Comments on: Articles Update

By: ubu50

ubu50 — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:52:37 +0000

The freakin’ link monster must be the reason places like Huffington Post and Daily Kos are showing up as top blogs. I know a lot of people read them but not that many people!

By: Kenric

Kenric — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:54:45 +0000

As part of owning a business online you must work hard to get ranked in the search engines. Companies are spending thousands of dollars per month on campaigns like these and if you do not compete with them you will lose.

I can tell you that there hundreds, if not thousands of sites made for this purpose daily. I’m sure google will discount links from these sites. I don’t use article links as an ongoing basis. On my ebiz1, I only made 2 articles. However, I did use a link building campaign that shot me to #5 within 2 months giving me over 1400 links. This wasn’t my intention, but the link building campaign went well, too well in fact that I’m sure I got penalized by Google.

It’s obvious that these campaigns work. Many large companies do this and maybe they are not the wiser. When they pay an SEO company $5000 a month, what do you think the SEO company is doing? They are building links one way or another.

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:39:35 +0000

As someone who sometimes stumbles upon such vacuous non-content myself (both on the web and in the queue of submitted comments to my blog) I can tell you without hesitation that it is a form of spam.

Kenric: Don’t be a link spammer.

By: ABC

ABC — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:05:27 +0000

Interesting concept.. I pity the poor readers who accidentally consume an article written for your keywords. I’ve accidentally come across several sites that must be using this format.

After reading the short article my brain worked it over and realized that it had said nothing, proposed no new ideas, and asked no insightful questions. I see now that it was a carrier for the keyword virus. A tepid emulsion with suspended SEO particulate.

I had been fooled, and allowed myself to read to the end -only- because the end arose so soon after the beginning.

I understand that these articles are actually only fodder for the robots, however real people are occasionally exposed. Please tell me you use this technique with a realization that it’s in fact a mild form of spam, polluting the landscape for those who seek out meaningful content. If you approach it with a level of pragmatism and remorse, and see it as a necessary evil for doing business, for what it’s worth I will have maintained my respect for you (indeed, I’ve been a follower of your blog for some time).

I only ask that you consider the realities of this business model. Can production of vacant non-content remain a viable business in perpetuity? Search engines will try to detect this and weed it out. And the business will only last as long as the cost to produce false content that can fool Google is less than the revenue driven by that false content.

Build a backup plan, and be ready with it. I predict the window for this technique will vanish one morning before you wake.