The DarkSide of Google a Spooky Story

This is a guest post by dk. He is a friend of mine who throws killer events like his thinktank and his poker tournament during Pubcon. dk has advised and marketed for some of the largest companies on the internet such as Facebook, World Series of Poker, and BLAMAds.

Marc Hardgrove of BackLinks.com just stepped up and grabbed the Major sponsorship for my Poker Tournament, High Limit Room Meetup, and the site about this stuff, and as a result we have named the Poker Tournament this year during Pubcon, the Purpose Inc and BackLinks.com poker tournament.

So I decided tonight, in honor of Halloween and Marcs generosity, to put on my black cape and fangs, and see if I can make a good argument for purchased links.

Google has put me out as a poster child for white hat SEO, which is all I ever do, and it has made me very successful. Tonight, in honor of Halloween I am going to take a look from the dark castle of those who do paid linking. I personally have not bought a link since Matt Cutts busted me 4 years ago in front of over 2000 people for having bought thousands of links previously. I actually adore Matt Cutts, and am very grateful to Google and Matt for all of the amazing things they have delivered to me when I did things White Hat, but for tonight I am going to wear the cape that is black!

The hard truth is (in my opinion) the sites that do well in Google are getting links with the following characteristics:

  1. The site linking to your site should have as many links to it as possible.
  2. The site linking to your site should be of a similar topic to your site.
  3. The words in the link itself should be related to the topic of your site.

It can get a lot more complex than that, but I have found that 1 to 3 above will beat any other strategy if you simply get enough of them, and their quality is high.

The most obvious way to accomplish 1 to 3 is to pay someone to do it.

The downside to buying links is that Google tells you that you should not pay someone to link to you, and if Google finds out they will remove you from Google.

But is that fair?

Does Google have a legal or ethical right to tell you what to do?

Let’s look at this from the view of the dark castle.

For this discussion lets assume you never agreed to or signed anything with Google. To create a website and put it on the internet, you do not need Google, and in fact can do it without even having heard of Google.

Once your site is up, Google has a robot that cruises the internet looking for new pages.

The robot follows a link to your site, and then follows the links in your site and copies all of your material, each and every word and image it can find. Now every word on your site probably is covered by copyright. Did you ever give permission to Google to copy every word on your site? I think probably not.

Now regardless of the legality of whether Google can do that without violating copyright laws, just as a matter of politeness, did they ever ask your permission to copy and use every single word you ever wrote on your site?

It is the only instance I know of in the world where someone regularly comes onto your property, and copies down every single word of anything and then leaves with it. Then comes back every few days and does that same thing. Anywhere else in the world this would be considered somewhere between rude and a felony.

See if I take a photo from National Geographic’s website and use it on my site, they can sue me for copyright infringement. If I go to Google and look at the bottom of most pages, you will see a © 2010 Google. That basically means they are telling you that you can not copy the content of their pages and use it, or you will be subjected to copyright laws! LOL

Now if you go right now and Google the single word Roseanna, and look at the pictures, you will see a picture of a pretty girl, wearing sun glasses, and eating an ice cream. I took that picture, and now Google puts it on their site every day, and shows pretty Roseanna to the world but they never asked me first, and they definitely never asked Roseanna.

Some might say that based on that, all bets are off.

So now Google has all of the content from your site, they copied all of the links going into and out of your site, and they are going to present this content and links on their site, which is Google.com

Remember, Google.com is simply another website, made up mostly of content taken from yours and other peoples websites, usually without asking permission first or being given permission.

So, now we are dealing with another website (Google.com) that has taken all of our content from us without asking, and is going to give bits and pieces of it to other users when they come to search for things.

Oh, and by the way, now that they have attracted users to their site with the content they took from yours and others websites, they are going to sell ads on those pages to other people, and make hundreds of millions of dollars off of this.

And each of those ads on Google that go to other sites, why they are links, paid links, purchased by the recipient from Google.

Unless I understand something incorrectly, the major income source for Google is the paid ads you see when you search at Google.com which are paid links.

Google has come out with a list of guidelines they want Webmasters to follow. The guidelines clearly state Google does not want you to do paid links. In fact they have a technical method they request of you, that requires programming skills, if you do link to someone else to let them know it is a paid link.

