DISQUS

Amish Furniture · 2 years ago

I am quite confused. David Airey comments that he has read that Google are dropping the whole process of page ranking. If this is true, why go through all this? If this is not, then it is being done selectively and Andy's conclusion seems to be correct. Why isnt Google responding?

Amish Furniture · 2 years ago

I am quite confused. David Airey comments that he has read that Google are dropping the whole process of page ranking. If this is true, why go through all this? If this is not, then it is being done selectively and Andy's conclusion seems to be correct. Why isnt Google responding?

Vlad · 2 years ago

It would be interesting to see if there is any correlation (or at least a sign of it) between those blogs that were penalized those that were not and whether or not these blogs were displaying AdSense ads.

I know in the past Google insisted it has nothing to do with your ranking, but I just cannot get out of my mind the saying "follow the money".......

Vlad · 2 years ago

It would be interesting to see if there is any correlation (or at least a sign of it) between those blogs that were penalized those that were not and whether or not these blogs were displaying AdSense ads.

I know in the past Google insisted it has nothing to do with your ranking, but I just cannot get out of my mind the saying "follow the money".......

kitchendon · 2 years ago

Very interesting, Andy.

I would have to agree that a well written, researched, paid post should not bring down the wrath of the mighty Google. RL journalists get paid, and the majority of the money comes from advertisers. So at least 1/3 of the content of a RL media outlet is actually paid for content. The actual news stories are not chosen for the news worthiness either. They are chosen to attract viewers and increase a shows popularity.

I think that paid text links ARE selling page rank, and frankly I find the methods used to sell these ads a little shady. Most services offer very little info about the sites where your link will appear, providing only page rank and Alexa ranking as a means of deciding which links to purchase. Most do not even provide the URL of the prospective page. How can you tell if a s site is relative by it's PR alone?

TLA and the like are merely cashing in on the backlink frenzy and desperation of the Webmaster/Blogger.

I am very curious as the the methods that Google is using to derive the PR on the sites that have been affected. Is it a manual, personalized method or a result of a new cog in their mighty algorithmic machine. I would suspect it is a new bit of algorithmic decision making. If it is not, and Google is hand picking sites to penalize, then I will have to retract my latest 'Google Whiners Rant'. :)

If it is an algorithm, then I wonder how they are detecting the practice of selling links. Are they looking at linking patterns, page source code, or some other mysterious data?

This is an intriguing turn of events and it'll be interesting to see how the story develops. Maybe next they can clamp down on Splogs, and made for AdSense landing pages with no original content. That would clear up the search results a lot quicker than penalizing paid-per-post blog entries.

kitchendon · 2 years ago

Very interesting, Andy.

I would have to agree that a well written, researched, paid post should not bring down the wrath of the mighty Google. RL journalists get paid, and the majority of the money comes from advertisers. So at least 1/3 of the content of a RL media outlet is actually paid for content. The actual news stories are not chosen for the news worthiness either. They are chosen to attract viewers and increase a shows popularity.

I think that paid text links ARE selling page rank, and frankly I find the methods used to sell these ads a little shady. Most services offer very little info about the sites where your link will appear, providing only page rank and Alexa ranking as a means of deciding which links to purchase. Most do not even provide the URL of the prospective page. How can you tell if a s site is relative by it's PR alone?

TLA and the like are merely cashing in on the backlink frenzy and desperation of the Webmaster/Blogger.

I am very curious as the the methods that Google is using to derive the PR on the sites that have been affected. Is it a manual, personalized method or a result of a new cog in their mighty algorithmic machine. I would suspect it is a new bit of algorithmic decision making. If it is not, and Google is hand picking sites to penalize, then I will have to retract my latest 'Google Whiners Rant'. :)

If it is an algorithm, then I wonder how they are detecting the practice of selling links. Are they looking at linking patterns, page source code, or some other mysterious data?

This is an intriguing turn of events and it'll be interesting to see how the story develops. Maybe next they can clamp down on Splogs, and made for AdSense landing pages with no original content. That would clear up the search results a lot quicker than penalizing paid-per-post blog entries.

Acopi · 2 years ago

I'm totally with you on this one. A review is a completely different kettle of fish to a purchased link and you rightly point out that you don't mention pagerank anywhere.

However, ask the people who purchased the review if they'd pay the same for an article without the link then the answer would probably be no. There lies the problem. What constitutes a paid link?

Acopi · 2 years ago

I'm totally with you on this one. A review is a completely different kettle of fish to a purchased link and you rightly point out that you don't mention pagerank anywhere.

