• SEO-Blog
  • Startseite
  • RSS-Feed, complete Feed
  • About the Blog, Blogcharts
  • Archive: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009
• Weitere Postings
  • Google PageRank update 10/2007
  • PageRank-update – some data
  • IndexWatch – what is happening in the searchengine-index?
  • Google helps with Geo-association
  • The fair-tale of topic-relevancy
  • AdSense competitor-filter
  • Google cleans up the index
  • Microsoft is showing backlinks again
  • Searchengineoptimization for beginners 1.3
  • Barrier-free webdesign and its intersection with SEO
•  

After the PageRank-adjustment: where do we go from here?

Three days after Google depreciated the PageRank of sites that obviously sold links, I would like to share some thought on this process, now that the dust has settled a little. Even though we might sometimes feel differently, the search is still Google's main business segment: the users come for this reason and therefore the money is flowing. Google has reached its current marketshare in this area by having a quality of results that was, by far, higher than that of its competitors at the time – it should be in the very own interest of those responsible to keep the quality of the search as high as possible. Whenever in the past, there have been ways and means to manipulate the search, Google has intervened: The inheritance of guestbooks and pure linkexchange-sites has been shut down years ago, following that were automated linkexchange-systems like Linkvault which Google was able to get under control as well and now its time for the bought links: Once a method is used by too many, Google intervenes. Linktrades to influence ranking has been already been around at the turn of the century, the only difference is that at that time it was only used by a small circle of people and was therefore no threat. Now, with service providers like Text-Link-Ads, Linklift and Teliad they were unable to continue ignoring this problem.

One of the most interesting facts, to me, to come out of the current PageRank depreciations for a very selected assortment of sites is that Google does not seem to have a working algorithm to identify paid-for links at this time. There is conclusive evidence that they have worked of a manually researched list, that was partially enriched by obvious “footprints”, like Trigami's disclaimer. This also explains why there was a veil of silence around this subject for such a long time, after they were baiting the sale of links loud and clear in the beginning of the year – the development just has not come far enough and for them not to loose face they are now intervening manually. It seems certain that it is not undesirable that a few bloggers and multiplikators are now sharing their knowledge thereof.

I admit that I find that, through this large-scale sensitizing of the public, Google is playing with fire – which is dangerous even for them. Linkbrokers and -merchants now have a much better argumentational aid to push through other implementations than just the “standardimplementations” of the sidebar or similar areas: The links will slide into the content and will therefore be extremely hard to discern from voluntary and free links – the upcoming development should stay fascinating.