WebProNews

The course of action that the SEO's have taken at Google are an example of white collar crime. However, in the converging of the social spectrum google ementcly facilitates the stronghold of the convergance of the worlg; economically, politically, and socialy. They have been enormously successful at the goals in which were set out to achieve. The public must accept the power of influence that they set out to achieve, therefore must accept that they grew the company to act as such. People should be more adept at sifting information with an editing eye as information without a bias does not exist.

Huile d'Argan & Huile de Figue de Barbarie bio du Maroc Achat En Ligne
argan bio alimentaire
Huile argan cosmétique
Huile de massage
Essential oils
Hammam
savon
www.arganmaroc.com

In my opinion, the main problem with Google SEO is the way publishers are forced to unnaturally tweak their content in order to let Google find it... e.g. boring yet search engine friendly headlines, unnecessary bold tags, keyword loading, splitting long pages into shorter ones, etc. In this regard, SEO has produced a large body of Google-optimized content that is often clunky sounding, lacks literary flair, and is often bereft of actual content... the "information wasteland" that Google itself has railed against.

If I go to a lawyer, I expect them to put my best interests forward, I pay them for their advice. If a Law office followed the SEO model the way webdesigners do, there would be a two tier system - Lawyers would offer their advice, but if I wanted to have the REALLY sound advice, I would pay a premium. No law firm would exist long with such a business model.

So why do Webpage designers think they can get away with it? If you design a webpage, then design a webpage - period. If you know your craft the accurate page rank will follow.

Surely all SEO could be defined as trying to manipulate the results? As long as think you are doing "white hat" SEO, you'll probably be OK.

Web Design and SEO Services in Darlington

SEO is not Anti-Google and seo are not bad guys, unless untill they are not doing any black hat methods and not trying to do any thing to implement with Google ranking.
They just CAN follow the Google guidlines how they would like the web to be.
it help google bot to crawl the website smoothly!

SEOs likes us helped google to improve their Algorithm ...

So we are not that bad i think. And Also by optimising sites we make the crwling easy for Search Engine

Mostly NO.

People who are better than me at SEO are good. And believe me, I've spent enough on gurus!

Link farms, pages of keywords with no real content, illegible text etc are bad - and Google knows it.

Doing the right thing gets there slowly - as I believe I am doing with my photographic sites http://www.opusalbums.com, http://www.printalot.org etc

Daniel

SEO companies first and biggest pitch is to guarantee top 10 ranking to all and sundry and I need nothing more than this to conclude that SEO is a bad thing. Simply put, it is lies all lies.

As an example.. you start up a website advertising anything from cars to hotels, first look at all that competition there is already out there. "English Hotels" brings shows more than 21 million results... 21 MILLION. So you got to an SEO and tell him you wanna be in the top 10 for the search "English Hotels", thing is only 10 sites can feature in that top 10.

Being very conservative, lets say that 21 million results equates to 20,000 genuine individual websites. So you have to beat 19,990 other websites in order to get on the first page. Question is are you the only one using SEO companies to get you into the top 10? Chances are, if you are doing it, so are many of those already listed in the results. Lets assume then that the whole top 10 are already using SEO to get them there, and now you come along as number 11. There lies the rub with SEO companies, they simply cannot get everyone who uses their services the positioning they want for the terms they want.. only 10 out of every 11 sites, and the thing is, I bet they dont give the money back when they fail.

The main reason this has come about is because of our good old friend "affiliate marketing". Sure we all use it, but consider a users experience when he/she searches for a product only to reach blog after blog after link farm with reams Of Adsense space or hotlinks to other affiliate schemes. This was my experience only a few weeks ago when I was trying to find somewhere to by a new mobo - the sites where I could actually buy the mobo from didnt appear until the 3rd page. As an internet user, this is not my idea of a good experience, but it is because there is so much money to be had from blogging about products and services out there, that SEO is a required evil nowadays.

SEO's are bad? In my opinion - YES. I also think that their lifecycle is coming to an end. This is evident by the increasing number of SEO companies using affiliates to send SPAM email from yahoo and hotmail companies. I wonder if they even consider how this makes their business look when prospective customers receive email from yahoo email addresses LMAO!!! So no credibility in their marketing and no credibility in their claims - for me they GOTTA GO!

Are "SEO's" the bad guys ??? No.. Not really !!!!