However, ask the people who purchased the review if they'd pay the same for an article without the link then the answer would probably be no. There lies the problem. What constitutes a paid link?

lilian aka 5xmom · 2 years ago

Hi Andy
Remember me? The one who made your snowflakes plugin to pink flowers?

I got smacked but it won't kill me. Six of my blogs lose their rankings, including those that I hardly write paid posts. I guess Google pick up the whole bunch of my blogs which I linked on the sidebar and decide I am a good target since I am the top earner on PPP and my blog rules #1 for the keyword make money. I am slowly losing that #1 position but ah well, I am not relying on Adsense (which dropped 40% since I was smacked). I sold all 10 links on TLA and selling more links on Linkworth. It is a price (losing the rank) I have to pay I guess.

In fact, I notice I was one of the earliest to be hit by Google, after JohnChow. I suppose that's something to be proud of, eh?

Thanks for the enlightening post.

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Lilian I was aware of what happened to your sites as I do keep an eye on a lot of things that are happening, I even pop by the PPP message boards occasionally, though I am very quiet there.

At the end of the day if people can't feed their family with Adsense, they are going to feed them any way that is legal.

In the past Google has hit legitimate site owners heavily, so the site owners have turned to more automated methods.

We end up going full circle with people more interested in building authority sites, and now the cycle might be kicked off again by Google themselves again.

Garry Conn · 2 years ago

Hey man... I know we have had are various shares of debates but I did want to come on over here and tell you that I do support you and have always felt like you do a very wonderful job with your reviews. I don't think this is going to impact your business to much as it seems that you don't depend on Google as much as others do. Carry on and continue doing what you do best!

Take care man,

Garry

lilian aka 5xmom · 2 years ago

Hi Andy
Remember me? The one who made your snowflakes plugin to pink flowers?

I got smacked but it won't kill me. Six of my blogs lose their rankings, including those that I hardly write paid posts. I guess Google pick up the whole bunch of my blogs which I linked on the sidebar and decide I am a good target since I am the top earner on PPP and my blog rules #1 for the keyword make money. I am slowly losing that #1 position but ah well, I am not relying on Adsense (which dropped 40% since I was smacked). I sold all 10 links on TLA and selling more links on Linkworth. It is a price (losing the rank) I have to pay I guess.

In fact, I notice I was one of the earliest to be hit by Google, after JohnChow. I suppose that's something to be proud of, eh?

Thanks for the enlightening post.

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Lilian I was aware of what happened to your sites as I do keep an eye on a lot of things that are happening, I even pop by the PPP message boards occasionally, though I am very quiet there.

At the end of the day if people can't feed their family with Adsense, they are going to feed them any way that is legal.

In the past Google has hit legitimate site owners heavily, so the site owners have turned to more automated methods.

We end up going full circle with people more interested in building authority sites, and now the cycle might be kicked off again by Google themselves again.

Garry Conn · 2 years ago

Hey man... I know we have had are various shares of debates but I did want to come on over here and tell you that I do support you and have always felt like you do a very wonderful job with your reviews. I don't think this is going to impact your business to much as it seems that you don't depend on Google as much as others do. Carry on and continue doing what you do best!

Take care man,

Garry

Ari Shohat · 2 years ago

Hi Andy,

As you probably know there's an alternative theory going around, one recently mentioned by Shoemoney too, that is based not on whether you sell links or sell pagerank in any way. Instead it is whether whatever it is that you do makes Google look stupid, unfair, or inempt. Perhaps your usual insightful and thorough analysis has made some google engineers feel a bit too uncomfortable lately given that you have important eyeballs here. How's that for a conspiracy theory.

Keep up the great work, we won't stop reading just because pagerank goes down :)

Ari Shohat · 2 years ago

Hi Andy,

As you probably know there's an alternative theory going around, one recently mentioned by Shoemoney too, that is based not on whether you sell links or sell pagerank in any way. Instead it is whether whatever it is that you do makes Google look stupid, unfair, or inempt. Perhaps your usual insightful and thorough analysis has made some google engineers feel a bit too uncomfortable lately given that you have important eyeballs here. How's that for a conspiracy theory.

Keep up the great work, we won't stop reading just because pagerank goes down :)

Dan Schawbel · 2 years ago

I believe you. Your blog is so high profile that i'm sure google read this entry. Either way, as long as we don't intentionally buy or sell links, I think we are fine.

Dan Schawbel · 2 years ago

I believe you. Your blog is so high profile that i'm sure google read this entry. Either way, as long as we don't intentionally buy or sell links, I think we are fine.

CVOS man · 2 years ago

Andy, I think the penalty may have more to do with the sites you are "sponsoring" by not nofollowing your comment tags. Other prominent bloggers have reinstituted nofollow in their comments following unsatisfactory ranking issues.

