suit
- and
Eric Schmidt’s op-ed about Book Search

Posted by seo at 04:15:47 | Permalink | Comments (4)

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Google - New Patent Algorithms Designed to eliminate Spam

How Much of This Patent is being Implemented Now


Google C.E.O. revealed this …
Sergey, for example, has been looking at new ways of doing search quality, a new math around that.
in an interview a few months ago.

This March 2005 Patent, relealed potential new directions in Google ALGOs.
There appears to be changes occurring now and predictions for massive changes in a few months….

It will probably be based on this….How many of these suggestions are being implemented with the current update?

Information retrieval based on historical data

Quote:
[0099] Certain signals may be used to distinguish between illegitimate and legitimate domains. For example, domains can be renewed up to a period of 10 years. Valuable (legitimate) domains are often paid for several years in advance, while doorway (illegitimate) domains rarely are used for more than a year. Therefore, the date when a domain expires in the future can be used as a factor in predicting the legitimacy of a domain and, thus, the documents associated therewith.

Quote:
[0100] Also, or alternatively, the domain name server (DNS) record for a domain may be monitored to predict whether a domain is legitimate. The DNS record contains details of who registered the domain, administrative and technical addresses, and the addresses of name servers (i.e., servers that resolve the domain name into an IP address). By analyzing this data over time for a domain, illegitimate domains may be identified. For instance, search engine 125 may monitor whether physically correct address information exists over a period of time, whether contact information for the domain changes relatively often, whether there is a relatively high number of changes between different name servers and hosting companies, etc. In one implementation, a list of known-bad contact information, name servers, and/or IP addresses may be identified, stored, and used in predicting the legitimacy of a domain and, thus, the documents associated therewith.
Quote:
[0101] Also, or alternatively, the age, or other information, regarding a name server associated with a domain may be used to predict the legitimacy of the domain. A “good” name server may have a mix of different domains from different registrars and have a history of hosting those domains, while a “bad” name server might host mainly pornography or doorway domains, domains with commercial words (a common indicator of spam), or primarily bulk domains from a single registrar, or might be brand new. The newness of a name server might not automatically be a negative factor in determining the legitimacy of the associated domain, but in combination with other factors, such as ones described herein, it could be.

[0102] In summary, search engine 125 may generate (or alter) a score associated with a document based, at least in part, on information relating to a legitimacy of a domain associated with the document.

[0103] Ranking History

Quote:
[0104] According to an implementation consistent with the principles of the invention, information relating to prior rankings of a document may be used to generate (or alter) a score associated with the document. For example, search engine 125 may monitor the time-varying ranking of a document in response to search queries provided to search engine 125. Search engine 125 may determine that a document that jumps in rankings across many queries might be a topical document or it could signal an attempt to spam search engine 125.

Quote:
[0105] Thus, the quantity or rate that a document moves in rankings over a period of time might be used to influence future scores assigned to that document. In one implementation, for each set of search results, a document may be weighted according to its position in the top N search results. For N=30, one example function might be [((N+1)-SLOT)/N].sup.4. In this case, a top result may receive a score of 1.0, down to a score near 0 for the Nth result.

Quote:
[0106] A query set (e.g., of commercial queries) can be repeated, and documents that gained more than M % in the rankings may be flagged or the percentage growth in ranking may be used as a signal in determining scores for the documents. For example, search engine 125 may determine that a query is likely commercial if the average (median) score of the top results is relatively high and there is a significant amount of change in the top results from month to month. Search engine 125 may also monitor churn as an indication of a commercial query. For commercial queries, the likelihood of spam is higher, so search engine 125 may treat documents associated therewith accordingly.

Quote:
[0107] In addition to history of positions (or rankings) of documents for a given query, search engine 125 may monitor (on a page, host, document, and/or domain basis) one or more other factors, such as the number of queries for which, and the rate at which (increasing/decreasing), a document is selected as a search result over time; seasonality, burstiness, and other patterns over time that a document is selected as a search result; and/or changes in scores over time for a URL-query pair.

