PDA

View Full Version : Changes You Should Make To Avoid An Over-optimization Penalty



vangogh
04-23-2012, 01:14 AM
Not too long ago ( I think at the recent SXSW convention ) Matt Cutts mentioned that Google was going to be making changes to the algorithm to penalize sites that over optimized. This kind of thing is right in line with how Google's algorithms have been evolving over the years. Admittedly no one outside of Google can tell you exactly what over optimization Google is likely to penalize, but there are plenty of reasonable guestimates as to what they might penalize.

Last week Rand Fishkin offer some of his thoughts in a short video, 6 Changes Every SEO Should Make BEFORE the Over-Optimization Penalty Hits (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/6-changes-every-seo-should-make-before-the-over-optimization-penalty-hits-whiteboard-friday). I think it's definitely worth watching. He runs through 6 practices many have engaged in over the years and suggests it's time to stop practicing these things and making changes to your site if you've done any of them.

Here are the 6 over optimization practices.

1. Keyword stuffed page titles - For example "web design services, web design firm space brand name, whatever your brand name, web design" These titles don't get clicked often anyway since they look so spammy. Better to right something simple like "Brand Name Design Services" or "Design Services Brand Name"

2. Manipulative internal links - These are basically links in your sidebar or footer or wherever on the site that always use the same exact anchor text and point to the same page. Instead mix up the anchor text so it reads more naturally

3. Keyword filled footer links - You've probably seen those list of keyword rich links at the bottom of pages. They're often several lines long and the links are commonly grayed out a bit. They don't exist to be useful to real people, but are trying to get more keyword rich anchor text pointing at your pages.

4. Keyword stuffed copy - Don't write your copy for search engines. I'm sure you've come across sites written very poorly that will mention the same one or two words a dozen times in just a sentence or two. These are people looking to maximize some kind of keyword density in their copy. Better is to just write your copy for the real people who visit.

5. Links from poor sources - Two examples Rand gives are reciprocal links and article directories. Neither has provide much if any benefit for quite some time.

6. Lots of pages targeting similar keywords - For example creating 3 different pages each targeting a different, though very similar phrase "used cars seattle," "used autos seattle," "pre-owned cars seattle" There's no reason to create 3 separate pages for these phrases. They can all be targeted on one well written page. Creating specific pages for each is a sign you're trying to manipulate things more than you should.

I'd recommend watching the video. It's about 11 minutes long and has more detail than what I'm offering here. I think all of the above are practices that really haven't worked for awhile anyway and now could possibly get your pages or site penalized.

billbenson
04-23-2012, 01:48 AM
Interesting, although I don't see much there that hasn't been discussed for a long time. For a long time now, I've thought that you should write a quality page for each keyword or key phrase. By quality, I mean no keyword stuffing and an informative page. Recip links, footer links on all pages, lousy inbound links have all been considered bad for some time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you have said that these inbound links from article sites or similar weren't penalties but rather ignored. Same for recip links. The difference now being that they will be penalized?

A question: Lets say you have a title "Autos in Boise". In the copy you use mostly synonyms for "auto" ie cars, vehicles etc. I'm not talking about stuffing but rather mixing it up a bit. Lets say the copy never has the word auto in it, just synonyms. I would think that G would be smart enough to recognize that that page is on topic, even for more obscure words?

Business Attorney
04-23-2012, 10:59 AM
A question: Lets say you have a title "Autos in Boise". In the copy you use mostly synonyms for "auto" ie cars, vehicles etc. I'm not talking about stuffing but rather mixing it up a bit. Lets say the copy never has the word auto in it, just synonyms. I would think that G would be smart enough to recognize that that page is on topic, even for more obscure words?

The answer to that is clearly yes. I use Google almost exclusively for searches at work and there are many times where my search results page contains some web pages with ONLY synonyms of the word I put in the search. One example that I see often is "lawyer" and "attorney". It seems in that case that there is some preference for the word that you actually select, but that the two are treated more or less interchangeably.

vangogh
04-23-2012, 11:09 AM
I agree these things have all been discussed before, though most of them are still practiced by a lot of people. It wasn't that long ago we had a thread here going with people talking about using article directories to get links. The main point now is that Google has come out suggesting they're going to update the algorithms to penalize over-optimization. While many of the practices above haven't worked for awhile anyway, now there's the possibility they might hurt your site.