I love blogs without nofollow - but Google sees things differently.

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Over the months I provided all the information people needed to ensure they limited the amount of juice that might flow out of one specific post before the juice had time to benefit other pages.
Juice is meant to flow, and you can channel it around, and I do that actively.

This is a manual penalty, it is nothing to do with Nofollow on comments, and this blog has had nofollow removed on comments since it was launched.

I am sure if I added nofollow back, I would be able to benefot more from recursive calculations, but then I wouldn't necessarily receive as many great comments, or links.

It is possible and even quite likely that the only hit I have received is in the TBPR that is displayed.

I can imagine other blogs adding nofollow back to their comments, especially those with little conviction as to why they were doing it, or those who though they would gain major SEO benefit from doing it.
There are major benefits, but if your content doesn't stimulate conversation - real meaty conversation, it then becomes a potential liability you either live with, or switch off.

CVOS man · 2 years ago

Andy, I think the penalty may have more to do with the sites you are "sponsoring" by not nofollowing your comment tags. Other prominent bloggers have reinstituted nofollow in their comments following unsatisfactory ranking issues.

I love blogs without nofollow - but Google sees things differently.

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Over the months I provided all the information people needed to ensure they limited the amount of juice that might flow out of one specific post before the juice had time to benefit other pages.
Juice is meant to flow, and you can channel it around, and I do that actively.

This is a manual penalty, it is nothing to do with Nofollow on comments, and this blog has had nofollow removed on comments since it was launched.

I am sure if I added nofollow back, I would be able to benefot more from recursive calculations, but then I wouldn't necessarily receive as many great comments, or links.

It is possible and even quite likely that the only hit I have received is in the TBPR that is displayed.

I can imagine other blogs adding nofollow back to their comments, especially those with little conviction as to why they were doing it, or those who though they would gain major SEO benefit from doing it.
There are major benefits, but if your content doesn't stimulate conversation - real meaty conversation, it then becomes a potential liability you either live with, or switch off.

maneesh · 2 years ago

the whole problem about this whole scenario is google trying to be methodical in providing relevant content, when in fact content on the net never has any method. People might find the info they are looking for in the most uncanny of places many a times from advertising and paid reviews that you and msot other bloggers do.

Another hting that boggles me is the blatant hypocracy on part of google.. They can have sponsored results but bloggers and websties can't place text links. What pisses me off even more is their "nannying" on what is and what isn't relevant content. Why can't they develop their searches better to leave away links that don't end up in relvant results... In the sens if I am searching for a forum to sell text links, and the crawlers land on your site and see a link to text link ads instead.. why can't they devise an algortihm to figure out if its a forum marketplace... just an example really ..

google shouldn't use its expertise and might to dictate terms on individuals..

maneesh · 2 years ago

the whole problem about this whole scenario is google trying to be methodical in providing relevant content, when in fact content on the net never has any method. People might find the info they are looking for in the most uncanny of places many a times from advertising and paid reviews that you and msot other bloggers do.

Another hting that boggles me is the blatant hypocracy on part of google.. They can have sponsored results but bloggers and websties can't place text links. What pisses me off even more is their "nannying" on what is and what isn't relevant content. Why can't they develop their searches better to leave away links that don't end up in relvant results... In the sens if I am searching for a forum to sell text links, and the crawlers land on your site and see a link to text link ads instead.. why can't they devise an algortihm to figure out if its a forum marketplace... just an example really ..

google shouldn't use its expertise and might to dictate terms on individuals..

maurizio · 2 years ago

You should write shorter articles..:D

Anyway what's the difference between PPP and ReviewMe?
I thought they do the same services.

maurizio · 2 years ago

You should write shorter articles..:D

Anyway what's the difference between PPP and ReviewMe?
I thought they do the same services.

Tim · 2 years ago

Andy, you hit the nail on the head near the end of the post when you surmise that Google sees PPP as a threat. This action is about competition, not delivering the best search engine results to the user. In fact, as you've shown, your SERPs have been unaffected, and this appears to be a toolbar-only action. In effect, Google is saying "We like your content, but you don't get to use our Pagerank for advertising".

It has nothing to do with whether or not you sell links. It has everything to do with the fact that you are an influencer in the community, and if by hitting you they scare 100 advertisers and 1000 bloggers off from paid-review services, that's 100 advertisers and 1000 bloggers that might go back to Adwords.

As Vlad said, follow the money.

