This is the 1st in The Black Hat Series of blog posts – which was inspired by my realisation that businesses are increasingly being caught out and penalised for using "spammy" techniques to try and optimise and raise the profile of their websites. I acknowledge that some of these implementations are certainly intentional attempts to "trick" the search engines into giving their sites higher rankings than perhaps they deserve – however, in some cases (and perhaps many) so called "black hat" SEO techniques are simply being used out of ignorance.
In a number of cases I have come across, site owners are bewildered why their previously highly ranked (and in some cases respected brand name) website has suddenly disappeared from the search results – with a corresponding drop in traffic, and in most cases plummeting online revenues. Investigation often reveals "spammy" optimisation techniques have been used – in some cases by the owner themselves, because they "read somewhere" that a particular strategy could help their rankings, but in other cases, at the recommendation of their inhouse technical team, or even worse, by a so called "professional" Search Engine Optimiser.
The overall aim of this Black Hat Series is to educate website owners about some of the most common Black Hat techniques – how there are supposed to work, what they look like, how to identify them, and why they should (in almost all cases) be avoided.
Black Hat vs White Hat
This 1st post in The Black Hat Series, "sets the scene" by outlining some of the differences between White and Black Hat search optimisation strategies.
There are many many different techniques and strategies that can be used to increase a websites search engine rankings, raise the profile of a brand online, increase traffic, and ultimately maximise online sales. These different strategies can be categorised into two main areas – Black Hat, & White Hat
White Hatters use techniques that are considered "friendly" by the major search engines, and conform to their various site/page development guidelines (Google, Yahoo, Live). Optimisation strategies used by white hatters tend to focus on improving the user experience – by making a page/site more useful for site visitors. White Hatters also tend to take a medium to long term approach, aiming at sustained growth rather than a short term traffic boost. Ireckon are unashamedly White Hat SEO in our approach to search engine optimisation. If you've any queries about White Hat SEO strategies or would like to contact us for an SEO appraisal of your website, please feel free to get in touch with us.
Black Hatters test (and sometimes smash) the boundary between exactly what does (and does not meet) the search engine guidelines. Black Hatters tend to try and "trick" search engines into giving sites high rankings, by using techniques which although appearing to be of use or benefit to searchers – may not necessarily be so. If an optimisation technique appears to be used to "make a search engine happy" with little or no real benefit for the user – there is a reasonable chance it is a black hat strategy, and (if discovered) may result in ranking penalties being applied. Black Hatters seem to be driven by the "challenge" to achieve high traffic and top rankings as soon as possible – rather than the longer term growth or profitability of a business.
Now there is no doubt, that some Black Hat techniques have been very effective in improving the rankings of many sites. In the past, some of the techniques described in this series may even have been considered acceptable. As a result of the massive profits to be made by online business, and the significant extra value achieved through high rankings, there will always be new "tricks" to try. However as the search engines become increasingly sophisticated, smarter at spotting attempts to "game" them, stricter at enforcing their "guidelines", and more ruthless in their treatment of spammers, for most businesses, the very significant risks associated with using Black Hat optimisation techniques is simply not worth it.
Look out for more posts in The Black Hat Series… The next one entitled "Black Hat SEO Penalties" describes some of the penalties that could result from the use of spammy optimisation techniques.
About Darryl
Most link building by most SEO firms is not “natural” and is in fact blackhat according to Google. If you have to pay for it, ask for it, comment for it or insert a link in your article to gain it, then you are manipulating Google search results and Google terms that as blackhat. You just need to view the many video’s by Matt Cutts to realize that if you are doing any of the above, then you are creating links manually and violating Google’s TOS.
It simply baffles me how many SEO experts will quickly denounce Cloaking as “unethical” or against Google’s TOS or even label it as spam which manipulates search results but then on a daily basis create artificial, manual or software generated backlinks for clients.
If you are distributing countless articles with links or posting on blogs/forums to obtain backlinks or using automated backlinking software, isn’t that also spamming to manipulate search engine results?
What is the difference? It all violates Google’s TOS.
There is also a silly mindset that whitehat SEO is risk free and blackhat is full of risks. Really? How many whitehat sites, that supposedly conformed to all of Google’s TOS, suddenly lose their ranking and all their business when Google decides to do a major algorithm change? Ha! Where is the reward for loyalty from Google?
So does “blackhat” or being “unethical” really exist anymore? Isn’t this really about traffic, conversions and surviving within an ever tightening monopoly created by Google for which we now are left with few other options, unless to line the pockets of Google shareholders.
You raise some very vaild points Samuel and I mostly agree with what you say.
Firstly I would separate what Google says is “black hat” and what is “unethical”. I think they are two different things entirely. As I write this (in 2011) Google may be almighty, but they certainly do not have the call on what is and is not ethical. Just because it is outside Google’s TOS does not mean it is unethical.
That said, there is no clear line in the sand on what is white hat and what is black hat, just a big grey area. When you are dealing with something that continually evolves like the Internet then a TOS or Webmaster’s Guideline will never be all encompassing. Instead I think a good guiding principle is something I recently heard at a conference from a Google employee from Matt Cutt’s team, “If you’re focused on creating a great user experience then you are working towards the same goal as Google”.
Sure you might be doing something purely because it manipulates search results in your favour, and were it not for the pay off of better rankings you might spend your time in other ways. But if what you are doing is writing an article, answering a forum question or some other useful contribution, regardless of whether you are motivated by a link, you are sharing knowledge with the community. It is akin to saying it is unethical to write a book purely because you want to sell it to make money.
If you are going about optimising your site by contributing in useful ways then I think you are reducing the risk of being hit when Google makes algorithm changes that are ultimately targeted at catching out those who do not have the end user experience in mind.