Now because Google can make someone a millionaire almost overnight a lot of people want to please them, so many people follow Googles rules voluntarily.

I have noticed some people confuse Googles rules, with actual law that you can go to jail for. So far, Google has not taken control of the country, the state or the city I live in, so until they do, Googles rules are to me simply what they want, but nothing most of you have ever agreed to.

If you go by 1 to 3 that I wrote above, the simplest way to get more good quality links, and to do well in Google is to buy links. (By the way, don’t send me an e-mail asking to buy links from me because I will just forward it to Matt Cutts who is in charge of Googles Search Spam and a valued friend LOL). That is what Marcs company BackLinks.com has as its goal, to sell high quality links at wholesale prices that are lower than his competitors.

Can Google then decide not to include you in their index at that point? Sure they can. But from what I hear from Marc and others, even some Fortune 500 companies continuously buy links to maintain their good positions in Google.

Links of course carry other value besides getting Google to think highly of your site. That is why Adwords, Adsense and Facebook ads are so popular, and each and every one of them are paid links. Paid links from quality sites deliver very, very targeted traffic to your site. If I could buy a permanent link from John Chow’s site to my internet business sites it would be worth it to me, just for the quality traffic.

If you have more questions on paid links, feel free to hit up Marc at the Poker Tournament on November 9th at 8pm at the Mirage. Marc is a cool guy and I like him.

Jenny and DK

Marc also is a total baller. In the year that most companies have scaled back on promotional spending, Marc stepped up when I asked him to give a nice lump of money to allow the tournaments and my other activities this November to be first class.

If you want to be a guest and get free drinks courtesy of Marc and BackLinks.com or a be a player, go to purposeincpoker.com and signup.

When the sun comes back up tomorrow I will wear my white cape again, and be a Google Matt Cutts fanboy (called a Cutlet) but tonight I wear the cape that is black!

Black hood portrait

Much Blood,
dk


134 thoughts on “The DarkSide of Google a Spooky Story”

  1. Interesting arguement, however, you can always use noindex and nofollow if you dont want google to crawl your pages and images…

    Its on the internet, anything on the internet can be taken and saved. If your paranoid about some picture being on Google, dont put it on the internet save it on your computer…

    Bottom line, Google is king and you dont f**** with the king!! lol

    1. XuanTuyen says:

      oh..! I little do so because I don’t put my information online, especially the photos.
      Thank you ..!

      1. PPC Ian says:

        Dino makes a great point. Google is king and therefore you really don’t want to mess with them! 🙂

        1. d3so says:

          In case you guys didn’t know, google is skynet.

          1. Ha Ha You said Google is Skynet and according to the movie they are going to kill us.

    2. Mathew Day says:

      Yeah, since Google is the king of organic search traffic for now, you probably want to abide by their rules. Especially if you’re just starting out, you don’t really have much of a choice unless you want make it much harder for yourself.

      1. purposeinc says:

        The funny thing Mathew, is that this is not true. For me to get my sites to do well in Google, took me years of work. Recently I did a site called dkthinktank.com. I had tens of thousands of people go there this summer, and it reached an Alexa ranking in the U.S. of around 6,000 meaning it was about the 6,000th most visited site in the U.S. I don’t think one visitor there came from google. There was never any text there, the video is not labeled as to what it is about, and only the domain name gave a key to what the site was. It was massively successful, and Google played little or no part of it.

        I don’t think Antoine Dodson used Robot.txt files on his content development, and it has spread pretty well! LOL

        1. avlin miller says:

          most definitely, i believe the internet has lost alot of its pizaaz it used to have by being dumbed down with streamlined search engines. i miss the mystery and adventure of exploring the wed.

      2. purposeinc says:

        The funny thing Mathew, is that this is not true. For me to get my sites to do well in Google, took me years of work. Recently I did a site called dkthinktank.com. I had tens of thousands of people go there this summer, and it reached an Alexa ranking in the U.S. of around 6,000 meaning it was about the 6,000th most visited site in the U.S. I don’t think one visitor there came from google. There was never any text there, the video is not labeled as to what it is about, and only the domain name gave a key to what the site was. It was massively successful, and Google played little or no part of it.