Tim · 2 years ago

Andy, you hit the nail on the head near the end of the post when you surmise that Google sees PPP as a threat. This action is about competition, not delivering the best search engine results to the user. In fact, as you've shown, your SERPs have been unaffected, and this appears to be a toolbar-only action. In effect, Google is saying "We like your content, but you don't get to use our Pagerank for advertising".

It has nothing to do with whether or not you sell links. It has everything to do with the fact that you are an influencer in the community, and if by hitting you they scare 100 advertisers and 1000 bloggers off from paid-review services, that's 100 advertisers and 1000 bloggers that might go back to Adwords.

As Vlad said, follow the money.

Marcel Feenstra · 2 years ago

It is my impression that Google is currently generating a lot of ill will amongst prominent / highly visible bloggers, by targeting them specifically for "paid" links and reviews, even though they are clearly not the ones raking in the big dough...

Did it occur to Google that these bloggers may be "prominent" and influential for a reason? If readers trust the bloggers and value their opinions, these manual adjustments may well backfire on Google.

Marcel Feenstra · 2 years ago

It is my impression that Google is currently generating a lot of ill will amongst prominent / highly visible bloggers, by targeting them specifically for "paid" links and reviews, even though they are clearly not the ones raking in the big dough...

Did it occur to Google that these bloggers may be "prominent" and influential for a reason? If readers trust the bloggers and value their opinions, these manual adjustments may well backfire on Google.

Interesting health articles · 2 years ago

i too dropped down from 5 to 4.

Interesting health articles · 2 years ago

i too dropped down from 5 to 4.

Dan Thies · 2 years ago

Since you aren't selling PageRank, Andy, why not update your profiles on the paid review sites to say PR 0? Even if you aren't selling PageRank from your site, they are.

I ain't sayin' it's right for Google to do what they appear to have done, BTW.

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Dan, the services pull the data using APIs, nothing is entered manually, and PayPerPost are moving to their own metrics, but nothing will really replace PageRank as a measure of influence.

When talking about influence I am not referring to Google Juice in any way. I promote my audience as being "influencers"... just like yourself. My content is not the typical short articles aimed at newer bloggers.

Google are using PageRank in their directory, other charts also use PageRank such as the top 25 blogger, top make money blogs and the Adage Power 150.

My rankings have just taken a hit on all of those ranking charts, and that does have an effect on "proof" I might have available for a product launch - if there is no proof there is no launch as Jeff Walker says.

I don't think the number of links to a particular site is a good alternative though the metrics are related.

Dan Thies · 2 years ago

Since you aren't selling PageRank, Andy, why not update your profiles on the paid review sites to say PR 0? Even if you aren't selling PageRank from your site, they are.

I ain't sayin' it's right for Google to do what they appear to have done, BTW.

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Dan, the services pull the data using APIs, nothing is entered manually, and PayPerPost are moving to their own metrics, but nothing will really replace PageRank as a measure of influence.

When talking about influence I am not referring to Google Juice in any way. I promote my audience as being "influencers"... just like yourself. My content is not the typical short articles aimed at newer bloggers.

Google are using PageRank in their directory, other charts also use PageRank such as the top 25 blogger, top make money blogs and the Adage Power 150.

My rankings have just taken a hit on all of those ranking charts, and that does have an effect on "proof" I might have available for a product launch - if there is no proof there is no launch as Jeff Walker says.

I don't think the number of links to a particular site is a good alternative though the metrics are related.

Dan Thies · 2 years ago

Preaching to the choir on influence, Andy - if I get a link or a mention here, it's worth more link juice elsewhere than I can possibly get from your site.

So now the real question - have you lost any actual rankings or traffic, or did they just knock some green pixels off the toolbar?

Dan Thies · 2 years ago

Preaching to the choir on influence, Andy - if I get a link or a mention here, it's worth more link juice elsewhere than I can possibly get from your site.

So now the real question - have you lost any actual rankings or traffic, or did they just knock some green pixels off the toolbar?

Doug Heil · 2 years ago

There may be more things wrong with what you are doing than you think. At least wrong according to Google. You are using that silly blogrush stuff that redirects links to any type of blog there is out there. I clicked on a few, and they are awful stuff. How do you know your penalty isn't for linking to bad neighborhoods? How do you know what you are actually penalized for? I'd say it's for more than one thing IMO.

Also; why this industry thinks all of these pay per review or pay per post, or pay per anything stuff would be a good way "long term" to do well in Google, is beyond me. We have been warning about this link stuff for about three years now. It seems the SEO industry is a few years behind as everyone seems surprised about what Google is "finally" doing. I saw this coming a long time ago as it's really just common sense stuff.

