Google Experimenting with Eliminating Backlinks

Article said they tested it and said it was shit. Is there some sort of ambiguity here?
 
Backlinks are still needed for improving SERP. And build high quality backlinks only as tier #1 toward to the money site.
 
Backlinks are the most essential factor for a search engine to determine a site's popularity and importance in the world wide web. It's still possible to rate a site's relevancy without backlinks, but that'd need an umpteen amount of processing power and more advanced algorithms. The search results will look like a human body without any bones on it if they plan to exclude backlinks as a ranking factor.
 
What about the semantics on the content? I mean, there are certain logics now thanks to authorship.
Im not sure when, but soon enough authorship algorithm is gonna kick butts thanks to machine learning. Thats why we have to improve our methods.
 
Evolving is the key. Backlink building will eventually get eliminated as Google tries to reduce the impact of SEO work so that more SMEs will pay for displaying their ads on Google. As a listed Company, this is the only way whereby they can answer to shareholders request for higher growth.
 
If this was true, then why invent the disavow tool?
 
and cutts said they are not gonna do it in near future.
 
This is impossible....Google's billion dollar bot is written around the backlinks and relevancy...this seems to me as a link bait... So don't worry SEO guys....keep on building links!
 
Evolving is the key. Backlink building will eventually get eliminated as Google tries to reduce the impact of SEO work so that more SMEs will pay for displaying their ads on Google. As a listed Company, this is the only way whereby they can answer to shareholders request for higher growth.

I'd imagine a massive infrastructural change would precurse a shift away from back links. It's like their search engine infrastructure.
 
You have to toss the whole of networking theory out if you eliminate backlinks and the question becomes replaced with what? How else do you determine relevancy for the searcher?
 
I get annoyed with these posts, they distract from what works and what does work is high pr links (the more relevant the better). Get on with what works and stop worrying (within reason) about what may or may not happen.
 
how do you know about some person's abilities and skills without someone else telling you? how can you give job to someone without any reference? It's same with backlinks.

For websites, links are the sources which refers to google about it's skills (value, authority etc)

In short, backlinks will never go away. No matter what happens.
For me, even talking to someone and showing what my site has got for him or for the audience is THE BACKLINK! (m not drunk :P )
 
Relax OP and stop worrying..

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lol. Did you even watch the video/read the article before placing this link here? It doesn't mean anything for us except for that nothing has changed.
 
I bet they are experimenting with it, and I guess their major problem is that not everyone has Analytics installed.
If they could map the traffic flow it would be much more powerful than backlinks - its like ignoring those backlinks no one clicks on.
 
how do you know about some person's abilities and skills without someone else telling you? how can you give job to someone without any reference? It's same with backlinks.
For websites, links are the sources which refers to google about it's skills (value, authority etc)

Backlinks are like the internet's version of "advice" for anything and everything that exists on it. If they were removed, then the idea of Google would shift from a democratic builder of quality into a vetted and spoon-feeding monolith.
 
Backlinks are like the internet's version of "advice" for anything and everything that exists on it. If they were removed, then the idea of Google would shift from a democratic builder of quality into a vetted and spoon-feeding monolith.

Yeap, true that.
 
Back
Top