SEO’s Say The Stupidest Things!
This is a post that I’ve wanted to write for quite a while. I love seeing people test new ideas out and writing about their findings, it’s human nature to learn more about subjects of interest. However in a desperation to say anything new/fresh about SEO we are starting to see a few little fallacies slip through the net. After all SEO has to always move forward/improve and SEO rockstar #78 has a reputation to maintain, right?
It’s understandable, Panda shook alot of people up in 2011 (with people losing jobs and many more losing clients) and although no-one has truly and properly explained what Panda is and how it works there is a belief that it is a quality metric/algorithm. The update has been great for the bigger SEO companies as it has mean’t that SEO can now be sold as ‘harder than ever!’ Copywriters can charge more for their quality/optimised content and link building ‘specialists’ can talk about outreach, infographics and kinetic typography. You can understand why SEO companies and freelancers are beginning to share their “advanced SEO” secrets again (yes the SEO blogosphere was dead pre Panda).
This has unfortunately lead to people screaming utter drivel from the rooftops:
- Going forward links will hold less sway influencing search results.
- To be successful you must vary your anchor text.
- Want to beat Panda? Write quality content
- Want to beat Panda? Create quality links
I’m sorry but from what I’m still seeing and hearing this isn’t the case.
In the last couple of weeks I’ve talked to a very high profile person within the SEO industry about link building. He told me that one of his clients had seen rankings drop after gaining links from Vogue, New York Times,Shape and many more. Yes lets go through that again rankings decreased after gaining quality links.
Surely these are the links that I should be looking to gain for my client? Every SEO blog under the sun is telling me that I should be looking to gain links from quality resources. If we hear that Google are penalising websites for this then people are going to start to think “why shouldn’t I go back to what I know works?”
I’d also be interested to find out how this was explained to the client!
Client – Excellent so you got me links on these quality websites, you told me that Google will like this. So how are the ranking results, gone through the roof I expect?!
Supplier – Yeah, umm, about that…
This doesn’t mean spam the shit out of the internet, lord knows we have enough of that already. But please could we at least tone it down a bit when it comes to this quality only approach when it’s obvious that a good mix of link techniques are still required to get results, after all this is why the clients are paying us right?!
I suppose at the end of the day it is the game that we play…