Doug Heil · 2 years ago

There may be more things wrong with what you are doing than you think. At least wrong according to Google. You are using that silly blogrush stuff that redirects links to any type of blog there is out there. I clicked on a few, and they are awful stuff. How do you know your penalty isn't for linking to bad neighborhoods? How do you know what you are actually penalized for? I'd say it's for more than one thing IMO.

Also; why this industry thinks all of these pay per review or pay per post, or pay per anything stuff would be a good way "long term" to do well in Google, is beyond me. We have been warning about this link stuff for about three years now. It seems the SEO industry is a few years behind as everyone seems surprised about what Google is "finally" doing. I saw this coming a long time ago as it's really just common sense stuff.

Darren McLaughlin · 2 years ago

I agree with the sentiments of your post. I feel that since I don't have the Google PageRank toolbar installed, I can't possibly "game" Google.

I think that since you don't mention you sell PR anywhere, and you do reject reviews that are irrelevant, you are innocent. Too bad I'm not in charge.

Darren McLaughlin · 2 years ago

I agree with the sentiments of your post. I feel that since I don't have the Google PageRank toolbar installed, I can't possibly "game" Google.

I think that since you don't mention you sell PR anywhere, and you do reject reviews that are irrelevant, you are innocent. Too bad I'm not in charge.

Platinax · 2 years ago

Andy, I've got to say, I find your reasoning daft. All you're saying is that your interpretation differs from Google's clearly stated and different interpretation.

I figured you were more intelligent than this, so what's with the strategy here? Are you simply trying to gain some kind of blogger sympathy vote as a viral marketing plan?

I seriously don't get it - you sell paid editorial links, you got your hand slapped, end of story, surely?

Platinax · 2 years ago

Andy, I've got to say, I find your reasoning daft. All you're saying is that your interpretation differs from Google's clearly stated and different interpretation.

I figured you were more intelligent than this, so what's with the strategy here? Are you simply trying to gain some kind of blogger sympathy vote as a viral marketing plan?

I seriously don't get it - you sell paid editorial links, you got your hand slapped, end of story, surely?

Mert · 2 years ago

Platinax, that comment of yours comes from the guy who sells links at the top right of his site to bunch of people (one of them being to text link ads (another penalized site). That is called kicking a guy that lies on the ground after the guy gets beaten up by another guy whose girlfriend you were sleeping with. In other words, give me a freakin break.

By the way Andy,
The link in my username was done just for you.

Mert · 2 years ago

Platinax, that comment of yours comes from the guy who sells links at the top right of his site to bunch of people (one of them being to text link ads (another penalized site). That is called kicking a guy that lies on the ground after the guy gets beaten up by another guy whose girlfriend you were sleeping with. In other words, give me a freakin break.

By the way Andy,
The link in my username was done just for you.

Reem · 2 years ago

Don't worry about PageRank. Sometimes I'll stumble onto a blog that's really good, and will be surprised to find a low PR. Keep up the good work;)

Reem · 2 years ago

Don't worry about PageRank. Sometimes I'll stumble onto a blog that's really good, and will be surprised to find a low PR. Keep up the good work;)

Platinax · 2 years ago

No, Mert. If I were to ever believe Platinax had a penalty, I'd change to correct it.

As for the ads on the right - they've been there for 3 years - long before the paid link arguments really developed.

However, you can be assured that I will be taking action, and applying a nofollow to all of the links this week, simply because I have no intention of waving a red flag to Google.

Platinax · 2 years ago

No, Mert. If I were to ever believe Platinax had a penalty, I'd change to correct it.

As for the ads on the right - they've been there for 3 years - long before the paid link arguments really developed.

However, you can be assured that I will be taking action, and applying a nofollow to all of the links this week, simply because I have no intention of waving a red flag to Google.

Elizabeth · 2 years ago

Andy, this is really concerning me. I have five text link ads (for which I make very little money, because they all bought one-year ads when I was new and my link price was very low), and I also have text ads I've sold through LinkWorth. Am I going to be penalized by Google for that? Should I not have those ads clearly labelled as "ad partners" or "sponsors"?

Sponsored Reviews-I started getting MORE of my bids approved once I added my Page Rank to the titles of my blogs. But should I take that out to preserve that rank? This is so confusing.

Elizabeth · 2 years ago

Andy, this is really concerning me. I have five text link ads (for which I make very little money, because they all bought one-year ads when I was new and my link price was very low), and I also have text ads I've sold through LinkWorth. Am I going to be penalized by Google for that? Should I not have those ads clearly labelled as "ad partners" or "sponsors"?

Sponsored Reviews-I started getting MORE of my bids approved once I added my Page Rank to the titles of my blogs. But should I take that out to preserve that rank? This is so confusing.