Quote:
[0108] In addition, or alternatively, search engine 125 may monitor a number of document (e.g., URL) independent query-based criteria over time. For example, search engine 125 may monitor the average score among a top set of results generated in response to a given query or set of queries and adjust the score of that set of results and/or other results generated in response to the given query or set of queries. Moreover, search engine 125 may monitor the number of results generated for a particular query or set of queries over time. If search engine 125 determines that the number of results increases or that there is a change in the rate of increase (e.g., such an increase may be an indication of a “hot topic” or other phenomenon), search engine 125 may score those results higher in the future.

Quote:
[0109] In addition, or alternatively, search engine 125 may monitor the ranks of documents over time to detect sudden spikes in the ranks of the documents. A spike may indicate either a topical phenomenon (e.g., a hot topic) or an attempt to spam search engine 125 by, for example, trading or purchasing links. Search engine 125 may take measures to prevent spam attempts by, for example, employing hysteresis to allow a rank to grow at a certain rate. In another implementation, the rank for a given document may be allowed a certain maximum threshold of growth over a predefined window of time. As a further measure to differentiate a document related to a topical phenomenon from a spam document, search engine 125 may consider mentions of the document in news articles, discussion groups, etc. on the theory that spam documents will not be mentioned, for example, in the news. Any or a combination of these techniques may be used to curtail spamming attempts.

Quote:
[0110] It may be possible for search engine 125 to make exceptions for documents that are determined to be authoritative in some respect, such as government documents, web directories (e.g., Yahoo), and documents that have shown a relatively steady and high rank over time. For example, if an unusual spike in the number or rate of increase of links to an authoritative document occurs, then search engine 125 may consider such a document not to be spam and, thus, allow a relatively high or even no threshold for (growth of) its rank (over time).

Quote:
[0111] In addition, or alternatively, search engine 125 may consider significant drops in ranks of documents as an indication that these documents are “out of favor” or outdated. For example, if the rank of a document over time drops significantly, then search engine 125 may consider the document as outdated and score the document accordingly.

[0112] In summary, search engine 125 may generate (or alter) a score associated with a document based, at least in part, on information relating to prior rankings of the document.

[0113] User Maintained/Generated Data

Quote:
[0114] According to an implementation consistent with the principles of the invention, user maintained or generated data may be used to generate (or alter) a score associated with a document. For example, search engine 125 may monitor data maintained or generated by a user, such as “bookmarks,” “favorites,” or other types of data that may provide some indication of documents favored by, or of interest to, the user. Search engine 125 may obtain this data either directly (e.g., via a browser assistant) or indirectly (e.g., via a browser). Search engine 125 may then analyze over time a number of bookmarks/favorites to which a document is associated to determine the importance of the document.
How Much of This Patent is being Implemented Now


Google C.E.O. revealed this …
Sergey, for example, has been looking at new ways of doing search quality, a new math around that.
in an interview a few months ago.

This March 2005 Patent, relealed potential new directions in Google ALGOs.
There appears to be changes occurring now and predictions for massive changes in a few months….

It will probably be based on this….How many of these suggestions are being implemented with the current update?

Information retrieval based on historical data

Quote:
[0099] Certain signals may be used to distinguish between illegitimate and legitimate domains. For example, domains can be renewed up to a period of 10 years. Valuable (legitimate) domains are often paid for several years in advance, while doorway (illegitimate) domains rarely are used for more than a year. Therefore, the date when a domain expires in the future can be used as a factor in predicting the legitimacy of a domain and, thus, the documents associated therewith.

Quote:
[0100] Also, or alternatively, the domain name server (DNS) record for a domain may be monitored to predict whether a domain is legitimate. The DNS record contains details of who registered the domain, administrative and technical addresses, and the addresses of name servers (i.e., servers that resolve the domain name into an IP address). By analyzing this data over time for a domain, illegitimate domains may be identified. For instance, search engine 125 may monitor whether physically correct address information exists over a period of time, whether contact information for the domain changes relatively often, whether there is a relatively high number of changes between different name servers and hosting companies, etc. In one implementation, a list of known-bad contact information, name servers, and/or IP addresses may be identified, stored, and used in predicting the legitimacy of a domain and, thus, the documents associated therewith.
Quote:
[0101] Also, or alternatively, the age, or other information, regarding a name server associated with a domain may be used to predict the legitimacy of the domain. A “good” name server may have a mix of different domains from different registrars and have a history of hosting those domains, while a “bad” name server might host mainly pornography or doorway domains, domains with commercial words (a common indicator of spam), or primarily bulk domains from a single registrar, or might be brand new. The newness of a name server might not automatically be a negative factor in determining the legitimacy of the associated domain, but in combination with other factors, such as ones described herein, it could be.

