For more of the latest information on social media marketing, please visit our official blog page at http://blackboxsocialmedia.com/topics/blog/

2. To Link or Not To
Link; That Is The
Question Post Google
Penguin

3. As we know, Google is constantly
tweaking its rankings algorithm to
improve the relevancy of its search
listings. The first iteration of one of
the most dramatic updates in
some time, known as the “Panda”
or “Farmer” update, rolled out in
the spring of 2011.

4. This update’s focus was to
eliminate low quality content spam
from its database. Since then,
numerous tweaks to the Panda
update have been implemented
without major ramifications for
most webmasters.

5. That is until the most recent Google
Penguin update. No less controversial,
this one targets “over optimized” web
sites; sites that use moderate to
aggressive link building tactics, the
utilization of blog networks and black
hat tools to obtain links, the use of
“un-natural” or over optimized
anchor text and so on.

6. Since then, Google has sent out
signals that indicate SEO is going to
matter less in the future, and quality
content is going to be paramount.
According to Matt Cutts, new changes
are going to “level the playing
field”, making it easier for the folks
who don’t focus on SEO to rank higher
just by having a great, content rich
site.

7. This has left some webmasters
wondering if this signals the “end of
SEO.”

8. Does Google Penguin
Mean the End of SEO?
short and quick answer is no, it doesn’t.
Why?
To answer that, we have to determine
how any search engine determines
relevancy, and assesses the quality of
any of the sites in its database. There
are three ways…

9. 1. What you say about you:
Essentially, this is the content of your
web pages, and the various related
HTML elements (Title and Meta tags,
H1, H2 and H3 tags, etc.).

10. 2. What others “say” about
you:
These are the in-pointing links from
authority web sites, guest posts, blog
comments links, bookmarking,
directory sites, and so on.

11. 3. What the social web says
about you:
These are the “Tweets”, “Likes” and
“Google +1’s” that your site
generates. Simply put, these are
another form of links.

12. If we go back to the days before
Google, when AltaVista, Fast, and
Inktomi-powered engines ruled the
‘Net, ranking algorithms were
determined largely by on page
factors, or “what you say about you.”

13. Since the vast majority of webmasters
have a vested interest in presenting
their web sites as the “best”
regardless of whether they are or not,
this didn’t always lead to the highest
quality results. Plus, the results were
pretty easy to game, by analyzing the
densities of various on page factors,
and altering your pages so they met
them.

14. Then Google came along.
Google changed the rules of the
game, because it figured “what
others say about you” (in the form of
in pointing links, which in essence act
like “votes” for the quality of your
content) would be a better metric to
use in determining search relevancy
than relying purely on on-page
metrics.

15. And while there have been some
glitches, this strategy has worked
pretty well for Google. Despite the
fact that Google’s results have been –
up to this point at least – relatively
easy to game using aggressive link
building tactics, focusing on in-
pointing links is still by far the best
way to determine relevancy.

16. To suggest therefore, that SEO or link
building is no longer applicable in
2012 is counter intuitive.
Think about what makes content
great for a moment.

17. Is it fantastic prose? A conversational
style? Citations or documentation to
support statements? A certain
number of words? Links to
authoritative resources? A specific
ratio of nouns to verbs? It could be
any or all of these things.

18. Or perhaps even none of them. The
point is, what makes content “great”
is entirely subjective. Determining
great content from average content
based entirely on on-page factors is,
at the time of this writing at least, not
something at which the search
engines are particularly good.

19. It still makes the most sense to use
off-page ranking factors – that means
links from credible resources – to best
determine this.

20. What About Social Signals?
These too are going to be important
moving forward, but it’s unlikely that
they can or will play a huge role in any
ranking algorithm for the simple reason
that most sites don’t get more than a
handful of “Likes”, “Tweets”, and so on.

21. So let’s go back to the “level the
playing field” statement, and the
assertion that Google is making it
easier for sites that don’t focus on
aggressive SEO to rank higher simply by
having a great, content rich site. How
does this play out for you?

22. Sidebar:
Let us ignore the obvious incongruity;
that engaging in smart SEO somehow
precludes quality content. Investing in
SEO has always been a smart business
strategy and for many businesses; it
generates a decent return on
investment, which is exactly why it is
done.

23. If Google really is interested in
delivering the best possible results to
its audience, it can’t simply penalize
sites that have used link building
tactics in the past, if those sites really
are the best possible option for their
audience.

24. As anyone who has built a brand new
site in the last year or two will tell you,
expecting Google to drive traffic to it
without engaging in some sort of link
building is akin to waiting on the
winning numbers in the lottery. It just
does not happen.

25. What Mr Cutt’s is most likely
saying therefore is this…
Sites that develop slow building,
natural link profiles – with links that
likely constitute genuine “votes” for the
quality of your content, are going to do
just as well or better as sites that obtain
tons of links via aggressive link building
for the sole purpose of manipulating
search rankings.

26. Of course, it’s difficult for Google to
assess what really constitutes a
genuine link or not, and since the
majority of small, content rich sites
don’t receive many (or any) links from
high quality authority sites, it simply
can’t eliminate the value of all low
quality links without compromising the
integrity of its database.

27. In many ways, low quality links are the
most natural of links, and the sort of
links most sites acquire (blog comment
links, forum links and social
bookmarking links are all prime
examples).

28. How To Recover From
Google Penguin?
So what’s the bottom line, moving
forward?
Your link building has to appear as
natural and “un-manipulated” as
possible. Some ways to do this?…

29. 1. Your anchor text needs to be varied
and a percentage of it should be “un-
optimized” (i.e., “click here”, “for
more information”, etc.).
2. Links should point to internal pages
of the site and not just the home page.

30. 3. Links should come from a wide
variety of link types (i.e., press releases,
guest posts, blog comments, videos,
social bookmarks, etc.).
4. A significant percentage (perhaps as
much as a quarter) of your links should
be “no follow.” Such links are part of a
natural link profile.

31. 5. The amount of links you obtain should
be in direct proportion to your site’s
traffic. A site that receives 10 visits a day,
for instance, is not going to obtain 5,000
social bookmarks in a month.

32. 6. Stay completely “white hat.” Forget
tools that offer instant backlinks, traffic,
etc. If Google doesn’t know about them
now, it will soon, and will take the
appropriate action. You will lose
whatever ranking benefit you obtained,
and may possibly incur a penalty.

33. It goes without saying that your content
should be great. This is something
Google has always claimed to hold
paramount and should not come as a
surprise. However, the biggest take
home lesson from Panda 3.3 when it
comes to building links is that if it
“seems unreasonable”, then it probably
is, and Google will act accordingly.

34. Now more than ever, it seems, SEO is a
race that goes to the tortoise, not the
hare. Slow and steady should be your
link building mantra, post Panda 3.3.