Bryan@OneMansGoal.Com · 2 years ago

Andy,

I wrote a post about this too... although mine wasn't quite as nice as yours.

http://onemansgoal.com/166/googles-warning-dont...

I think it is ridiculous that the "internet police" won't let us monetize our sites in ANY way that we feel necessary. Adsense isn't what it used to be, and it definitely won't make you millions unless you throw content out the window and start writing Adsense optimized posts. I say to hell with that, I write for my readers.

Bryan@OneMansGoal.Com · 2 years ago

Andy,

I wrote a post about this too... although mine wasn't quite as nice as yours.

http://onemansgoal.com/166/googles-warning-dont...

I think it is ridiculous that the "internet police" won't let us monetize our sites in ANY way that we feel necessary. Adsense isn't what it used to be, and it definitely won't make you millions unless you throw content out the window and start writing Adsense optimized posts. I say to hell with that, I write for my readers.

Etienne Teo · 2 years ago

Yours is one of the few that i noticed does not have paid links and got the drop.. but most of the others are receiving it because of this that matt cutts had previously talked about on his blog..

Please change all your "feature links" "sponsored links" to something else like "cool sites" or "resources" on your paid links and give those links a rel="nofollow"..Something i learnt from matt cutts, while this may not be truth but it what he had mention before the massacre of dropping pageranks...
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pa...

Etienne Teo · 2 years ago

Yours is one of the few that i noticed does not have paid links and got the drop.. but most of the others are receiving it because of this that matt cutts had previously talked about on his blog..

Please change all your "feature links" "sponsored links" to something else like "cool sites" or "resources" on your paid links and give those links a rel="nofollow"..Something i learnt from matt cutts, while this may not be truth but it what he had mention before the massacre of dropping pageranks...
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pa...

Lord Matt · 2 years ago

But the GOd hath spoken (all hail they that are "never" wrong) in the form of Matt Cutts (Who is perfect and all his ways are... oh you get the picture) who demanded we all snap to attention and rel nofollow these things.

I think the only way we as bloggers can over come these strong arm tactics is to say "big fat ones to ya" we walk by a different code and if you hurt us we will know you are vile... (G)evil and that will make us martyrs.

If the traffic loss is going to be hard then we need to form verticals that can be used to replace that. If it is the marks out of ten that matters so much then we can use a group effort to brute force the numbers (SETI@HOME has been doing that for ages). We have the original formula available and I published some theoretical work on the subject too.

Lord Matt · 2 years ago

But the GOd hath spoken (all hail they that are "never" wrong) in the form of Matt Cutts (Who is perfect and all his ways are... oh you get the picture) who demanded we all snap to attention and rel nofollow these things.

I think the only way we as bloggers can over come these strong arm tactics is to say "big fat ones to ya" we walk by a different code and if you hurt us we will know you are vile... (G)evil and that will make us martyrs.

If the traffic loss is going to be hard then we need to form verticals that can be used to replace that. If it is the marks out of ten that matters so much then we can use a group effort to brute force the numbers (SETI@HOME has been doing that for ages). We have the original formula available and I published some theoretical work on the subject too.

Meister · 2 years ago

I think google just tries to scare the seo community. The problem is that they can not penalize everyone because it would worsen their search results. Thus they have to threat everyone, but it will not work. I ask myself if PR will remain to be important. If you get the same amount of users to your site and keep the same position in the serps .... the value for links from your site must be unchanged too.

Meister · 2 years ago

I think google just tries to scare the seo community. The problem is that they can not penalize everyone because it would worsen their search results. Thus they have to threat everyone, but it will not work. I ask myself if PR will remain to be important. If you get the same amount of users to your site and keep the same position in the serps .... the value for links from your site must be unchanged too.

Artem · 2 years ago

There hundreds of penalties of Page Rank around the Net. But there are no any upgrade.. Damn Google, I have blogs with the age of more than 5 months and still with page rank 0.