[0102] In summary, search engine 125 may generate (or alter) a score associated with a document based, at least in part, on information relating to a legitimacy of a domain associated with the document.

[0103] Ranking History

Quote:
[0104] According to an implementation consistent with the principles of the invention, information relating to prior rankings of a document may be used to generate (or alter) a score associated with the document. For example, search engine 125 may monitor the time-varying ranking of a document in response to search queries provided to search engine 125. Search engine 125 may determine that a document that jumps in rankings across many queries might be a topical document or it could signal an attempt to spam search engine 125.

Quote:
[0105] Thus, the quantity or rate that a document moves in rankings over a period of time might be used to influence future scores assigned to that document. In one implementation, for each set of search results, a document may be weighted according to its position in the top N search results. For N=30, one example function might be [((N+1)-SLOT)/N].sup.4. In this case, a top result may receive a score of 1.0, down to a score near 0 for the Nth result.

Quote:
[0106] A query set (e.g., of commercial queries) can be repeated, and documents that gained more than M % in the rankings may be flagged or the percentage growth in ranking may be used as a signal in determining scores for the documents. For example, search engine 125 may determine that a query is likely commercial if the average (median) score of the top results is relatively high and there is a significant amount of change in the top results from month to month. Search engine 125 may also monitor churn as an indication of a commercial query. For commercial queries, the likelihood of spam is higher, so search engine 125 may treat documents associated therewith accordingly.

Quote:
[0107] In addition to history of positions (or rankings) of documents for a given query, search engine 125 may monitor (on a page, host, document, and/or domain basis) one or more other factors, such as the number of queries for which, and the rate at which (increasing/decreasing), a document is selected as a search result over time; seasonality, burstiness, and other patterns over time that a document is selected as a search result; and/or changes in scores over time for a URL-query pair.

Quote:
[0108] In addition, or alternatively, search engine 125 may monitor a number of document (e.g., URL) independent query-based criteria over time. For example, search engine 125 may monitor the average score among a top set of results generated in response to a given query or set of queries and adjust the score of that set of results and/or other results generated in response to the given query or set of queries. Moreover, search engine 125 may monitor the number of results generated for a particular query or set of queries over time. If search engine 125 determines that the number of results increases or that there is a change in the rate of increase (e.g., such an increase may be an indication of a “hot topic” or other phenomenon), search engine 125 may score those results higher in the future.

Quote:
[0109] In addition, or alternatively, search engine 125 may monitor the ranks of documents over time to detect sudden spikes in the ranks of the documents. A spike may indicate either a topical phenomenon (e.g., a hot topic) or an attempt to spam search engine 125 by, for example, trading or purchasing links. Search engine 125 may take measures to prevent spam attempts by, for example, employing hysteresis to allow a rank to grow at a certain rate. In another implementation, the rank for a given document may be allowed a certain maximum threshold of growth over a predefined window of time. As a further measure to differentiate a document related to a topical phenomenon from a spam document, search engine 125 may consider mentions of the document in news articles, discussion groups, etc. on the theory that spam documents will not be mentioned, for example, in the news. Any or a combination of these techniques may be used to curtail spamming attempts.

Quote:
[0110] It may be possible for search engine 125 to make exceptions for documents that are determined to be authoritative in some respect, such as government documents, web directories (e.g., Yahoo), and documents that have shown a relatively steady and high rank over time. For example, if an unusual spike in the number or rate of increase of links to an authoritative document occurs, then search engine 125 may consider such a document not to be spam and, thus, allow a relatively high or even no threshold for (growth of) its rank (over time).

Quote:
[0111] In addition, or alternatively, search engine 125 may consider significant drops in ranks of documents as an indication that these documents are “out of favor” or outdated. For example, if the rank of a document over time drops significantly, then search engine 125 may consider the document as outdated and score the document accordingly.

[0112] In summary, search engine 125 may generate (or alter) a score associated with a document based, at least in part, on information relating to prior rankings of the document.

