Google Claims To Be “Very Resistant” To Negative SEO

    December 25, 2012
    Chris Crum
    Comments are off for this post.

Negative SEO has been a big topic in the search industry this year, particularly since the Penguin update and Google’s link warnings to webmasters. Many have wondered how easy it would be for their competitors to trick Google into making their sites look like parts of “bad neighborhoods'”.

Have you seen examples of Google allowing negative SEO to take place? Let us know.

For all Google has done to combat search spam, and talk about issues more openly with webmasters, concerns about negative SEO still linger.

It didn’t help much when Google changed the wording in its Webmaster Tools help center to make it seem more possible that this could happen.

Google used to say:

There’s almost nothing a competitor can do to harm your ranking or have your site removed from our index. If you’re concerned about another site linking to yours, we suggest contacting the webmaster of the site in question. Google aggregates and organizes information published on the web; we don’t control the content of these pages.

Our search results change regularly as we update our index. While we can’t guarantee that any page will consistently appear in our index or appear with a particular rank, we do offer guidelines for maintaining a “crawler-friendly” site. Following these recommendations may increase the likelihood that your site will show up consistently in the Google search results.

This year, that section was changed to say:

Google works hard to prevent other webmasters from being able to harm your ranking or have your site removed from our index. If you’re concerned about another site linking to yours, we suggest contacting the webmaster of the site in question. Google aggregates and organizes information published on the web; we don’t control the content of these pages.

If you’ll notice, Google changed it from saying “there’s almost nothing a competitor can do to harm your ranking…” to “Google works hard to prevent other webmasters from being able to harm your ranking…”

Not an incredibly reassuring change.

Eventually, of course, Google launched the Link Disavow tool, which lets webmasters tell Google to ignore certain links or links from certain domains. In theory, this should be a good tool to combat negative SEO if you’re actually experiencing it (though there is no guarantee that Google will actually ignore the links you tell it to).

According to Google, however, it’s very unlikely that you are experiencing negative SEO. This was the topic of a new Webmaster Help video from the company, which features Matt Cutts discussing negative SEO and the Link Disavow tool.

“From the very beginning, we have to think about, when we design an algorithm, or when we take action on sites with the manual web spam team, we try to think about, ‘Okay, is there some way somebody could frame somebody else? Some way that person A could hurt competitor B?’ or something like that,” says Cutts. “So we try really, really hard to design algorithms that are robust, and that are resistant to that sort of thing. Any algorithm that we’ve done in recent years – that the web spam team has worked on – we do try to walk through those cases and make sure that we’re resistant to that sort of thing.”

“At the same time, as Google has gotten better at assessing, you know, the quality of backlinks, and taken stronger action on a lot of link networks (especially both public and private link networks) earlier this year, a lot more people are thinking about their back links – how do they clean up their backlinks?” he continues. “And some people are asking about, what if people try to do negative SEO, which is ‘Google bowling,’ or they try to point links to a site to make that site rank lower. Again, most people don’t have to worry about this. If you’re just a regular mom and pop – you’re a small business, this is not the sort of thing where you’re likely in any way, shape or form to run up against this. In my experience, there’s a lot of people who talk about negative SEO, but very few people who actually try it, and fewer still, who actually succeed.”

Cutts mentions in the video that they did another video on the Link Disavow tool. You’ve probably seen it by now, but just in case you haven’t, here you go:

For people who are in competitive niches, who are really worried about this Cutts suggests using the Link Disavow tool. Here’s what Google said about negative SEO in an FAQ when the tool was first launched:

The primary purpose of this tool is to help clean up if you’ve hired a bad SEO or made mistakes in your own link-building. If you know of bad link-building done on your behalf (e.g., paid posts or paid links that pass PageRank), we recommend that you contact the sites that link to you and try to get links taken off the public web first. You’re also helping to protect your site’s image, since people will no longer find spammy links and jump to conclusions about your website or business. If, despite your best efforts, you’re unable to get a few backlinks taken down, that’s a good time to use the Disavow Links tool.

In general, Google works hard to prevent other webmasters from being able to harm your ranking. However, if you’re worried that some backlinks might be affecting your site’s reputation, you can use the Disavow Links tool to indicate to Google that those links should be ignored. Again, we build our algorithms with an eye to preventing negative SEO, so the vast majority of webmasters don’t need to worry about negative SEO at all.

Now that the year’s about over, it’s a good time to reflect on the changes Google has made to its algorithms and to the tools and resources it has provided webmasters. I don’t think anyone can say they haven’t at least communicated more changes this year than in any other year in recent memory. The Link Disavow tool is something that webmasters and SEOs have been waiting for for a long time.

