Penalized by Google?
Saturday, February 26th, 2011In the last week two major retailers have been penalized by Google for what many would term “grey hat” practices. They employed some different strategies that some might find questionable, and others might think that perhaps there were no direct Google policies against it, so why not go for it?
There are many, many ways to plan and implement SEO strategy, and some of them do fall into a grey area. A really good SEO won’t try most of them, and will stick to what is considered “white hat” or “ethical SEO”. Overstock.com, as of yesterday, their rankings dropped to the 5th or 6th pages for many phrases that they had been ranking well for in the past, according to the Wall Street Journal. Overstock approached colleges and universities, asking them to link to product pages for bunk beds and other items with a 10% off discount for college students and faculty. It’s a good idea, except that it doesn’t fall within Google guidelines. I don’t know that I would call it unethical. More stupid, since you really don’t want to be penalized by Google. Therefore, it falls into the “grey” category.
JC Penny has also has some trouble in recent weeks with Google. It seems that JC Penny did not do their homework before hiring an SEO, and ended up getting more than they bargained for. You’d think they would have questions for this SEO when they were suddenly ranking first for everything from area rugs to dresses. It was eventually brought to light that the SEO was employing some seriously stupid, and majorly black hat SEO techniques. I guess the guy paid a good bit to throw a couple thousand links back to JC Penny all over the web with anchor text like “dresses” and “samsonite luggage” and hundreds more on sites all over the web. Some had a vague relevancy, but most did not. So, JC Penny’s rankings are tanking. JC Penny is also firing back, unappreciative of the “exposé” by the New York Times, or Google’s response. Within hours JC Penny’s rankings all fell significantly.
So what is up Google’s sleeve after a month of big retailers using some grey hat and black hat strategies to gain rankings? They’ve come up with algorithm designed to weed out “cheaters” and low quality sites. What’s a low quality site? Any site that does not serve it’s own purpose: link and content farms, ones with no copy or little copy, just ads, or copied content. The new algo will help Google determine how people interact with the sites. It’s supposed to weed out low quality sites, but the specifics of how it works, of course, have not been released. Some data from Chrome, I am sure helps them determine what users consider low quality sites.
I think that no matter what search engine you use, you have to consider what has always been the case with search. This algo changes none of that – you still have to go with high quality content, fresh content. And a white hat SEO…
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380306,00.asp
http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2011/02/25/did-googles-algorithm-update-go-far-enough-on-content-farms

















