|
Google
Page Rank and Linking - an Alternative View
Written for LinksManager.com by Dirk
Johnson, LinkStrategy.com
We all know the old clichés
of "putting the cart before the horse", or "which comes
first, the chicken or the egg". Yada yada. Well, it's descended
on the world of linking, too. For years, reciprocal linking was the
backwater of web marketing. Everyone talked about it, but few people
actually did much of it. Now, because of Google, linking is now the
"front and center" subject of the search engine
mythologists. Google is now driving linking, not the other way around.
The current search-engine fad of the moment (and this, too, will
change, to use another cliche) is to achieve a high Google Page Rank (GPR)
through careful management of the links coming in and going out of a
website. The concept is that, with exactly the right link partners who
each have the right GPR, lightning strikes and Google will send you to
the top for your keywords. Maybe so. Maybe not. But it is no longer
linking for the sake of linking. It is linking for the sole purpose of
GPR.
While a high GPR is a worthy goal, earning it through complex link
practices is not only very difficult and time-consuming (after all,
linking is hard enough on it's own), but it can also be misguided,
costly, and very detrimental to the overall site traffic. What's more,
abbreviated linking might very well thwart the goal of a high GPR.
Since every article about linking these days seems to mention some
sort of Google PR-boosting strategy, I'd like to take the time to
present counter-arguments to this approach toward linking. Am I 100%
right? Probably not. But neither are the so-called GPR pundits, who
rely on their own speculation, as well as rumors extracted from highly
questionable discussion board postings to arrive at their
"facts". Google itself provides very little factual guidance
on the subject.
Instead of speculation, I'd just like to present some alternative ways
to think about the situation, using some common sense arguments. Then
I'll leave it to you to decide.
1) Many of these
GPR articles are outright contradictory. How can that be? Who's
right?
2) Linking was
around long before Google. Many of the sites I work with enjoy
excellent Google rankings, but have links (both in and out) from all
across the spectrum. Yes, most of these links are in the same
general category of interest, but many are not. The so-called
"penalty" for linking to sites outside of a
"theme" appears to be nothing more than "boogie-man
under the bed" chatter. I've learned to ignore it all.
3) Many pundits say
that links to and from sites with a low GPR will hurt you. Some
experts claim that a link to a GPR=0 site will send your own site
headed toward a GPR=0. Where is the proof of this? A "balanced
load" of GPR is all that is needed. Good Google results are
quite possible with all kinds of sites coming in and out. Even high
numbers of low GPR sites may actually help, not hurt. An excellent
discussion of the math behind GPR can be found at http://www.iprcom.com/papers/pagerank/.
I seriously doubt that many of people who write about GPR have even
read this page, let alone understand it. It's a bit heavy on the
math.
4) Many sites now
use a robot.txt file to limit search engine indexing, for whatever
reason. Google may not even index these sites, but they could very
well be high-traffic sites that would provide good, free traffic to
your site. Even low traffic sites can provide good traffic, if
yours is one of only a few links on their links page, or your link
is prominent.
5) All search
engines change their criteria constantly, including Google. Do you
optimize for Google, at the expense of the others? What if Google
does change? Then what? Some of the experts now say that linking is
now out of favor at Google. Again, who to believe?
6) Google Page
Ranks for individual sites change quite often. What is low today
could be high next month, and vice versa. There is no way to manage
it. Denying links to appropriate sites only because they currently
have a low GPR is not only rude, it is extremely shortsighted. Since
the person making the request is actively seeking links, their own
GPR is probably on the rise, and quickly. Turning them down is
simply "cutting off one's own nose", as the cliché goes.
7) Alternatively,
sites do temporarily lose their ranking, all the way to GPR=0. If
one of them happens to link to you, and you to them, should you then
hunt them down and ask them to remove your link from their site,
since they are now "penalizing" you? I have read where
some people are actually doing this. I think it's a great way to
waste time being obnoxious. If their rank shoots back up again (and
it can), then what? Ask for the link back? Right.
8) If your site
shows up on nearly every significant links page in your realm of
interest, then there is a definite "branding" effect from
this much exposure. Limiting your linking to a handful of high page
rank sites in a narrow category does not achieve this saturation
effect. GPR is a calculation. Real people surf with their eyes. The
more places that you're linked in a category, the better the chance
that people will see it and click it. Let's use the "no brainer"
cliché here.
9) Your own links
pages are keyword-rich resources. Make them as extensive as
possible. Again, limiting your links page listings to just a few
high page rank sites limits your own keyword density and the textual
info on your own site.
I have read many of
these "GPR-enhancement via links" articles, and I have yet
to see factual proof of any of these theories. It is just a whole lot
of speculation. In the meantime, I have simply continued to pursue as
many appropriate links as possible, both for my own sites and for my
client sites, without regard to GPR. In every single case, this has
resulted in constantly increasing traffic, from both the links
themselves, and from many of the search engines, including Google.
Those kinds of results are hard to argue with.
I have to trust what I've seen for myself, not a bunch of
unsubstantiated, contradictory theories. The bottom line cliché is
this: Pursue links on their own merit, which is considerable in and of
itself. Good overall search engine results will probably follow,
including good Google results. I wouldn't turn down a good link
to an appropriate site because they don't have the right GPR. Links
are valuable. Waste them, and you may later want them, to re-word
another old cliché.
|
