The NY Times As SEO Cops?

The NY Times published an article on February 13th (the 12th online) titled The Dirty Little Secrets of Search by David Segal, that lambasted J.C. Penny for a massive paid link campaign. This included playing elementary school tattle-tale and reporting their “findings” to Google – which in turn got J.C. Penny’s search engine ranking positions flushed down the toilet.

If you ask me, and possibly many other Search Engine Optimization professionals, the write-up is really a joke. The overall tone by itself was sufficient to make me almost not read it.

You will find problems in their “investigation” but come on; they didn’t examine President Obama anywhere near this much… had they, perhaps our nation wouldn’t be whirling all around, likely straight down the toilet. I don’t believe many of the “expert” SEO viewpoints within the write-up are correct… much more about that towards the end of this article.

Obviously Segal was angry that J.C. Penny was ranking really well for countless products they marketed, and brought in a specialist to perform some research on why. This expert discovered that J.C. Penny was purchasing hyperlinks to enhance their Search engine optimization ranks. Something Google states is in opposition to their guidelines.

This article describes link buying as “Black Hat”. That’s bull crap. If anything at all, it’s little off white or greyish: nowhere, I repeat nowhere near black. Folks that really know and employ black hat methods would have a good laugh at the entire article.

Segal really should have performed a tad bit more research on several of the websites he quotes in the initial few paragraphs of his write-up. As he’s identifying numerous things such as dresses, bedding, sweater dresses, and so forth, and pondering if J.C. Penny is truly the very best internet site on earth for that merchandise, he links to web-sites HE believes ought to rank far better… the catch is, he links to one or more web-sites that purchases links! Yes! You got it. And he provided them a no-follow hyperlink from the N.Y. Times as well… I put in perhaps five minutes and discovered the rug site he links to has what is apparently compensated hyperlinks in link directories.

J.C. Penny of course denied they were purchasing links, but later dismissed their SEO firm. The SEO company really should have utilized other techniques to build links and kept the paid links at a minimum. I’m confident J.C. Penny was paying out major dollars to this particular Search engine optimization company and the firm was being lazy and clearly didn’t consider the best treatment of their customer.

Purchasing links is a normal Internet Business activity… my guess is Segal or an individual at New york Times had a beef with J.C. Penny, or, is the owner of a business that J.C. Penny was out ranking.

Is Organic SERP Enhanced by Substantial PPC?

The Times article also questions if there’s a link between J.C. Penny’s massive paid advertising spend on Google and their seemingly abnormal high search engine rankings. I believe there exists a relationship, nevertheless, I also believe it’s a simple side-effect not a deliberate advantage rewarded by Google. Obtaining a huge number of visitors from paid ads most likely invokes a rise in natural search rankings, but it’s most likely not much of an improvement whatsoever. I don’t think that Google rewards large advertisers by giving them a big boost in rankings. They assert they don’t, therefore i believe them. If they do, then they shouldn’t say they don’t and that’s the scope of it.

My take on this “analysis” is: Get yourself a Life! Go check out something significant and let Search engines police their own company and rankings.

In the end, J.C. Penny really sells the merchandise they ranked for – there is absolutely no trickery, you can really get whatever you were searching for… and that’s the purpose of searching for something.

I don’t agree with much of the SEO “expertise” that’s given in their article – I didn’t read anything that would hurt your search rankings, however I did find a few things that they claim to make a difference that don’t.

People who are trying to find information about the niche of one way links, please make sure to check out the URL that is mentioned right in this line.