The "internet" is the "wild west" of our day. Trust NOTHING and
NO-ONE !!!! Do Your HomeWork !!! If a "blog" says its "true"
... that should be the 1st warning !!!!

Any time "you" "click" a "link-back" you should be prepared for a sales pitch !!!!

I do believe "paid" links should be acknowledged and if "you"
"write" a blog about a "gift" it should also be acknowledged.

Anything "online" should be taken with a spoonful of SALT :)))

SEO is not Anti-Google and seo are not bad guys, unless untill they are not doing any black hat methods and not trying to do any thing to implement with Google rankings.
its an interesting question for the seo's and very generic whether they are search engine friendly or Anti-Search engine

SEO feeds my family and buys our Mustang/house/cabin/snowmobile -- we're too big to fail....if they put us out of business I hope the Government will bail us out! :)

Here's the thing: content manipulation is as much of a business model as is providing a service, content production and presentation. Search is the combination of the three--a search engine provides a service (indexing data), presents it to users (in form of SERP), and manipulates those results to best suit its revenue model. Yes, the last part is key to keep in mind.

Google makes money off of advertising--selling it, offering it, and manipulating it right along with search results. Every search engine does that allows sponsored links and advertising. When you have a large market share as Google does, you can also begin to dictate practices of other businesses to ensure your revenue stays up while choking out the competition and ensuring users become dependent on you for survival.

Google is employing the same tactics that have made MS the troll under the bridge, punished by regulators for monopolies and unfair practices.

People who depend on Google for their business have built their business to be a one-trick pony. Here's a simple challenge... Block Google from your site for 120 days and see if your business survives and what condition it is in for having done so.

I am sure the thought of that scares the Hell out of a great many business owners. Never mind there are hundreds of other search engines and that if you have done well and taken care of past customers you will find new business and have repeat business. If you can't live without Google, you've created a weakness in your business model, and done so willingly. Would you hire someone to help build your business if they told you flat out they were going to build a dependency on another company into your core business model?

Especially when that other company practices double standards, has its own agenda, tries to dictate parameters for your marketing and business model, and makes a sizable portion of its own revenue thanks to the actions of copyright infringers and spammers?

What would you do if after 120 days your business survived, found new customers, penetrated new markets? What if you discovered you didn't need to spend a lot on SEO if you simply hired developers and designers who built a standards compliant site and followed best practices--and then retained the services of a copywriter who simply wrote in a good, clear manner?

On the flip side, there are those bloggers and site owners trying to earn a living off AdWords. Can't blame a person for trying. But plastering irrelevant ads all over a site is just more of the traditional billboard meets crap advertising path. It ruins the scenery--which happens to be your precious online presence/business. At least vet your advertisers and stand for something.

Everyone seems to be worrying about Page Rank instead of Public Relations, worrying more about link leak than finding ways to make strategic partners out of competitors, more about "no follow" than "follow me, I'm an innovator" and more fearful of dropping in SERPs than dropping the customer service ball.

I wonder if there's any studies done on the amount of gray hair, booze and Excedrin sales Google and SEO are responsible for? It all makes one wonder if somewhere along the line too many business owners forgot the importance of multiple channels and the dangers of depending too much on one in particular. If you're dependent on Google, the odds are you're probably neglecting a significant portion of your potential market--and the portion that is most likely to be a pre-qualified, niche market dweller.

Hardcore kayakers are hanging out on hardcore kayaker sites...and discussing the finer points of blade design with other hardcore kayakers already there. They may Google to find other sites/communities to participate in and gleen information from, but they are unlikely to buy some new paddle design based on the text in AdWord ads plastered in the SERP or on some blog about the outdoors.

SEOs aren't necessarily evil, but they are working in sweatshops for Google and helping the search slave trade. Google is raking in over a billion in profit each year after paying you a few cents for clicks you work hard to provide them so they can sell them off to advertisers for a fat chunk...and they change the rules regularly to keep you scrabbling.

Ever toss a handful of fish food into a pond filled with goldfish or carp? That writhing, frantic feeding frenzy is just what happens every time Google tosses some tidbit regarding code or practices out for site managers, webmasters, developers, designers and marketers. Truly sad.

One day, business owners will reawaken and realize that Google needs and is dependent on them and not the other way around. You shouldn't be letting a search engine dictate your business model or marketing strategy. Let the search engines adapt to coding practices, standards, new media types--that is THEIR JOB. If they can't do it, they'll become irrelevant and go out of business.