Figured the title would get Matt's attention. Okay Matt I need some help. I have been hired by an adult entertainment site to build their presence online - get better rankings etc.
I need to build their inbound links and want to make sure I am not wasting my time and their money. So before I started I did a search for your comments on directory submissions, paid links (well everyone knows that opinion), reciprocal links, bad neighborhoods (of the IP kind - not the seedy parts of towns where my client's businesses are located) and your example site review post.
So I began to think that I may not be able to do much for them. In general adult content has a bad rap in our industry - the job no one wants to take on for fear of the association - but it is also the industry that has been 'gaming' the system for the longest and thus most neighborhoods have been marked bad.
What's a guy to do Matt?
Directory listings seem to be one way. But how do we really know which ones are still considered any good and are the adult areas of some of the bigger directories taken with a TON of salt?
Could Google set up a Monitored By Google program? Why not give a Good Search Keeping Seal of Approval? Since directories should be an important part of deeper search results, if there was a system or established list maybe the work on one end could help in other areas of the fight against spam.
I know I am going to hear: "Google does not want to classify good and bad" or some variation of that, but we are being told to use no follow - so maybe other rules and system checks could help this.
Given the basis of the Google algorithm is link based and your job is to fight back the constant spamming, some sort of system could help people.
Interestingly, as I did my searches I did find a lot of people using your name to promote themselves, the one by submit edge is particularly good. They are 2 and 3 for Matt Cutts Directory Submissions and offer to get you in to hundreds of directories for a fee. Despite their SEO efforts I am thinking they may not be a good investment.
There are millions of directories, hell I started dozens back in the day. But if you are going to push your way up the rankings you need links.
I want to do it the right way, so am reaching out to you Matt for some advice. I could do a hoax press release about some gossipy fake story - hey include a porn star and a search industry leader (Danny smart move introducing me to your wife now I can't use you) and I will get a lot of links.
I have read your advice to use common sense when looking at directories but unless I am building the ultimate "good directory list" it is an endless job and one that is still subjective.
Hell, I am sure the people below still do not share the views they once stated:
Rand may not still think:
What does suck, imo, is that Google doesn't want to recognize more legitimate sources of paid links - I'm not talking about link brokers, but about sponsored links on particular sites or in directories, etc.
The belief that a link should not be counted as a vote if someone paid for it is a very dangerous idea. Imagine the link structure of the web without the influence of paid or monetarily influenced links. It would be a very, very different environment and I wonder if Google really believes it would be a better one. It's particularly egregious since their business model is serving links to paid sponsors, but they don't want folks doing it on their blogs or sites unless they add "nofollow" and remove some of the value of that link... Seems highly hypocritical to me.
Come to think of it, it's just not fair that Google doesn't want to count my link farm links as links. Google sucks and so does Matt Cutts.
Okay that one was a joke - don't shoot me Jill.
Time has changed what w do. Would love some insight into where directories stand now as a link building tool.
Early Bird Rates have been extended!
June 12-14, 2013: Join industry experts at SES Toronto for a crash course in the latest strategies in Online Marketing and Advertising.
Save $300 when you register by Thursday, May 23.