        I don’t think Antoine Dodson used Robots.txt files on his content development, and it has spread pretty well! LOL

      3. Mathew Day says:

        I agree with the comments. However, I was talking about a (beginner to internet marketing) would want to utilize every traffic method starting out. Unless (“you want to make it harder for yourself”). You wouldn’t want to be banned by Google, king of the search engines, right when you got started online.

        Never said Google is the only way of traffic.
        Yeah there is social media, viral traffic and etc… but for me, search engine traffic from Google brings in the most “Money Traffic”.

        I’ve only been internet marketing for a couple of years on and off, mostly part time. I’ve had several sites do very well in the Google in a short amount of time. So it really doesn’t have to take years of hard work to rank well in Google.

      4. Jenna says:

        You make google sound like the internet mafia, why should people have to abide by their unreasonable rules? These rules are simply set in place to stop others from raking in money the same way google does. Which last I checked doesn’t encourage competition, and is what helps companies like this become monopolies. Tsk tsk, what sheep!

    3. purposeinc says:

      @MMO, the problem with that logic is simply putting noindex and nofollow is something that requires effort on your part. A contract is not a contract until both parties agree. Just because I can put content on the internet does not mean I ever agreed to having to make the extra work to put on a nofollow or a robots.txt.

      In fact when I wrote this article, I had to take extra time to ask John to please put in nofollow tags where it was linking to my sites. I never asked for that extra work, nor did John.

      Like I said, the other 364 days of the years I play white hat because google has been so good to me. But even so, it takes me extra time to have to get off wordpress and into the code, to dump in nofollow tags.

      And Roseanna gave me permission to put her photo on my site, but never gave Google permission to spread it widely. Who knows, she could end up on an icecream porn site somewhere!

      1. Harshad says:

        A site can have success without Google as well. Shoemoney had experimented this with great success. DK had great success with the thinktank website without Google. I am not sure how much money was spent on it but lot of top bloggers including John Chow advertised DK’s website through blog posts and newsletters. This was enough for the website to get that kind of alexa ranking.

        1. Harshad says:

          To add to my comment above, you really don’t need Google when you are a John Chow or Shoemoney or even if you are friends with them just like DK is.

          1. purposeinc says:

            Or if you have a really good product. If your product really rocks, you literally simply need to e-mail the rock stars, or minor stars, get them to understand and play with your product. Hell, even offer them $100 if they will test out your product. This may happen more often than you think. Then if they like the product, you can always ask them to promote it, and let the rock star keep 1/2 3/4 or even all of the money they bring in. Get’s a project really jump started.

          2. Harshad says:

            That’s what the top Internet Marketer’s do. have JVs with people with huge lists and both make profits.

    4. d3so says:

      But I think google should ask first before voluntarily indexing your site.

      1. Jagan Mangat says:

        So what that looks like-Google personally mailing each and every guy and asking”sir can we index your pages so that we can provide you traffic??”lol,,withput google you won’t be able to get even 20% of present traffic to your site.

        1. purposeinc says:

          Look, personally I am totally cool with Google coming and taking all of my content. But I promise if I created a robot that went to every site it could find, and took all of their images and text, and put it on my site, and I let people know how to get a hold of me, I would end up in court, and would probably loose. And no, a huge amount of my quality traffic is type in.

    5. Jagan Mangat says:

      Yea noindex and nofollow can be used,and if you won’t allow google to index your pages you won’t get traffic from google,so we allow google to index our pages by keeping in mind the SEO,the meta tags index and follow included,aren’t these thing like saying “google common index or copy our content but instead give us traffic”.

      1. Harshad says:

        Exactly! If you don’t want Google to *steal* your data then block them using your robot.txt file. Simple.

        1. aadp says:

          that is true, every one has to do that.

    6. charlieb says:

      Google is definetly the king, and you definetly dont mess with the king!!!

  2. Keith says:

    Funny you may have pissed off two huge companies in one night. Putting the iPad on Microsoft’s table, and now saying Google is stealing content. Love this Blog!

    1. d3so says:

      Well, John didn’t write this post but the argument about google stealing content is interesting. I wonder how it would hold up in court.

  3. XuanTuyen says:

    Ohh…thank you for sharing ! John

  4. Keith says:

    Too Funny.