Artem · 2 years ago

There hundreds of penalties of Page Rank around the Net. But there are no any upgrade.. Damn Google, I have blogs with the age of more than 5 months and still with page rank 0.

valkyrie · 2 years ago

this is really unfair to the SEO COMMUNITY.

what would they or feel if they are one of us. what would they do if they're on our shoes.

valkyrie · 2 years ago

this is really unfair to the SEO COMMUNITY.

what would they or feel if they are one of us. what would they do if they're on our shoes.

gabriel bear · 2 years ago

the blog today at bridge solution is specifically about goooogle vs microsoft and the crushing of entrepreneurship by them both. Both corporations see themsleves as eventually being the central clearing house for all dfata on the planet that can be monetised. warren bufft, who is not doing too poorly financially, had a dream as a child--a road conencts everything in the universe instantly, but there's a tollbooth, price, only 5 cents. but buffet owned the tollbooth. this is the vision og gooogle, and the guy who pals with buffet the4se days...bill gates.
the guys who can hustle need to..and learn to work together.
i've gotten number 1 rankings on gooogle for terms relating to clients, and then banned from adsense for the loyalty of those cleints' fans thinking that a 5% ad click on one blog would help run the nfp operation...one client out of 12, one blog out of 200, and adsense gone. why? google had no answer, just, "policy".

gabriel bear · 2 years ago

the blog today at bridge solution is specifically about goooogle vs microsoft and the crushing of entrepreneurship by them both. Both corporations see themsleves as eventually being the central clearing house for all dfata on the planet that can be monetised. warren bufft, who is not doing too poorly financially, had a dream as a child--a road conencts everything in the universe instantly, but there's a tollbooth, price, only 5 cents. but buffet owned the tollbooth. this is the vision og gooogle, and the guy who pals with buffet the4se days...bill gates.
the guys who can hustle need to..and learn to work together.
i've gotten number 1 rankings on gooogle for terms relating to clients, and then banned from adsense for the loyalty of those cleints' fans thinking that a 5% ad click on one blog would help run the nfp operation...one client out of 12, one blog out of 200, and adsense gone. why? google had no answer, just, "policy".

Mimi Lenox · 2 years ago

I am concerned about this whole issue as well. I don't have any paid advertising on my site and I'm losing ranking daily. I was in the top 10K websites/blogs and creeping back up again. My Blog Reactions are not being updated. Period. The links that were placed there today (known as Blog Reactions) some are from weeks ago. What is up with that?

Mimi Lenox · 2 years ago

I am concerned about this whole issue as well. I don't have any paid advertising on my site and I'm losing ranking daily. I was in the top 10K websites/blogs and creeping back up again. My Blog Reactions are not being updated. Period. The links that were placed there today (known as Blog Reactions) some are from weeks ago. What is up with that?

Courtney TURTLE · 2 years ago

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that instead of going after all 50,000 pay per post members they have singled out a few of the most prominent and made an example of them for the masses. The punishment you have endured is enough for me to reconsider my paid review participation in the future. The result however is compliance with Google's wishes, but we all did not suffer equally in getting there.

Blogging to make a living is competitive with many niches becoming more and more saturated all the time. No where is this more true than in the field of metablogging. If one site is "beat down" with a tarnished reputation and lowered visible metrics, then in fact Google is playing a role in deciding which blogs in a given field will be successful.

Courtney TURTLE · 2 years ago

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that instead of going after all 50,000 pay per post members they have singled out a few of the most prominent and made an example of them for the masses. The punishment you have endured is enough for me to reconsider my paid review participation in the future. The result however is compliance with Google's wishes, but we all did not suffer equally in getting there.

Blogging to make a living is competitive with many niches becoming more and more saturated all the time. No where is this more true than in the field of metablogging. If one site is "beat down" with a tarnished reputation and lowered visible metrics, then in fact Google is playing a role in deciding which blogs in a given field will be successful.

mblair · 2 years ago

Truly a shame when Google takes one of the most thoughtful blogs in the industry suchas this one and effectively slanders it based upon an haphazard application of arbitrary criteria.

If Google wants to shutdown the PageRank economy the answer is simple: stop displaying PageRank and making it easier to commercialize links.

Their war against paid reviews is nonsensical. When a movie star is on TV promoting a product they are not only paid, they stake their reputation on it. Ultimately, it is all about reputation. If you provide links to sleazy sites for money, ultimately market forces will work against you in one way or another. We don't need Google to effectively issue a "tsk-tsk" in their toolbar as some kind of custodian of Internet morality. Frankly, this is one shining aspect of why monopolistic scenarios are dangerous.

I'm wondering if I've been subject to this a bit on www.smoblog.com as well -- while I don't sell links there at all I was on board the Technorati favorites train. Toolbar has never moved off of a PR0 even though I see values much higher than that in Webmaster Tools. I've assumed it was a fluke until now... If you decide to delve into this all further with more resaerch let me know and I'll share my screenies from Webmaster Tools.

mblair · 2 years ago

Truly a shame when Google takes one of the most thoughtful blogs in the industry suchas this one and effectively slanders it based upon an haphazard application of arbitrary criteria.

If Google wants to shutdown the PageRank economy the answer is simple: stop displaying PageRank and making it easier to commercialize links.