[0113] User Maintained/Generated Data

Quote:
[0114] According to an implementation consistent with the principles of the invention, user maintained or generated data may be used to generate (or alter) a score associated with a document. For example, search engine 125 may monitor data maintained or generated by a user, such as “bookmarks,” “favorites,” or other types of data that may provide some indication of documents favored by, or of interest to, the user. Search engine 125 may obtain this data either directly (e.g., via a browser assistant) or indirectly (e.g., via a browser). Search engine 125 may then analyze over time a number of bookmarks/favorites to which a document is associated to determine the importance of the document.
Posted by seo at 01:26:46 | Permalink | Comments (1) »

Monday, December 19, 2005

Google Yahoo MSN Top 100 Search Engine Ranking Tool

Search Engine Rank Checker
Enter the keyword or keyword phrase and the URL that you would to check.
Website URL
 
SEO tools by SEO tools by SEOLogs.com

Search Engine Rank Checker
Enter the keyword or keyword phrase and the URL that you would to check.
Website URL
 
SEO tools by SEO tools by SEOLogs.com

Posted by seo at 21:20:25 | Permalink | No Comments »

Thursday, December 15, 2005

TOP Search Queries of 2005 by Search Engine

Posted by seo at 20:30:51 | Permalink | No Comments »

Saturday, December 10, 2005

Google Webaccelerator will get your URLs spidered!

Google Webaccelerator is being used to crawl and spider URLs

 

Interestingly enough, several brand new never before owned URLs have just been added to Google SERPs

 

What is so interesting is that they were purchased about a week ago - the hand coding of the site and the FTP-ing were only done a new computer that had the Google Accelerator on it.

 

They are NOT linked anywhere because they are still being worked on.

 

There have been URLs in the past without that Google Accerator Computer being used - purchased from the same domain reseller and using the same host - that were not added until someone began the process.

 

This is good if you want it added - but be forwarned - since Google now spiders Word, Powerpoint, Excel, Flash etc… be sure you want them on the Web.

 

http://webaccelerator.google.com/

 

 

 

Posted by seo at 04:56:39 | Permalink | No Comments »

Saturday, December 3, 2005

WikiPedia Search Engine Optimization

The Wikipedia - Search Engine Optimization Topic

 

Newly created Search Engine Ranking Topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_ranking

Search engine optimization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search

Search engine optimization (SEO) is a set of methods aimed at improving the ranking of a website in search engine listings. The term also refers to an industry of consultants that carry out optimization projects on behalf of clients’ sites.

Using search engines, visitors can find sites in a variety of ways: via paid-for advertisements in the search engine results pages (SERPs), via third parties who are listed in the search engines, or via “organic” listings, i.e. the results the search engines present users. SEO is primarily concerned with improving the visibility of a site in the organic search results.

High rankings in the organic search results can provide targeted traffic for a site. Obtaining that traffic by other means can potentially be expensive. For particularly competitive terms, the cost per click can run several dollars, or more, when pay per click advertising or banner advertising are used. For even moderately competitive terms the cost can range from a few cents to several tens of dollars per visitor. Given those costs, it often makes sense for site owners to optimize their sites for organic search.

Not all sites have identical goals in mind when they optimize for search engines. Some sites are seeking any and all traffic, and may be optimized to rank highly for common search phrase. This can be a poor marketing strategy for a business because it can generate a large volume of low-quality inquiries that cost money to handle, yet result in little business. The “shotgun approach” to search optimization can possibly work well for a site that has broad interest, such as a periodical, a directory, or site that displays advertising with a CPM revenue model.

Other sites target a specific population, with particular needs or interests. Many businesses try to optimize their sites for large numbers of highly specific keywords that indicate a prospective customer who is ready to buy their product. Focusing on desired traffic can generate more high-quality sales leads, and fewer time-wasting inquiries.

Contents

[hide]

History

SEO began in the mid-1990s, as the first search engines were cataloging the early Web. Initially, all a webmaster needed to do was submit a site to the various engines which would run spiders, programs to “crawl” the site, and store the collected data. The search engines then sorted the information by topic, and serve results based on pages they had spidered. As the number of documents online kept growing, and more webmasters realised the value of organic search listings, it became imperative for search engines to sort the vast collection of pages they had spidered and display the most relevant pages first. This was the start of a search engine vs. SEO struggle that continues to this day.