    Who would think you could possibly p^ss off two huge companies in one night. Putting the iPad on Microsoft is huge, hysterical, and now accusing Google of stealing content! LOL.

    Thanks for the DK link.

  5. Bhavesh says:

    I m sorry but I have to say this …Past on 1 or 2 months I find your quality of posts decreasing..You have been writing stuff outside your niche…Therefore I have unsubscribed from your newsletter..Either change your niche or change the tagline in the title bar.

    1. John Chow says:

      The tagline is “The Miscellaneous Ramblings of a Dot Com Mogul” That means I can talk about anything and it’s still within my niche.

      1. d3so says:

        lol. I guess he was expecting more make money online posts.

        1. I also agree with Bhavesh because John Chow is popular for giving money making tips not for reviews about expo, dinner ect .

          1. Bhavesh says:

            Thanks ‘Tips For Blog’ for agreeing with me..

          2. Harshad says:

            Lol guys… how many more tips do you want? There are loads of tips on this blog already. John cannot blog about more tips everyday… he shares the tips as and when they come. Also, the tips that John shares are genuine and quality tips. This is not a make money online website which tells you to fill surveys everyday FFS. If you still cannot make money with whatever info is present on the blog then you are in the wrong business bro.

          3. purposeinc says:

            That’s why I like having a blog. You can do WTF you want to. 🙂 From everywhere I can see, John gets about 100,000 unique readers per month. That means he does what he wants! LOL

      2. Rich Dennis says:

        Dieing of laughter!

  6. Mathew Day says:

    It was a really interesting article to read, never really thought about it at that angle. Makes a lot of sense, but I only stick to white hat methods. To much risk involved doing anything shady under Google’s eyes. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

  7. d3so says:

    That’s a pretty interesting topic. I wonder if we can actually take google to court for stealing our sites content.

    1. Paul B says:

      I volunteer you to try it?

    2. According to me only companies like Microsoft and Yahoo has that much power to take Google to the court, It is impossible for Individuals. 🙁

      1. Lol, you better have some really deep pockets to even think about it. They’d tie it up in court for a few years, cost you a few million then probably come back with a B.S. decision and you’d get nothing.

  8. Rebecca says:

    I find it just astounding what Google is capable of- copywriting your work, denying you a spot on their search list if you have paid links, amazing. How did they ever get such power? What’s to come in the future? I guess we do have to play their game if we wish for any success on the internet.

  9. Blogging says:

    Great!
    Thank you!

  10. yawilda says:

    Very interesting I am getting started with links and appreciate this information. I think Google does have too much control but there isn’t much we can do.

  11. DK – Thanks for you identifying and stating clearly the google business model. It is our choice to work with them or not. I view search engines as my most valuable supplier. No successful business person who has sustained success overtime would retain and grow that success if one of their business principles was to try and fool their most valuable supplier! The toughest thing is to get a clear and reliable list of what that supplier wants and a heads-up when that changes. I agree that there are other ways to generate traffic than the search engines – you used your dkthinktank.com as an example and it is a perfect example of a quick hit success – it was at 6000 and now it is at 3.5 million a couple months later as a dead website. So if we want sustained results over time – true success – we do have to learn how to work with the search engines and keep them happy. Nice post thanks. My thoughts on Google as my most valued supplier are on this post I did a few months back http://www.beasuccessfulentrepreneur.com/time-organization-and-blogging-why-do-it/

    Glenn

    1. Mathew Day says:

      Nicely put, totally agree with you. Google brings in more quality, sustainable, and targeted traffic, at least for me currently. The author even stated Google has brought him a lot of success.

    2. purposeinc says:

      I do love google traffic for some sites. What I have become even more fond of, is capturing e-mails and then marketing to those lists. A good mailing list of people who agree with your philosophy and products, is infinately more valuable than a good Google position that could disappear tomorrow.

      1. Google and their search position is very fickle. I see sites and blogs all the time that have just a few pieces of content on them, that aren’t updated and are generally substandard that have much higher rank than sites or blogs with great content that is updated regularly. And the low quality sites hold on to the position for ages.

        There is no rhyme and reason for a lot of Google related things. Are robots stupid? They do what they are programmed to. They don’t change their algorithm by themselves. So what is the intention of those who program them?