Has Google improved in your opinion? Is negative SEO a non-issue now? Tells us what you think.

  • William

    GOOGLE.COM has 3,541,412,138 own spam backlinks – based on: majesticseo.com, and alexa.com toolbar, 12/19/2012.

    The Google arrogance and hypocrisy.

    Second, if everyone must to hire the FBI to track our external backlinks? The Google Paranoia Asymptomatic.

  • http://www.emagic.co.nz/ Cameron – eMagic Marketing

    I would take what Matt Cutts says with a grain of salt. Google simply want to keep webmasters guessing. Best to stay out of their forums, ignore all the scare mongering and focus on more important things like the real world!

  • http://www.1ongoogle.com Gabrielle F

    Google has gone a long way in battling negative SEO. Every update made is done to combat all black hat techniques. There was even a point when good techniques were mistaken as black. This gives sites a better competition. Where real traffic counts.

    • Guy

      where wikipedia, youtube and adwords get ALL the real traffic…

  • Guy

    we listen what matt cutts say, really stupid answer like usual. Use ‘disavow tool’. May be we also need to calculate google rankings manually to help that google???

    How google prefer to pay us for it?????

    At this days I NOT BELIEVE any newbie can create website which will get traffic from google. All that stupid pandas, penguins was created to prevent usual blog from any google ranking.

    Negative seo problem will increasing with every day. If google really will do everything to get rid of black hat webmasters (i not believe in it), later can be real links chaos in the internet. Just because if peoples will lost everything – they will try some kind of revenge.

    Also do you see how google shifts all work to webmasters? Because of panda – we need to delete pages, tags, categories pages (noindex), remove ‘thin content’ (and we doing it for google, not(!) for end-user). We cannot put ads in most delicious places of our websites, etc.

    I really start thinking what google slowly dies…

  • http://www.bloketoys.co.uk BlokeToys

    And once again we only have a fraction of the information we actually need from the almighty Google!

    So, how are we supposed to know what a “bad neighborhood” is, exactly? Google has refused to define this in any substantial way.

    Judging by the way they treat adult content, the entire adult business is considered a “bad neighborhood”. And as I work in that neighborhood, any site linking to anything I have is likely to have a negative impact.

    As is often the case, Google is keeping its secrets and we are supposed to comply, and accept it, deal with it and just keep our fingers crossed that we please the God in the Volcano with the latest virgin sacrificed.

  • http://www.belfast-architects.co.uk Alan

    Often good content is a matter of a few words and phone us. If you pad it out with unnecessary twaddle you confuse the message. How many street billboards do you see with 60 – 200 words? Then there is back links, well what on earth do Google think an efficient internet should look like? Are we supposed to duplicate content on other sites? When someone posts on our site are we to disavow their effort? Most of us will not want the spammers cluttering our sites and will delete the “hi great post nonsense”.

    • Guy

      google bot can determine what you have great quality content using only lsi and keywords stuffing checking.

      Google is not search engine, it not even knowledge (wikipedia copy-paste) engine. This system looking for ANY reason to penalize any website and to rank only wikipedia/youtube.

  • John


  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhZ_S6s2Uuw Steve – Online Radio

    I don’t think Google even cares.

  • http://www.tharu.net Sinhala songs

    This means we can buy postive backlinks. what sort of link is atually negative somebody please give examples

    • http://www.realitist.com Robert

      Pixel links on porn site pop-ups sold as guaranteed traffic.

  • http://www.diversified-demolition.com Jamie

    I don’t know how Google can reasonably claim that because just how some sites get penalized during the Penguin/Panda updates etc, well whatever caused those sites to get penalized, surely somebody else can do to somebody else.
    As far as local SEO goes, one thing here, even though this isn’t about organic listings, I believe you can do negative SEO on your competitors Pindrop, anybody can go to the edit this page or make a recommendation, when u do this u can alter somebody’s main category, and it will disrupt their pindrop, i have seen it happen.

  • Tag A. Long

    Links have nothing to do with page quality or how useful a document may be to the user. The link issue is only Matt Cutts running propaganda for the executive suite, their mission is to have only paid links provided by google.

  • https://www.linkedin.com/in/christophermanning Chris Manning SEO Guy

    At the end of the day the Internet is simply “Pages of content” connected by “Links”… So, if you focus on “good content” and “good links” your efforts will be rewarded.