The difference now being that they will be penalized?

That's what I keep seeing. I don't know if Matt Cutts himself used the word penalty to describe the coming changes, but it's how I've seen it described most everywhere. Here's a quote from Matt:


the idea is basically to try and level the playing ground a little bit. So all those people who have sort of been doing, for lack of a better word, “over optimization” or “overly” doing their SEO, compared to the people who are just making great content and trying to make a fantastic site, we want to sort of make that playing field a little bit more level.

The quote above comes from the actual audio that set this off, which I found here: Too Much SEO? Google’s Working On An “Over-Optimization” Penalty For That (http://searchengineland.com/too-much-seo-google%E2%80%99s-working-on-an-%E2%80%9Cover-optimization%E2%80%9D-penalty-for-that-115627).


A question: Lets say you have a title "Autos in Boise". In the copy you use mostly synonyms for "auto" ie cars, vehicles etc. I'm not talking about stuffing but rather mixing it up a bit. Lets say the copy never has the word auto in it, just synonyms. I would think that G would be smart enough to recognize that that page is on topic, even for more obscure words?

I think they can recognize the page is on topic too. That's how you should write it. The problem has been people writing one page titled Autos in Boise that doesn't ever use the word cars and then another page titled Cars in Boise that doesn't use the word auto. And for the most part the two pages have the same content, with the exception of one being focused on autos and the other on cars. A very common example you see in practice is the site that has a page for Autos in Boise and another for Autos in Seattle and another for Autos in Denver, that are all the same page with the exception of the city name.

billbenson
04-24-2012, 01:54 AM
You know its kind of interesting, but SEO is probably much easier now than in the early days. There was so much gaming years ago like white text on white backgrounds, link exchanges etc that really was time consuming ways of cheating. Now there are just a few of mostly above the table things to do and you have pretty good SEO.

vangogh
04-24-2012, 10:57 AM
Yes and no. Things like white text on white backgrounds and similar tricks were always considered bad practice and manipulation and basically spam. I really haven't changed the way I do seo since I started. In years past the search engines had more holes in their algorithms that were easier to take advantage of, but I don't consider that seo. That's always been gaming the system and it still happens today. You just need more technical chops today than you did years ago.

For years though most reputable SEOs have been preaching the same stuff. Not everyone wants to listen though since it's hard work that doesn't have overnight results. Many people still want to see seo as some kind of technical magic. Use the right combination of words in the right place and it leads to instant success. Then when it doesn't work they decide seo is snake oil instead. The instant results stopped once there were enough websites online.

cbscreative
04-24-2012, 03:12 PM
Sometimes it may be difficult to really know who is to blame. Certainly anyone gaming the system is responsible for their own actions, but when their clients get taken in because they want to believe in magic pills, then that client is at least equally at fault. Ironically, they are also the one ultimately losing. The "SEO expert" gets paid so they have no motivation to care. The only way for that client to truly stay ahead is if the SEO provider is clever enough to change tactics before getting slapped. But then the client has to perpetually be paying for the newest bag of tricks or they are doomed.

Ultimately, the cheaters can end up spending more time and energy over the long haul because there is no staying power like you get when you work hard according to the rules.

It's all kind of laughable in a way. Those who use tricks or jump on every bandwagon cringe in fear every time Google enhances their algorithms. Those willing to treat Google the way they would like to be treated if they were Google never have anything to worry about.

vangogh
04-25-2012, 07:21 PM
but when their clients get taken in because they want to believe in magic pills, then that client is at least equally at fault.

I completely agree. I think we all have to be responsible for ourselves and our businesses. True there are times someone else can scam us, but when that happens it's still in part because we allowed it to happen.

By the way it looks like the over-optimization stuff is rolling out. People started noticing changes in their traffic yesterday. Also yesterday Matt Cutts published a post on the Google Webmaster Central blog, Another step to reward high-quality sites (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2012/04/another-step-to-reward-high-quality.html) that mentions they'll be launching an important algorithm change in the next few days.

T-RexCards
05-13-2012, 05:39 PM
Good list, thanks for the repost from SEOMoz.