Initially, search engines were guided by the webmasters themselves. Early versions of search algorithms relied on webmaster-provided information like meta tags. Meta tags provided a guide to each page’s content and relevant keywords. Soon some webmasters began to abuse meta tags, causing their pages to rank for irrelevant searches. In response, search engines developed more complex algorithms, taking into account a wider range of factors, but they still relied largely on what are today known as “on-site” factors. Examples of on-site factors include:

  • Keywords in the domain name
  • Keywords in the site’s directory and file names
  • Page titles and tags: for example, a phrase marked up as an H1 (heading) element was considered to contain keywords relevant to the page
  • Ratio of the keyword(s) to other words on the page, the keyword density
  • Content of alternate text provided in the form of Alt tags for images, noframes text for browsers not able to display framed pages, etc.

The inherent flaw in relying so extensively on those factors was that webmasters and SEOs had full control over them and could “optimize” their pages for better rankings. Search engines had to adapt again to ensure their SERPs showed the most relevant pages rather than the best optimized ones.

A new search engine emerged with a new kind of thinking. Google was started by two PhD students at Stanford University, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, and brought a new concept to ranking web pages. This concept, called PageRank, was, for many years, the mainstay of the Google algorithm [1]. PageRank relied heavily on incoming links and used the logic that each link to a page is a vote for that page’s value. The more incoming links a page had the more “worthy” it was. The value of each incoming link itself varied directly based on the PageRank of the page it was coming from and inversely on the number of outgoing links on that page. PageRank proved to be very good at serving relevant results. Google became the most popular and successful search engine. Because PageRank measured an off-site factor, it was more difficult to manipulate - at first.

But manipulated it was. Given time, and the realization that PageRank was the new game in town, webmasters focused on exchanging, buying, and selling links on a massive scale. PageRank’s reliance on the link as a vote of confidence in a page’s value was undermined as many webmasters sought to garner links purely to influence Google into sending them more traffic, irrespective of whether the link was useful to human site visitors.

It was time for Google—and other search engines—to look at a wider range of off-site factors. There were other reasons to develop more intelligent algorithms. The Internet was reaching a vast population of non-technical users who were often unable to use advanced querying techniques to reach the information they were seeking and the sheer volume and complexity of the indexed data was vastly different to the early days. Search engines had to develop predictive, semantic, linguistic and heuristic algorithms.

The PageRank metric itself is still displayed in the Google Toolbar, but it is only one of several factors that Google considers in ranking pages.

Today, most search engines keep their methods and ranking algorithms secret. A search engine may use hundreds of factors in ranking the listings on its SERPs; the factors themselves and the weight each carries may change continually.

Much current SEO thinking on what works and what doesn’t is largely speculation and informed guesses. Some SEOs have carried out controlled experiments to gauge the effects of different approaches to search optimization.

The following, though, are some of the considerations search engines could be building into their algorithms, and the list of Google patents [2] may give some indication as to what is in the pipeline:

  • Age of site
  • Length of time domain has been registered
  • Age of content
  • Regularity with which new content is added
  • Age of link and reputation of linking site
  • Standard on-site factors
  • Negative scoring for on-site factors (for example, a dampening for sites with extensive keyword meta tags indicative of having being SEO-ed)
  • Uniqueness of content
  • Related terms used in content (the terms the search engine associates as being related to the main content of the page)
  • External links, the anchor text in those external links and in the sites/pages containing those links
  • Citations and research sources (indicating the content is of research quality)
  • Stem-related terms in the search engine’s database (finance/financing)
  • Incoming backlinks and anchor text of incoming backlinks
  • Negative scoring for some incoming backlinks (perhaps those coming from low value pages, reciprocated backlinks, etc.)
  • Rate of acquisition of backlinks: too many too fast could indicate “unnatural” link buying activity
  • Text surrounding outward links and incoming backlinks. A link following the words “Sponsored Links” could be ignored
  • Use of “rel=nofollow” to suggest that the search engine should ignore the link
  • Depth of document in site
  • Metrics collected from other sources, such as monitoring how frequently users hit the back button when SERPs send them to a particular page
  • Metrics collected from sources like the Google Toolbar, Google AdWords/Adsense programs, etc.
  • Metrics collected in data-sharing arrangements with third parties (like providers of statistical programs used to monitor site traffic)
  • Rate of removal of incoming links to the site
  • Use of sub-domains, use of keywords in sub-domains and volume of content on sub-domains… and negative scoring for such activity
  • Semantic connections of hosted documents
  • Rate of document addition or change
  • IP of hosting service and the number/quality of other sites hosted on that IP
  • Other affiliations of linking site with the linked site (do they share an IP? have a common postal address on the “contact us” page?)
  • Technical matters like use of 301 to redirect moved pages, showing a 404 server header rather than a 200 server header for pages that don’t exist, proper use of robots.txt
  • Hosting uptime
  • Whether the site serves different content to different categories of users (cloaking)
  • Broken outgoing links not rectified promptly
  • Unsafe or illegal content
  • Quality of HTML coding, presence of coding errors
  • Actual click through rates observed by the search engines for listings displayed on their SERPs
  • Hand ranking by humans of the most frequently accessed SERPs