    The question that I believe has never truly been answered is can you successfully repair negative SEO?

    There has been a lot of speculation but very few practical tests. It will be interesting to see someone do a live case study where they get a page ranked #1 in a moderately competative space, then negative link bomb the site and after 90 days start the repair process to see if the first position can be reaquired and the time and effort that it takes to be successful.

    • http://www.tipsinablog.com Danny

      Chris, I read only a little while back that something similar was to this was being done on a very well known site…

      The reason it caught my attention, was that it was the “polar opposite” of all the “how to build positive SEO for higher ranking” type articles….

      The site owner and some other individuals(from other well known sites) were testing what effect, certain SEO practices would have on a site over a period of time…though, focusing on negative effects…..and how they could be amplified….

      Whether or not I have misconstrued their actual intention, who knows!

      I have heard of other cases recently where tests are being conducted, in the same manner you describe(rank a site then bomb it with spam(and do other things to affect the rankings) then clean it up) as part of an experiment….

      I have read on a number of occasions over the years, people talking about “bombing websites / competitors” out of the rankings, rather than out rank them through, legit SEO practises…

      It’s far more common than many people know, or many people wish to know…

  • http://www.pulsetraksurvey.com/ Bob

    This is plain lie. Who trusts Matt Cutts?

    • Zoran

      No one… Matt Cutts is just a front face clown.

      I wonder why they do not penalize huge web news portals who are selling links openly?

      Here is DO-Follow link bought by Bloomberg:

      Are Google will penalize BBC? NO because they will face a huge suit from BBC! Google is penalizing only small companies who do not have power to go in legal battle with Google. If you are big and have good lawyers you are SAFE!

      Why they do not penalize big brands web directories who are doing the same?
      This one: http://botw.org/ sell links for $150 per year or 250 one time payment. Google will also never do anything with this company, but if you are small directory they will ruin you.

      All in all… Google is in undeclared war with SEO companies because if you have good SEO you don’t need Google ad words!

  • Matt

    A client I do on-site SEO for was recently hit by a bunch of spammy links (we believe from a competitor). It definitely wasn’t us doing it, we’ve only been working on on-site SEO. These bad links resulted in the site getting de-indexed for all the key words we were targeting and the site traffic dropped by half. We’ve submitted a disavaow request for the links in question, but so far no change.

    This tells me that negative SEO is definitely possible. We’ll see how useful the disavow tool is for recovering from negative SEO….I’m not going to hold my breath.

  • http://www,greenawayresidential.com/ Darren Greenaway

    I can honestly say that I am as confused as ever but reading the comments I have learnt lots but again seems like there is no definitive answer.

  • http://www.mindconnection.com Mark

    Obviously, Google is going into the mushroom-growing business. Generating this much BS is a good start for them.

    I have documented to Google CLEAR cases, on two sites I run, of being the victim of a negative SEO attack. I was able to track new spam only minutes after it went up. Webmaster Tools doesn’t “discover” the spam until usually several months have passed, but the Googlebot finds it right away. So while your revenue drops to zero, Google pretends they are helping you by showing you a list of all the URLs except the ones that matter.

    Another kind of problem, which I documented to Google, arises when a spammer writes an article and offers it at no cost to an unsuspecting admin of a small site. It contains links to several legitimate Websites (usually to some randomly selected page, it seems), but also (I’m guessing) some purchased links. The links have anchor text that isn’t relevant to the linked site, thereby disguising (as the theory goes) the actual paid links that are done the same way. A dumb approach, but it’s what’s being done. And Google penalizes the site that had NO contact whatsoever with the one doing the dirty linking.

    Both of my sites got paid link penalties due to being linked to in such articles. But I had no idea where these articles were or who was creating them, or even–for the longest time–that such pages were the culprit. Google was zero help, of course. I had to get a $1600 program to find these links.

    Clearly, Google is trying to lie its way out of being blamed for the massive damage done to innocent sites through false assumptions and severely impaired judgment that are inexcusable. If this is Google’s idea of “do no evil,” someone there needs to look up the definition of “evil.”

    • http://www.tipsinablog.com Danny


      There are sites and I think software, that can help you track who is using your content…(sorry, just read about it recently, forgot the name)…

      You can also set up Google Alerts to do this, too….though, it works differently…

      This was mainly to do with copyright infringement, though, also to do with the fact that many sites were stealing content(close to or 100% rip off) then outranking the original source…

      I get a mountain of comment spam trying to sneak through. If you go into your hosting account, check out whatever tools you have there for tracking data and you can often find a whole bunch unusual links…

      Mark, those dodgy links appearing in your webmaster tools(can be thousands of links from same site) are not said to have any affect on your site, according to Google(that’s what they said)…though, I do have my doubts about this….

