Why White Hat SEO Still Fails To Get It

[Avid Learner]

If you ignore Google (70% of the search engine market) entirely, for example, and only do SEO for Bing/Yahoo (30% of the SE market), you'll get good SE traffic without the penalty hassles. ... This means getting away with the black hat methods (that B/Y won't penalize you for), plus supplementing with whatever non SEO tactics you can, is the future of search engine marketing going forward--i.e., a future without Google.

Very good point. I like the contrarian point of view. Google also gets a lot of attention from the IM world, so what it does gets "noticed". Could it also be that Bing/Yahoo are flying "under the radar", but are engaged (perhaps less aggressively) in the same efforts as Google is?

 

[zebrahat]

Very good point. I like the contrarian point of view. Google also gets a lot of attention from the IM world, so what it does gets "noticed". Could it also be that Bing/Yahoo are flying "under the radar", but are engaged (perhaps less aggressively) in the same efforts as Google is?

Possibly, but B/Y appear to have no where near the logistical ability to try to clamp down rules on the whole search engine marketing universe that Google does (i.e., G has a far more robust ability to index sites, more staff to manually review and penalize, etc, yet even it can't keep up).

And because the rivals don't have most of the market share of the SE industry, they don't have the leverage Google has in dictating rules to everybody. The nice thing about optimizing for B/Y is that you'll get steadier traffic from them, but much of the time traffic from Google anyway, if you're following good SEO practices in general. You just won't have all your traffic mostly held hostage to G's algo shifts, dances and purges.

 

[SEO Power]

Very good point. I like the contrarian point of view. Google also gets a lot of attention from the IM world, so what it does gets "noticed". Could it also be that Bing/Yahoo are flying "under the radar", but are engaged (perhaps less aggressively) in the same efforts as Google is?

All search engines are engaged in spam-fighting activities in one way or another, so Bing and Yahoo are definitely doing the same thing, but not as much as Google is doing. Google is usually the target of blackhats and blackhat sites rise faster in Google than in other SEs because Google has faster crawlers and therefore indexes the blackhat links faster.

 

[Argent]

good post man.

I am one of those "white hat seo" people and I have a few sites that I value highly and I've been mostly concentrating on content.
Great content is getting me more and more visitors, it gets me natural links and it has never been "slapped". However, it's stuck on top of page 2 of Google for the main keywords... it's almost the same as not being indexed.

Now after doing a small research I've realized that at least 3 of top 10 of my competitors are using low quality PBNs. I am not very technical nor do I have the proper knowledge or resources yet I was able to figure out (and track down) their PBNs and these guys have been ranking for years... google doesn't give a damn.

Now I'll probably not do any "shady" stuff to my main few sites but I am very tempted to create a few money sites just to test out PBNs and other techniques that Google claims to hate.
I honestly try hard to create an amazing site and I stay away from any kind of Google manipulation - yet it gets me nowhere. Just like OP mentions. Play by the rules and keep living on the page 2

 

[tony_d]

When it comes to content google will treat the following pretty much the same (for 'digital camera' kw):

A decent digital camera might set you back financially a bit, but depending on what you do is worth it.
Smelling the digital camera will produce a new era that begins to develop abruptly because of the sunshine.

This has long been my view, but you put it so eloquently in a way that I never have

I've insisted that the only time we're in 'real trouble' as SEOers or IMers is when G perfects AI - and I don't see that happening anytime soon. Until then, don't do stupid shit, and you'll be fine.

 

[SpreadOption]

I have really never understood why some are so intent on perpetuating this half-baked "good vs. evil" dichotomy between WH and BH (even down to the actual color symbolism). For my purposes, WH techniques are mostly (but not entirely) on the backburner, but I know others who are plenty successful with them. Honestly, I wish I were a bit more skilled and experienced with WH techniques, because I think it could be valuable to integrate them more frequently with the BH work I do. Maybe one day...

 

[Avid Learner]

All search engines are engaged in spam-fighting activities in one way or another, so Bing and Yahoo are definitely doing the same thing, but not as much as Google is doing. Google is usually the target of blackhats and blackhat sites rise faster in Google than in other SEs because Google has faster crawlers and therefore indexes the blackhat links faster.

Possibly, but B/Y appear to have no where near the logistical ability to try to clamp down rules on the whole search engine marketing universe that Google does (i.e., G has a far more robust ability to index sites, more staff to manually review and penalize, etc, yet even it can't keep up).

And because the rivals don't have most of the market share of the SE industry, they don't have the leverage Google has in dictating rules to everybody. The nice thing about optimizing for B/Y is that you'll get steadier traffic from them, but much of the time traffic from Google anyway, if you're following good SEO practices in general. You just won't have all your traffic mostly held hostage to G's algo shifts, dances and purges.

I guess it is the ROI for B/Y - same effort for smaller return. They probably monitor Google and copy cat their methods (as much as they can guess, discern them).

 

[Avid Learner]

I am one of those "white hat seo" people and I have a few sites that I value highly and I've been mostly concentrating on content. Great content is getting me more and more visitors, it gets me natural links and it has never been "slapped". However, it's stuck on top of page 2 of Google for the main keywords... it's almost the same as not being indexed. ... I honestly try hard to create an amazing site and I stay away from any kind of Google manipulation - yet it gets me nowhere. Just like OP mentions. Play by the rules and keep living on the page 2

This gets me to a few questions...

