As I near my 100th post (which is the post after this one I believe) I was reviewing some of my older post to spotlight on my 100th blog post. I found a couple of the articles that had links to John Chow dot com. A few post later I found an article I had written about Google optimization.
Part of that article told readers not to be linking to questionable or bad neighborhoods per Google Webmaster Guidelines.
Here’s a quote from Google Wemaster Guidelines.
Don’t participate in link schemes designed to increase your site’s ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or “bad neighborhoods” on the web, as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links.
Does Google See John Chow dot Com as a Bad Neighborhood?
A question popped into my head. If Google has penalized John Chow to the extent that his site doesn’t even rank on the first page when searching for his own name, John Chow, do they consider this a bad neighborhood? Would I be penalized for linking to John Chow dot Com?
So for sake this blog’s little pittance of PR, I put “no follow” on those outgoing links. At least until Google decides what to do permanently, if anything, about John Chow. Maybe they already have?
I guess only time will tell whether or not Google sees his site as a “bad neighborhood.” For many of us who linked to him, I certainly hope not!
More Questions for Google…
Which brings us to another question I’d like to ask Matt Cutts. What if we link to a “good neighborhood” only to have that neighborhood (or site) turn bad on us down the road? Are we suppose to remember who we linked to two years ago?
I’m also wondering, just for curiosity’s's sake, if John Chow dot Com will lose PageRank due to the penalty? I guess we’ll have to wait for the PR update for that one…which should be any day now. A loss in PageRank could hurt his income since it’s one of the guidepost used to measure how much some company’s such as Text Link Ads pays out. This is interesting the more I think about it.
I’ve got to stop, it seems I’ve opened a flood gate of questions in my mind. I hate it when that happens. It’s worse than when the voices in there start answering their self!
8 responses so far ↓
1 DazzlinDonna // Aug 14, 2007 at 8:33 am
Those are interesting points you make. I can understand that we should theoretically be mindful of what links we have on our sites, and I do spend time making sure the links I’ve placed don’t end up as 404s down the road, but there’s no way I could check every link I’ve posted, years later, to see if they are pointing to bad neighborhoods or not. I mean, we don’t even really know what criteria to use to determine if a site is in a bad neighborhood (we are forced to guess), but even if we knew exactly what to look for, it would be impossible to keep track over the years. Would love to hear Matt comment on this.
2 Don // Aug 14, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Donna, that’s one of my points. Gosh, I have a 6 year old Real Estate site with a links page I built years ago. Hundreds of outgoing links.
They were quality sites when I linked to them but should I go and check every one to make sure they’re not pointing a porn or gambling site? Geez, it would be easier to just get rid of all the links!
Thanks for commenting, I appreciate you stopping by and taking part in the conversation.
3 Lisa Kirkpatrick // Aug 15, 2007 at 11:06 am
Don, thanks for bringing this to our attention. I agree we need to pay attention to who we link to but this new guideline is really misguided. link exchange has been around longer than google. they have no right to tell webmasters that link exchange violates the google webmaster guidelines. whoever wrote that probably has a phd in engineering and has probably never marketed a website through traditional link exchange in his or her life.
google, what happened to “do no evil”?? google is creating paranoia among well intentioned webmasters who link exchange for the benefit of end users.
Google should come out and state that fully automated link programs that force link exchange is what the problem is and that webmasters should use editor based software if they are going to manage linking. I have been using linksmanager for 6 years and I am not going to stop now. Google should clarify link exchange once and for all.
4 How I reversed my Google ranking penalty :: David Airey :: Graphic Designer // Oct 5, 2007 at 9:31 am
[...] If you have any info about the usefulness of the Bad Neighborhood tool, I’d love to know. Don Lawson at Affiliate Watcher asks some interesting questions about linking to bad neighbourhoods. [...]
5 Google penalties can be lifted : nicharalambous.com // Oct 5, 2007 at 10:20 am
[...] There are some links that David provides to try and help with these issues; here and here [...]
6 Getting Slapped Down By Google Is Easier Than You Think // Oct 7, 2007 at 2:13 pm
[...] my opinion, Google really got serious about this technique when John Chow was using it to bomb Google with “make money online”. John Chow was slapped down then and has been since for what [...]
7 Who Doesn’t Love Daegan Spam? Or “Delete to Avoid a Google Penalty” : Big Bucks Blogger // Oct 18, 2007 at 11:19 am
[...] trackback will soon link into a “bad neighborhood”. If you read further, you’ll discover why out-link to bad neighborhood’s could cause [...]
8 Lanie // Jan 1, 2009 at 12:04 am
I have linked a lot to JC and never been penalized.
Leave a Comment