      I actually contacted a few high profile sites in my niche, as their site(and mine) were being used on a website as part of a link exchange….this person who often commented on our sites, was then taking all our site urls(site names) then building an elaborate link exchange section on his site(they had link exchange written in the header)….

      This was done without any permission from the website owners(to my knowledge)…

      I found out whilst Analyzing my own link profile…

      The person told concerned webmasters who requested their site be removed from the link exchange, that this type of practise is normal in their country….

      Last time I checked, most of the sites are still there, though, the website owner has changed “link exchange” to something else…..

      The fact that this is considered no big deal in many countries, is a worry…

      There is a chance that Google will see those sites, and believe they willingly participated in a link exchange…

  • http://www.captaincyberzone.com Cap’n Cyberzone

    Within the content of reassuring us of Google’s grand algorithms and “new” Links Disavow tool we get this:
    ” … (though there is no guarantee that Google will actually ignore the links you tell it to)…”

    Google, why not stick with a very strict SEO (that you set-up/started with in the beginning!). Let’s say a SEO score of 95 gets put into a hopper of 1st through 3rd page search results and randomly gets chosen for a place (also randomly picked) for a spot on those coveted results pages?
    All this crap that everyone is going through is your creation. Sometimes, as you’ve proven, you at Google get to smart by half.
    Keep growing that bureaucracy … like BIG Government it just keeps generating one mess after another … until the dummies (who allowed it to happen in the first place) revolt.

  • George

    Can someone explain (newb here) how to find out about negative links or seo? My site dropped from the third page to 11th for one prominent key word. How can I
    find out why?

    • http://www.tipsinablog.com Danny

      Could be a number of reasons, George.

      If the site is new, then it should “in theory” take quite a while to get up on page one, if the keyword being targeted is highly competitive…

      I have seen new sites rank for average(quality) keywords for a short time, then they often tumble out of the rankings…

      If your site only lost ranking for one “prominent” keyword, there could be any number of reasons….

      The fact that your target keyword only got to page 3, suggests that it may not have had enough ranking factors to move upwards, or even hold onto a page 3 ranking…

      Then again(depending on your site) with some link building(legit) and a bit of polishing up of the page(s) you wish to rank(for that keyword) along with some website housework, you should be able to get that ranking back…(there are way too many factors that can affect rankings, though)…

      If your keyword was not too competitive, and you do enough work, then you are in with a good chance….

      It can happen without any so called “Negative SEO” taking place, though, certain link building or “short cut” ranking practices can also cause this…

      Some sites rankings shoot up to the top of the ranking results in a short time frame(for targeted keyword terms) then often vanish from the search results(sometimes drop from page 1 or 2 down to page 10 or worse”

      Other sites take much longer to rank well for their target keyword terms, though after a bit of a shuffle, they then stabilize and often remain in a healthy ranking position…

      • George

        I’d like to hire someone who can help. Can anyone suggest a service or company that is reputable and really knows what it is doing? And is there a way to find out what page you rank on for a keyword other than manually checking?

  • Jan Erik

    I don’t think what I’m going to say has anything to do with “negative” SEO but has to do with Google and local search. Since this is about Google I’m taking this opportunity! If Google wants to give local searchers local and relevant information I think they do local service providers an injustice and the same for thoes looking for local information! If you search for any city, town or community and real estate or homes for sale. Guess what comes up at the top of most searches? Realtor., Trulia.com, Zillow.com and other major aggregators! So how local and relative is their information? All they offer is aggreated real estate listing form the agents that have them listed, than they sell advertising to other agents to get the phone call. Sometimes the listings ahve sold or expired but my grip is… How relavent and local is the information the search results Google offers? Not very! Sorry for the rant but I saw an oppertunity bash Google. Thanks!

  • Fed Up

    Im going for my third attempt for reconsideration after combing through countless links due to negative SEO. I have used the disavow tool and it has had zero effect on my site after well over 60 days of implementation. I almost think the disavow tool is some kind of trick to help Google determine guilt because as part of a good reconsideration you must confess your guilt in order to be taken seriously so why wouldn’t this tool be used any differently?

    All I know is after these updates the only sites ranking are the large commerce sites, some youtube videos and of course paid listings where the large commerce sites participate in. The democratic nature of the internet that Google claims to hold so dear is as democratic as 1940’s Germany.

