Subscribe to Posts
Subscribe by E-mail
Technorati Favorites
Since When Is Link Baiting Unethical?
June 4th, 2007 by Matt HugginsIn response to my opportunity to win free business books, a visitor by the name of Mark Levison responded with the following comment.
My review: Matt you will not be getting link from my blog. Not because you don’t write interesting content, you do. But this post especially your request that we use specific link text smells of technorati/google spam. If your blog is worth reviewing and linking to then why trust that your readers will do it. Isn’t striking that you’ve got a technorati rank of 47 (1 more than me) - but only 60 readers (according to feedburner).
Wouldn’t it be far more satisfying to earn your links and rank organically?
Sadly I know that this won’t win me any books (and I love reading books - prize package 4 catches my eye). But integrity seems more important here.
Mark’s comment is the first I’ve heard of anyone complaining about “technorati spam“. (It’s okay Mark, I’ll link to you even though you won’t link to me. I guess that would be “google spam” anyway if we’re going by your train rules.) I haven’t heard of such an offense, and reading the post on his blog, he makes it clear that he is also against linking techniques such as those infamous Technorati trains.
I think many of us have taken part in Technorati trains before. We’re all new to the blogosphere at some point, and whether you’re new to blogging or a seasoned professional, who doesn’t like receiving links? That’s what makes Technorati trains so successful is the sensationalism, regardless of whether you know you’re helping your Technorati/Google scores or not.
Even without things like Technorati trains, link exchanges, and so forth, how is this any different than an advertiser paying a site for traffic through a link or ad either directly or via a service such as Text Link Ads? The advertiser receives a link to their site at a cost as well as a boost in PageRank as long as the site being advertised on does not utilize the nofollow tag. Perhaps Mark has a rant about advertising I have not yet seen, though I do not expect to since he does use ads on his own site.
Looking at a real world example, stores offer sales in hopes of receiving customers by word of mouth daily. Hell, new stores especially are known for having special “grand opening” sales while giving away candy and balloons for the kids. Offering a promotion on the internet in hopes of receiving new visitors from new inbound links is no different from either of these situations. The former example is considered a standard practice, so what precisely is wrong with the latter?
Regardless of your view, the promotion is completely optional. Those who are interested will partake, and those who are not interested will not. If Technorati or Google has an issue with this kind of practice, they will simply adjust their algorithms to account for it.
Mark is entitled to his opinion. But obviously my opinion strongly differs from his. What I’m wondering is if I am in the minority, the majority, or if there is a pretty close balance between the two? What are your views on things like blog promotions, Technorati trains, link exchanges, and similar practices?
Related Posts:
June 4th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Personally I think blogging should primarily be fun… it is being used increasingly to make money but I think first and foremost, you should just want to enjoy yourself. Worrying about Technorati-this, and reader-that is not really conducive to this “easygoing enjoyment”.
The way I figure, we all give links away on a whim (I gave a link to a site with a dress I bought on it), what’s the big deal? Free books, review a blog with evidently “interesting content”.
If blog promotion is now unethical, we are all in hella trouble! And in the end, why complain? Just don’t participate if you are not interested.
Great contest Matt! I wish I had some business books and a blog with, yes, admittedly “interesting content”, and I would do the same thing as you.
June 4th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
When I have a few spare minutes (sick kids and wife) I will write a reply (even link to your blog).
My key point Technorati (and Google) isn’t about you or me - its not about what your readers think. Its about what the end users think. My knock is that John Chow, Gary Lee and you are gaming the search engines so that users will see your blogs and not others that might be relevant to their needs.
I make lots of effort to promote my blog through Digg, Dzone, signatures at the bottom of my email etc. The key difference here - the links have to relevant to the context. So I only use dzone to promote programming related stuff. Whereas the link train crowd is gaming the system in a way that doesn’t appear to benefit the end user.
June 4th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
One more thought - I think the line is crossed when you tell people what text to use to link to your site. Up until that point your asking for feedback and offering a prize - without gaming the search engines. You cross the line when you ask for a specific text.
Off to do diaper laundry.
June 4th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I understand that it’s about what the end users think. And I want my end users to think that I’m here to offer my failures and successes as insight into their own decisions. With my promotion, I’m offering a chance to win business books that the end users might find useful in their own learning.
Like you, I use Digg, Delicious, StumbleUpon, and other methods of allowing users to find my site. Like you, the links are relevant to the context. And even taking it a step further, the anchor text that I included in my promotion are relevant too. What part of “Entrepreneurial Blog of Matt Huggins” or “win free business books” is out of context? It’s exactly what I’m offering, and I’m not going to tell people they’re not entered into my contest because they only put the anchor text for “win books” or “blogging books” or something like that.
Hell, I’ve had reviewers write my name as “Matt Huggings” or “Matt Higgins”, and I don’t bother to correct them because I really don’t care. It’s more about having fun blogging and learning things with each other.
I’m not claiming to be a blog buff or anything, and I’m not here to say what’s right and wrong. However, I simply can’t see anything unethical about offering people a chance at winning something for free. And considering you even took part in some free t-shirt link bait on the same blog that you slam me, I can’t help but to disregard everything you’ve written since you’re being completely hypocritical.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:08 am
As a writer, Matt was doing what any contest editor would do, he set up a set of guidelines to follow. Every writing contest I’ve ever entered had a set of guidelines that each contestant had to follow.
I really don’t care whether he links to my site or not, I did it for the contest. If he gets a little something out of it, so be it. There are a lot of contests out there that charge a small fee of some kind or another, Matt’s just getting a few extra linkbacks.
I see no problem with it whatsoever.
June 5th, 2007 at 1:16 am
Hey Matt
I’m have no problem with link bait strategy, or whatever name anyone wish to call that. No one is being force at gunpoint to join the baits or link trains. It is similar to a business deal, each parties will want some benefits out of the deal.
The most important thing is, we need to loosen up and have fun blogging and enaging our readers!
June 5th, 2007 at 1:24 am
Thanks for the additional input, Sapheyerblu and BetShopBoy. I’m basically on the same page as the two of you in addition to what Danielle wrote above. I don’t think there’s too much more to be said from my perspective though after all that I’ve written.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Perhaps I took my original point a bit far in your case. Lumping you in with Gary and John was a bit much. The only point on which we differ is whether its reasonable to ask your reviewers to use specific text for the links. I think that amounts to an attempt to game the search engines for your own gain.
As to my participation in Eric Sink’s TShirt contest - the difference is that Eric didn’t ask for specific text in the link or posting. So I think I’ve played by my own rules.
In any case I’m sorry for lumping you in with the real spammers here.
June 5th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
I can understand the difference you point out in asking for specific link text, where the shirt giveaway you took part in did not ask for that. I guess there are so many sites that use the tactic I used here (eg: other bloggers running contests, directories with specific badges and alt/title tags within a link, etc.) that I didn’t have a second thought about doing it myself.
I still can’t say that I agree with it being such an awful thing to offer such a promotion, as there are so many sites that will receive natural links despite my running a contest. But at least I understand your point now. No need to apologize, you’re entitled to your opinion, and it’s always good to know how others view things on the Web.
June 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
You already know where I stand on the subject, but I really enjoyed the dialogue here. You both made valid points and sought to understand the other’s point of view.
June 5th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
It’s up to Google, Technorati and co, to determine the relevance of a site based on its content in relation to what a user is searching for. If their rankings are based on the number of links, or the text used in those links, then they are only encouraging MORE links, not better quality content.