Their war against paid reviews is nonsensical. When a movie star is on TV promoting a product they are not only paid, they stake their reputation on it. Ultimately, it is all about reputation. If you provide links to sleazy sites for money, ultimately market forces will work against you in one way or another. We don't need Google to effectively issue a "tsk-tsk" in their toolbar as some kind of custodian of Internet morality. Frankly, this is one shining aspect of why monopolistic scenarios are dangerous.

I'm wondering if I've been subject to this a bit on www.smoblog.com as well -- while I don't sell links there at all I was on board the Technorati favorites train. Toolbar has never moved off of a PR0 even though I see values much higher than that in Webmaster Tools. I've assumed it was a fluke until now... If you decide to delve into this all further with more resaerch let me know and I'll share my screenies from Webmaster Tools.

Tricia · 2 years ago

Andy a few of my sites took a hit last week too ... and two took a hit about three months ago. As a result two of my PR5 sites are now PR4 and some that had PR4 and PR3 also dropped.

I've been reading a lot of posts about these drops and as I read yours a thought occurred to me. Many of use who do work for PPP are listed on Payperposts "Meet our Bloggers" pages. Either as highlighted blogs on the page or within the rotating header on that page. At least two of my blogs are listed on PPP prominently.

You've got to wonder if that's partly how Google decided who would lose rank.

I've barely done any marketplace ops in the last THREE months. I mostly do PPP direct, Sponsored Reviews and ReviewMe posts now and only on a few of my many blogs.

Tricia · 2 years ago

Andy a few of my sites took a hit last week too ... and two took a hit about three months ago. As a result two of my PR5 sites are now PR4 and some that had PR4 and PR3 also dropped.

I've been reading a lot of posts about these drops and as I read yours a thought occurred to me. Many of use who do work for PPP are listed on Payperposts "Meet our Bloggers" pages. Either as highlighted blogs on the page or within the rotating header on that page. At least two of my blogs are listed on PPP prominently.

You've got to wonder if that's partly how Google decided who would lose rank.

I've barely done any marketplace ops in the last THREE months. I mostly do PPP direct, Sponsored Reviews and ReviewMe posts now and only on a few of my many blogs.

Marty · 2 years ago

Lord Google giveth...and Lord Google taketh.

Marty · 2 years ago

Lord Google giveth...and Lord Google taketh.

Stephan Miller · 2 years ago

I think social networking itself makes Google look stupid. Yes, they have a stranglehold over traditional search. But as far as social networking and blog search goes, they are bombing.
Once the leaders in social networks start becoming stable and their algorithms get better, Google may still claim their dominance over traditional search, but they are destined to take the same position as Microsoft is in for search when it comes to social media.
Their algorithms can't account for the jump of links a blog can get daily through social media and they start popping blogs.
But that's just my two cents.

Stephan Miller · 2 years ago

I think social networking itself makes Google look stupid. Yes, they have a stranglehold over traditional search. But as far as social networking and blog search goes, they are bombing.
Once the leaders in social networks start becoming stable and their algorithms get better, Google may still claim their dominance over traditional search, but they are destined to take the same position as Microsoft is in for search when it comes to social media.
Their algorithms can't account for the jump of links a blog can get daily through social media and they start popping blogs.
But that's just my two cents.

Tricia · 2 years ago

Just wondering why my link was removed here. You know I'm not a spammer. What gives?

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Tricia, I think you might have forgotten to add a link when you commented ;)

I will email you the comment notification I received

Your comments are always most welcome and never spam

Tricia · 2 years ago

Just wondering why my link was removed here. You know I'm not a spammer. What gives?

AndyBeard · 2 years ago

Tricia, I think you might have forgotten to add a link when you commented ;)

I will email you the comment notification I received

Your comments are always most welcome and never spam

Jen / domestika · 2 years ago

The ways of the Big G are mysterious indeed, but I'm adding my vote for the BlogRush hyposthesis... When it launched, I did wonder if there'd be some sort of backlash. The "bad neighbourhood" clause did surely apply, before the recent massive exorcism of splogs, but still I'm not seeing a whole lot of what I'd call "bona fide quality" in the links served up by that widget. Not, like, you know, Andy Beard type quality... ;)

Jen / domestika · 2 years ago

The ways of the Big G are mysterious indeed, but I'm adding my vote for the BlogRush hyposthesis... When it launched, I did wonder if there'd be some sort of backlash. The "bad neighbourhood" clause did surely apply, before the recent massive exorcism of splogs, but still I'm not seeing a whole lot of what I'd call "bona fide quality" in the links served up by that widget. Not, like, you know, Andy Beard type quality... ;)