  • http://sahelmarketing.com buzz@saheltech.com

    It seems to me that giving the site owner the control over which backlinks should be considered for SEO purpose is the best way to go.
    It’s quite pointless to try to contact a webmaster to have an inbound link removed.

    If that third party website has a bad reputation, it goes without saying the webmaster won’t give a hoot about what impact her site has on yours.
    Even if the spam is done by someone else, it much easier for Google to ignore “spammy” links at the request of the website owner just like the 301 redirects are picked up by Search Engines.

  • http://Mabuzi.com Kevin

    For a free service Google is brilliant and have taken search away from Yahoo, thank goodness.

    The problem we have is SEO industry has no accountability and rules. Not that that would stop guys from been destructive on competitors sites.

  • NickVonNyphe

    Mr. Cutts is quite likely parroting a teleprompter and not speaking from case study data analytics and high-school level scientific observation.

    It’s been very publicly and effectively demonstrated on several occasions throughout the year negative seo is able to tank rankings in very short order, and even do so on some rather prominent sites at that. To confirm suspicions further, run your own tests. Any self-touting expert or professional worth their salt already has, realized the practice capable of the claims and also realized it would likely take more time and money to sink x# competitors’ websites rather than focus on raising themselves in the rankings – basic ROI analytics.

    The ‘disavow tool’ remedy is laughable at best to put it politely. Sacrificial altar of the mighty Gorg.
    WM: “I’ve been bad Gorg.”
    GORG: “What have you done my child?”
    WM: “I have sinned – I built links back in 2004 when it was still OK to build links, but I did NOT know what I was doing would be evil in 2012.”
    GORG: “I see. And what else my child?”
    WM: “Then in 2005 and 2006 when we were told it would be good to write and distribute content relative to our industry… well, we did. We had know idea this would be evil in 2011… honest!”
    GORG: “I see. What else?”
    WM: “And when it was OK to offer ads… well we did. Then the ToS’s changed again, and we were in contravention – oh Great Gorg, save us from our sins!”
    GORG: “Say 3 Hail the Gorg’s and use the Mighty Disavow Tool!”
    WM: “But,… but,… ”
    GORG: “Yes, my child?”
    WM: “Well,… you see,…”
    GORG: “Come forth with thy sins child!”
    WM: “We’ve now been putting out gobs of ooey gooey goodness on our blogs – lots of great content relative to our niche just like you’ve been asking for.”
    GORG: “Did you says blogs, as in plural, my child?”
    WM: “Umm… yes… each one based around its own topic – there might be a very slim chance for cross-over phrases or terms, but hardly any. We used a thesaurus.”
    GORG: “We’ll talk about that in 2013. In the interim, 6 Hail the Gorgs, you better be using Adsense and Adwords, and, lest ye forget, covet the Mighty Disavow Tool, my child!”
    GORG: “NEXT!!”

    For those of you enjoying the Kool Aid, we apologize for the ripples in your bowl – we now resume with your regular Gorg programming.

    • http://www.theprivateplateco.co.uk Martyn

      I really like NickVonNyphe comment from December 23, 2012 at 5:55 pm. I wouldnt mind betting 99% of people suffering right now after Panda and Penguin are in exactly the same boat. I ask myself why Google doesnt just completely ignore anything they consider as poor content, bad links, spam etc etc. That way only quality will do and more to the point we dont have to worry about anyone pointing bad links to our site. If they do point bad links, then carry on. Googles’s not giving any weight for them.

      Alternatively, wouldnt it be a great idea if we all had access to all our inbound links via WebMaster tools. That way we could just delete the ones we dont want rather than ask Google to disavow them. At least we would get the job done quicker and save them millions of manual man hours.

      Then, when any new links are arranged ( either by ourselves or nasty 3rd parties ) WE can decide which ones to “allow” by ticking an accept link button or something similar.

      Anyone agree? Mr Cutts ?

      • http://www.OnlyHangers.com Ron


        You are on the money with that comment. It could put this issue to bed if Google just didn’t count anything they considered a poor link. This would save us from having to hunt down and disavow any old ones we may have created by mistake and stop any competitors from trying to maliciously point links to our sites. You know that Google has the technology do do this. It would save us all a lot of headaches.

  • John Travis

    I not believe any google employers. This company not have a human face anymore.

  • http://elainequinn.com Elaine

    I’m beginning to wonder if Matt Cutts is more of a salesman than a techie. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. He’s only one of many.

