Syed Guest posts from "write for us" or similar websites
Steven Kang 👑 » Syed I call BS on this. (not you personally but the information being passed around regarding this) I want someone to show any proof of this. So, if NY Post adds 'write for us' on their website, does it mean Google will diminish its authority? Wait, I thought someone said Google weighs page by page. Syed » Steven Kang Even many such sites with high Moz and Ahrefs metrics and traffic with such pages which these asian guys sell in groups doesn't pass any juice or any significant boost. Tested myself. However 😂 it's still a theory Steven Kang 👑 » Syed Many guest posts don't pass juice because ultimately, internal pagerank is what matters. So, there is a mixture of somewhat misinformation and marketing. I would, however, never paint one color to paint guest post. There are legit guest posts and I am willing to bet Google uses it for passing page level authority. Ammon 🎓 » Steven Kang Actually, Forbes, and several other very major publisher brands did indeed create areas of the site for submitted content, a very visible 'write for us' invitation, and every single one of them resulted in action. All of those sites were forced to either remove the section entirely, or ensure "nofollow", or take a Google PageRank penalty where none of the pages in those sections could pass any PageRank at all, not even via the internal navigation. Google don't give a stuff who you are if you are allowing link spam without strict editorial control, because that's not how the detection systems work. Basically, if a thing can be manipulated for links, it'll be found and manipulated for links by networks, scammers, and malware sites, just as quickly as for those just trying to promote a hair loss clinic or whatever. Those inevitable bad links will get the whole thing dinged and devalued. Steven Kang 👑 » Ammon I understand Google's stance and its actions. I also am not vouching for guest post links either. I'm just looking at it holistically and always looking for proof. I also understand the devaluation game. Google took actions against brands to make a statement in the past, and no one gets a free pass. That being said, I am always leery of blanket statements in the SEO world. It seems logic-based sentiment is strong in the community, not enough real correlation study. All I want is evidence that shows every website accepting guest posts has been penalized using a correlation study. It shouldn't be hard to detect a pattern using SEMrush or Ahrefs. I would like to see the date of the reported incident regarding Forbes and major publisher names. I can do some data digging. Steven Kang 👑 » Syed If someone can show a correlation between all websites accepting guest posts and their traffic value dropping on Ahrefs over time, I might consider it as a possibility. If not, it's a baseless claim. Syed » Steven Kang It happens. Big websites even links from sites like vent magazine (great authority) and so doesn't pass any juice to the page at all with negligible boost. Also many amazon affiliate websites based on guest posts got hit after.4 December update u can check out Pakistan amazon affiliate group and Pakistan SEO bloggers. Steven Kang 👑 » Syed Google doesn't like affiliate sites. hence, rel=sponsored. I want to see non affiliate site case studies. I also want to check their case study methodology against a larger pool of similar situations, not cherry picked case studies. Morgan ✍️ I would think it depends on the amount of outlinks per page and the quality of sites being linked rather than stating that a site accepts guest posts. This is one of the things I look at when deciding whether a domain is worth getting a link from or not. If they have obvious pages made with the sole purpose of giving (read selling) backlinks then I wouldn't even take a free link from it. After a while, you can easily tell those sites off after a couple of minutes. Lots of sites designed to look like news sites just so they have an excuse to write about everything and sell links in all niches. Steven Kang 👑 » Morgan I get the reasoning based on SEO logic but I want someone to show a strong correlation study regarding this.
Steve Work for Majestic so… Low Trust Flow (TF) High Citation Flow (CF), A link profile chart that looks like a sausage sitting on a line. A Link graph either: one tier deep, or dominated by a link network. Distorted anchor text distribution Topical Trust Flow that seems particularly out of character, especially when in comparison to other players in sector Source Page Languages "off" in similar way Let's face it, if you look at a sector long enough you get a feel for authority sites. Sometimes it's not so much what's there but what isn't. Scrolling down link Context shows a significant proportion of links on high link volume, low content pages ( directories ) Probably some stuff I could add on duplicate link data but have to admit there's still a lot I have to learn there.
Roger This! 👆
Afzal Backlinks from adult and casino websites. A large no of backlinks from the same ip addess. Tld where you have no business etc
Mike » Afzal I disagree with this. Google loves p0rn and gambling. 🤭1 Cormac » Mike After all, Google is only human
Micha "spammy link profile" Do you mean "spammy as in 'it violates search engine guidelines" or do you mean "spammy as in 'a typical marketer won't trust this link'"? Because those are 2 different things. Most of the people in this group are comfortable with obtaining links that violate search engine guidelines. Over the past few years, there has been a growing trend among Web marketers (not all, but many) to disavow perfectly innocent links because (ironically) they were NOT created directly or deliberately by those marketers (in violation of search engine guidelines). So, please clarify: whose spam are you trying to flag in your backlink analyses?