The relationship between SEOs and the search engines

In the early 2000, search engines and SEO firms attempted to establish an unofficial “truce.” There are several tiers of SEO firms, and the more reputable companies employ content-based optimizations which meet with the search engines’ (reluctant) approval. These techniques include improvements to site navigation and copywriting, designed to make websites more intelligible to search engine algorithms.

Search engines have also reached out to the SEO industry, and are frequent sponsors and guests at SEO conferences and seminars. In fact, with the advent of paid inclusion, search engines now have a vested interest in the health of the optimization community.

Getting discovered by search engines

New sites no longer need to be submitted to search engines to be listed. A simple link from an established site will get the search engines to visit the new site and spider its contents. It is rarely more than a few days from the acquisition of the link to all the main search engine spiders visiting and indexing the new site.

Naturally, this means that it is good practice to have some means (such as a site map, or plain hypertext links) so that once a spider finds part of a site, it can navigate to the rest. Otherwise, individual, isolated, dead-end pages must be found one-by-one from outside the site; any pages that are not linked to from outside can only be found by links internal to the site.

For those search engines, like Yahoo, who have their own paid submission, it may save some time to pay a nominal fee for submission.

“Ethical” methods

So-called “ethical” methods of SEO involve following the search engines’ guidelines as to what is and what isn’t acceptable. Their advice generally is to create content for the user, not the search engines; to make that content easily accessible to their spiders; and to not try to game their system. Often webmasters make critical mistakes when designing or setting up their web sites, and “poison” them so that they will not rank well. Ethical SEO attempts to discover and correct mistakes, such as machine-unreadable menus, broken links, temporary redirects, or a generally poor navigation structure that places pages too many clicks from the home page.

Because search engines are text-centric, many of the same methods that are useful for web accessibility are also advantageous for SEO. Methods are available for optimizing graphical content, even Flash animation (by placing a paragraph or division within, and at the end of the enclosing OBJECT tag), so that search engines can interpret the information.

Some methods considered ethical by the search engines:

  • Using a robots.txt file to grant permissions to spiders to access, or avoid, specific files and directories in the site
  • Using a short and relevant page title to name each page
  • Using a reasonably sized description meta tag without excessive use of keywords, exclamation marks or off topic comments
  • Keeping the page accessible via links from other pages on the site and, preferably, from a sitemap
  • Developing links via natural methods: Google doesn’t elaborate on this somewhat vague guideline, but buying a link from an off-topic page purely because it has a high PageRank is probably not considered acceptable. Dropping an email to a fellow webmaster telling him about a great article you’ve just posted, and requesting a link, is most likely acceptable.


“Unethical” methods

As search engines operate in a highly automated way it is often possible for webmasters to use methods and tactics not approved by search engines to gain better ranking. These methods often go unnoticed unless an employee from the search engine manually visits the site and notices the activity, or a change in ranking algorithm causes the site to lose the advantage thus gained. Sometimes a company will employ an SEO consultant to evaluate competitor’s sites, and report “unethical” optimization methods to the search engines.

So-called “unethical” methods may include:

Keyword spamming (or keyword stuffing) involves the insertion of hidden, random text on a webpage to raise the keyword density or ratio of keywords to other words on the page. Hiding text out of view of the visitor’s screen is done in many different ways. A popular technique is text colored to blend with the background. Using CSS “Z” positioning to place text “behind” an image — and therefore out of view of the visitor — is also common. Other ways include using CSS absolute positioning to have the text positioned several feet away from the page center and, again, out of physical view of the visitor but plainly text that any search engine would pick up in a crawl of the page. Invisible text is a bad idea, as of 2005, because top search engines apparently can detect it.

