Google is Breaking the Internet
jeremypalmer.com
Google is Breaking the Internet
1–10 of 306 posts
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#2Jeremy Palmer is a SEO marketer, who also appears to be doing some scammy affiliate thing. Google considers his links low quality because they are low quality.
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#3I understand the point.
But you could be friendly and agree to remove the links in questions since they seem to believe it will harm their business. Not doing so "out of principal" may effect others as Google believes your links are low quality.(although it sounds like their SEO company is mostly to blame for their problems).
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#4Jeremy Palmer is a SEO marketer, who also appears to be doing some scammy affiliate thing. Google considers his links low quality because they are low quality.
Yep.
http://www.newspapergrl.com/affiliate-marketing-training-wit...
It's hard to cry when justice is served.
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#5I talked about this phenomenon recently on This Week in Google with Leo Laporte and Gina Trapani: http://twit.tv/show/this-week-in-google/248 Skip to 4:15 in to listen to the discussion.
Note that there are two different things to keep in mind when someone writes in and says "Hey, can you remove this link from your site?"
Situation #1 is by far the most common. If a site gets dinged for linkspam and works to clean up their links, a lot of them send out a bunch of link removal requests on their own prerogative.
Situation #2 is when Google actually sends a notice to a site for spamming links and gives a concrete link that we believe is part of the problem. For example, we might say "we believe site-a.com has a problem with spam or inorganic links. An example link is site-b.com/spammy-link.html."
The vast majority of the link removal requests that a typical site gets are for the first type, where a site got tagged for spamming links and now it's trying hard to clean up any links that could be considered spammy.
If you read the original post closely, it's clear that this is a site asking for a link to be removed--the quoted email isn't from Google.
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#6Jeremy Palmer is a SEO marketer, who also appears to be doing some scammy affiliate thing. Google considers his links low quality because they are low quality.
> Google considers his links low quality because they are.
So what? Why should I have to care that Jeremy Palmer (or any other person) is linking to my site?
The point of the article is that webmasters are going around trying to get links to their sites removed because it might get them penalised by Google. That is not natural or desirable behaviour. Site owners shouldn't have to care about that. Many have resorted to adding 'nofollow' to all of their own outbound links for fear of being punished by Google for linking to 'spammy' sites and appearing to be part of a paid/circular links scheme.
It all sounds very broken to me.
Note: I have no interest in SEO whatsoever, and I only have a single low traffic web site.
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#7[deleted]
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#8Jeremy Palmer is a SEO marketer, who also appears to be doing some scammy affiliate thing. Google considers his links low quality because they are low quality.
He might have low quality links, but his points are still valid. it's not our perogative to link the way Google us to. We should link however we want, and it is up to Google to figure which is link is good, and which are bad.
Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#9Re: Google is Breaking the Internet
#10Jeremy Palmer is a SEO marketer, who also appears to be doing some scammy affiliate thing. Google considers his links low quality because they are low quality.
> Google considers his links low quality because they are. So what? Why should I have to care that Jeremy Palmer (or any other person) is linking to my site? The point of the article is that webmasters are going around trying to get links to their sites removed because it might get them penalised by Google. That is not natural or desirable behaviour. Site owners shouldn't have to care about that. Many have resorted t…
If you've got bad links, just disavow them. Wikipedia has to nofollow links because anybody in the world can add a spammy link to an article. NYT nofollows links because they're old media, and don't understand the web.