  • http://wallshade.com HD Wallpapers

    Google search will soon loose its reputaution,there will soon be a competitor for google search.Iam already optimizing my sites on other search engines than google,bing is one of the best and i also suggest other webmasters to search for alternatives and start working from today.As you will definitely get banned/penalized by google one day.

  • Alan

    Google now in “jumping the shark” period.

  • http://kalang.mywapblog.com seo pemula

    This means we can buy postive backlinks. what sort of link is atually negative somebody please give examples

  • http://AmericanDoorsInc.com Richard Cruz

    American Doors Inc. Will tell you exactly what I think I think Google are a bunch of cowards hiding behind your tiny computers we used to be on places in Google we got wiped out for who knows what reason they said it was their fault that was 4 and a half months ago numerous requests to have us reinstated they have not given us a real answer add a lot of brush off fact is we don’t matter to Google. Google matters to Google. We have switched to bing and now are putting all our concentration into them. With no problems at all. it seems like Google was picking on us which I find hard to believe from mom and pop operation. Google will go down I am now putting a curse on them by years end Google will be have half the business they had before if my company is not reinstate it I will continue to write letters 100 a day if I have to

  • http://www.choose-piano-lessons.com/ Carlinton

    I agree with Chris Manning.

    The Internet is pages of content connected by links. You don’t have to worry if you have good content and good links.

    Webmasters need to focus their attention on good content. There are a lot of websites with little or no content about a specific topic but yet they rank high in the search engines.

    Good content and good genuine links will pay of in the long run. Google is penalizing a lot of website with little content and for participating in link exchanges designed to cheat the search engine. Now we will see more website with great content on the first five pages of Google and other search engines.

  • http://www.webcopywriter-tx.com Sherry

    All I have to say is there is a company ranking on the first page for “negative seo”. One of those one page sites, explanation, and contact form. I wonder how their business is doing and if they have produced results for their clients? Well, I’m sure they won’t tell us and if they’re ranking so highly, Google hasn’t found out about it yet. I’m taking everything with a grain of salt.

  • http://www.insuranceclaimhelp.org Ron

    Ever since my website insuranceclaimhelp.org published a page “Boycott Farmers Insurance?” it has not only been brought down for being redirected to marketingvillage.ru (htaccess file was overwritten repeatedly for months “above the root directory” on a Godaddy server without my knowledge), but thousands of backlinks appeared from websites (such as womens fashion accessories) having nothing to do with insurance claims. On March 22, 2012, my traffic dropped from an average of 1000 visitors a day to 200 a day. This was a month before Penguin came out. Google obviously has no idea how to disavow irrelevant backlinks, but they sure know how to penalize a website and give no notice or reasons why. All I got from Google Webmaster Tools was a message that my web pages had “a significant drop in traffic”. Thanks for nothing Google. And as to Matt Cutt’s smiling face “assurances”, they really are insulting. Sorry.

  • http://www.kjpwllc.com Pressure Washing Tampa

    I guess time will tell with this new update. I think that webmasters need to focus on what they can do to better their own seo rather than worring about everyone else.

  • Jack Thomas

    There Will always be individuals that attempt to do harm to competitors with unethical tactics, the challenge we face if that happens to us is not taking the same actions ourselves.

  • http://k2media.co.uk Joe

    Who actually believes what Matt tells us? For those of us who have been in SEO years know how to take such comments.

  • Mikelmx

    Existence of Google creates extra work for the people and the businesses which otherwise would not have to bother with. Something is wrong. Creating fake links, and hunting for bad fake links that hurt the business should not be an activity that people engage in. This is a waste of time for mankind.

  • http://techlister.com john

    “Very Resistant” ?, how much resistant?, google results speak otherwise.

    almost all the crap sites are there after the algorithm update.

  • http://youtube.com/watch?v=wbZcykUNUq8 Dangerous Google SEO

    Guys… there was a NYT full page story about a guy making tons of money selling crappy sun glasses.

    He was #1 in Google under “gucci sunglasses” “armani sunglasses” etc.

    Anybody remember this guy?

    Anyway, the way he did it was to piss people off so bad, they blogged about him.

    Google responded by saying that they would NOW start incorporating reputation cues into their results. So… which is it?

    Negative SEO works or doesn’t?

    PS… if anybody here has a TOTALLY organic marketing blog, I’d be happy to talk to you about syndication (guest blogging). I’m sparkah at gmail

  • http://danilopetrozzi.it Specialista seo

    Actually negative seo is still a huge problem, expecially in highly competitive serps