Abusing NOSCRIPT tags is another way to place hidden content within a page so that the search engines will index it, but the visitor won’t see the content. NOSCRIPT tags are also a valid optimization method for displaying an alternative representation of JavaScript content, such as dynamic methods. The NOSCRIPT tags is not unethical by itself, only if misused.

The inserted text sometimes includes words that are frequently searched (such as “sex”) even if those terms bear little connection to the content of the page. The goal in these cases is plainly to increase traffic at all costs whether that traffic is relevant or not. Once traffic comes to the page, the unethical webmaster may hope to monetize the traffic by displaying ads.

Spamdexing is the promotion of irrelevant, chiefly commercial, pages through abuse of the search algorithms. Many search engine administrators consider any form of search engine optimization used to improve a website’s page rank as spamdexing. However, over time a widespread consensus has developed in the industry as to what are and are not acceptable means of boosting one’s search engine placement and resultant traffic.

Cloaking refers to any of several means to serve up a different page to the search-engine spider than will be seen by human users. It can be an attempt to mislead search engines regarding the content on a particular web site. It should be noted, however, that cloaking can also be used to ethically increase accessibility of a site to users with disabilities, or to provide human users with content that search engines aren’t able to process or parse. It is also used to deliver content based on a user’s location; Google themselves use IP delivery, a form of cloaking, to deliver results.

Link spam is the placing or solicitation of links randomly on other sites, placing a desired keyword into the hyperlinked text of the inbound link. Guest books, forums, blogs and any site that accepts visitors comments are particular targets and are often victims of drive by spamming where automated software creates nonsense posts with links that are usually irrelevant and unwanted.

The following techniques are also widely acknowledged as being spam, or “black hat“:

Some SEOs argue that the terms ethical and unethical should not be applied to the work they do. They maintain that on the principle of basic freedom everybody should be free to post whatever they choose on a site they own, as long as they stay within the law. The responsibility to block search engines access to that content is not one the webmaster should automatically assume. SEOs then explain that typically search engines visit sites uninvited and help themselves to the entire content of that site. Should the search engine then apply some software to “digest” that content and use it in their search results (often monetized with their own advertising) then pinning an “unethical” label on the webmaster is neither fair nor accurate. The flip side is that when a webmaster submits a site to a search engine he is actually inviting the search engine over. However, nowadays, the invitation is unnecessary as search engine spiders are aggressive in finding links to new pages and in crawling that new content, often within hours or minutes, unless they have specifically been excluded by a webmaster-prepared robots.txt file, or a robots exclusion meta tag.

High quality web sites typically rank well

A webmaster who wants to maximize the value of a web site can read the guidelines published by the search engines, as well as the coding guidelines published by the World Wide Web Consortium. If the guidelines are followed, and the site presents frequently updates, useful, original content, and a few meaningful, useful inbound links are established, it is usually possible to obtain a significant amount of organic search traffic.

When a site has useful content, other webmasters will naturally place links to the site, increasing its PageRank and flow of visitors. When visitors discover a useful web site, they tend to refer other visitors by emailing or instant messaging links.

As a result, SEO practices that improve web site quality are likely to outlive short term practices that simply seek to manipulate search rankings. The top SEOs recommend targeting the same thing that search engines seek to promote: relevant, useful content for their users. Means of improving web site quality include:

  1. Clean, fast loading websites, that are content rich, and frequently updated.
  2. Websites that follow the web’s simpler conventions (short and descriptive titles, easy navigation, no disabling of browser buttons, no keyword stuffing or other blatant SEO work).
  3. Natural-looking link building: a few links from directories, very minimal reciprocal or three-way linking, no apparent buying or selling of links, no attempted PR manipulation (buying/selling/hogging), no outward links to less reputable sites.
  4. No auto-generated nonsense content and no machine translated content, but original, useful material.
  5. No technical errors, no duplicate pages, a valid robots.txt, a sitemap, and custom error pages.

Related fields

Internet marketing is a field that includes SEO, as well as other methods of improving web site traffic, including content development, graphic design, public relations, online advertising, newsletters.

See also

References

External links

Posted by seo at 02:50:49 | Permalink | No Comments »