Presumably (perhaps naively so) some of the most popular websites (high authority?) are purely whitehat. Take HuffPost, IndiaTimes, DailyMail (just to pull from Alexa top 100) ... they don't need to, I guess, because of their volume of traffic. Is this a correct view? Or, if they do any BH/GH, is it entirely a different approach than what we peons would consider, and perhaps, much more subtle?

So, as we move down the ranking to somewhere "mid-tier" (say at 200,000th+ place in Alexa), does the BH/GH become more important for ranking? Or, is this all about us peasants getting a leg up on the bigger, "pure WH", sites?

In other words, even if one wants to follow a pure WH approach (whatever that may mean), they are at a competitive disadvantage, but as they mature and move up in ranking on visitor traffic (attributable to WH activity) there is a diminishing return for any BH/GH activity?

Perhaps nobody really knows, but thought I'd see what is plausible or likely.

 

[SalieriJazz]

Great post, Scritty!

I've been thinking the same since few days ago, I'm working my ass off on 5 sites of mine ... all of them are on page 2,3,4 and 8 and one is dancing like hell, but I've been working on them since 2 months now ... guess white hat shit. But I'm thinking of buying some SAPE links or something ... because I feel like time is money ... even if I rank only 1-2 months, but I'll make some good money, what do you think? SAPE links or not?

Honestly, I tried for another site some churn and burn with GSA, but didn't work so well, also opened up some academia.edu projects to test it out, but they got stuck on pages 4,5 and 6...

Opinion?

Cheers, thanks!

 

[BabyAngel]

I can relate your post to call of duty. My bf gets into arguments online about "campers" (he loves to camp). People say you are "cheating" for camping but it is part of the game mechanics and as long as you kill people that is all that matters.

Same with black hat, white hat, blue hat, penis hat. If the end goal is to "make money" screw google and what he is crying about what is right or wrong.

As long as you are not scamming the customer or traffic I say rank and bank however you see fit.

 

[dzuster]

very well said. this actually true,

 

[sarav]

Not every single webmaster starts his strategies with blackhat. I myself wanted to enter the web with pure white hat traffic generation methods in 2008. After a while I figured, that will be a joke and I will be a joker if I don't make a move towards building strong links myself.

Trust me, it is google who says white hat is the way and changing algorithms such a way that the white hat techniques won't work. If they prove that white hat methods work, most of the genuine business / ecom sites will sure follow it. It is not at all possible to rank a website with google guidelines with limited funds a small company can have.

It is google, that forces the people to black hat NOT anyone else.

 

[Londoncalling]

For those of you that run SEO Agencies, do you ever use grey hat/ blackhat strategies for your clients, like tiered links/ web's or PBNs?
It seems that many of the SEO agencies these days claim to do nothing but create good content to get links naturally. But in reality, as the OP says, maybe you will rank in years that way!

 

[xoziggieox]

I think technically the moment you create a single link, Google sees you as trying to "manipulate the system". I make sure I test things out on my own sites to make sure it works before pointing links to a client site. Also, I make sure I control all of the 1st tier of sites so if it goes south I can remove the links in tier 1.

 

[Beastman]

I don't think it benefits SEOs to think in terms of White v Black.

There are a range of tactics you can use to rank websites. Some carry more risk than others and are therefore good for particular purposes. Some are more effective than others.

It really depends on your aims. Understanding the full range of tactics you have available to you, and the use that they have when combined allows you to pick and choose the right approach for the right goal.

 

[irmscher]

Ahaha, nice post, you're reading my mind man. I'm calling these guys Google candi-kiddies. But for being nice they are always getting the flogging instead of sweets.

 

[calhunjas]

all great info. thanks!

 

[moonlighsunligh]

Exactly. I studied NLP and NLG enough to know this:

1. It is possible to detect most SPAM content by checking grammar corectness, n-grams and other factors.
2. It is too computationally intensive to do the above
3. If you do it however, you end up penalizing a shitload of UGC sites with users that are not native english speakers or lazy typers who make mistakes and dont correct.
4. You can build NLG systems that pass any detection algo, it takes just a bit more effort.

When it comes to content google will treat the following pretty much the same (for 'digital camera' kw):

A decent digital camera might set you back financially a bit, but depending on what you do is worth it.
Smelling the digital camera will produce a new era that begins to develop abruptly because of the sunshine.

When it comes to backlinks it is equally dumb, but SEOs are dumber and they leave footprints the size of a barn door.

What G has is great scare tactics and brainwashing campaigns.

Did you test recently how is Google able to detect word level spun content (such as the content using WordAI) on web 2.0, when used on T1?

Some people are saying that manual is better I did so and didn't see good ranking using manual content, and the web 2.0s beat my "money" sites in serps.

 

[ratra]

i couldn't agree more to OP . Before the latest updates i did zero link bulding. zero so called black hat stuff.only quality content bulding. and on site seo. but i still got slaped hard by G. I WAS SHOCK. I really belived white hat will work eventually.

Reason why white hat doesn't work is Big G. They don't do enough to keep their promises. Their algo is not designed for white hat guys. focusing ONLY good quality content is not working.

 

[Beastman]

Did you test recently how is Google able to detect word level spun content (such as the content using WordAI) on web 2.0, when used on T1?

Some people are saying that manual is better I did so and didn't see good ranking using manual content, and the web 2.0s beat my "money" sites in serps.

I don't think they detect it very well at all. You can still find plenty of it in the SERPs. I use spun content all the time for my tier 1s and haven't had a problem ranking.