        Google is supposedly trying to give the users the best experience. I still want to believe that. But they are failing in doing this. Quite miserably.

        They and the other search engines. Doing everything by their arbitrary book of rules is a wise thing however futile it may turn out to be.

        I wear a transparent hat. Does Google care? Only they know.

  12. fas says:

    Haha Google is the big daddy for most.

  13. Rich Dennis says:

    I Googled Roseanna and the picture really was there in Google under images and it’s a link to DK’s chiro page… too funny.

  14. You bring up interesting points to ponder DK. When I have clients complain about how Google operates I remind them of the traffic benefits which obviously vary based on the concept of your website and your network. Most of my clients benefit from the intrusion.

    Most websites can be thought of like a traditional business front. You want customers to come in and look at everything (ie. searching google). They like what they see they buy (go to your site). If you don’t want them to come in and look, you put up a front door (robots file), but then you will have less people buying your stuff.

  15. Bhavesh says:

    Just F**k Off JOHNCHOW ..u lose one more reader of ur blog…

    1. LOL, I thought you said you were gone a few posts up. That didn’t last very long, or did you not get the response you were looking for from it…..

  16. Yits says:

    What Google is doing is simply a symptom of the out of control capitalism that runs the country. They have the money they are the ones that influence politicians and policy and unfortunately that will continue to be the way. We cant have it bothways. We cant use and rely on Google and then bemoan their methods. If not them somone else would come along and do the same thing and be equally successful.

  17. Megan says:

    Wow! I never even thought about this before. But after reading it, it makes a lot of sense ( & zero sense in other aspects!). I use google at least 10 times a day, to search for websites & usually go through there. Although I never click on the ads.

  18. JTAC2010 says:

    Wow you’ve got a point there. Amazingly I’ve never thought about it that way.

  19. Ryan says:

    Wow… This actually makes me see Google in a new light. I didn’t actually think of it like this before. CRAP, now I have moral pondering to do…

    1. purposeinc says:

      Yah, doing business on the internet is full of moral pondering. I try to walk a very honest line. The reason for this blog was that a link seller became my largest supporter for my events next week. It got my attention, and got me looking at exactly what is doing on here.

  20. I absolutely agree with that topic. Ok we all think that google does all that fo us, and we can only benefit from that. But even to index your website Google never asks a permission. Of course getting traffic is the best thing when having a blog or simple website, but anyway I absolutely agree with this article.

  21. Kitten says:

    As someone just starting out with internet marketing strategies I found this pretty interesting… I totally agree that Google is infringing upon peoples creative content, but they are sooooo much easier to work with to improve your site standing than any other form I have found…. so for this newbie, I will keep kissing Google tush & playing by their rules.

    1. purposeinc says:

      One of the things I love about Google, and have seen with Matt Cutts is how incredibly fair they are. They don’t seem to play favorites with their friends, and from appearances, they mostly let the computer figure out where sites rank and don’t care who kisses or doesn’t kiss their tush.

  22. Even Google has a dark side.

  23. I would totally worry about something of mine being taken. I hardly even trust Google docs not to put everything I’ve ever written out on the internet for anyone to copy. But I love google and I will always used them for school projects. Has anyone noticed how irrelevant google has gotten lately?

  24. Atniz says:

    Is this motivating us to use some black hat method? I would not risk my site with any tools that can get us banned or penalized. Simply not worth the time.

    1. purposeinc says:

      No, just my ponderings after reevaluating an entire class of internet companies, link sellers. They are usually presented as almost illegal, but when you look at it, they are clearly not violating any laws, and Google is one with adwords! LOL,

  25. Planetprose says:

    Lets think of Google as the World power on the Internet. Not even facebook with its 100s of millions of users can cause a stir like Google does.

  26. Jane says:

    This is very interesting. I agree that it is difficult to figure out how google works, and the idea of many links is one to consider.

  27. JaneR says:

    I have always found Google to be fascinating in the secret way that it decides which pages are to be put on top. I believe that they often adjust their algorithm. I like your idea that the number of links on a page, can affect it’s place. Interesting!

  28. genetyper says:

    Google is simply a genius in all regards. I think that you have offered some intelligent thoughts. I for one intend to try your suggestions.

  29. Matt P says:

    Mr Chow you are full of great ideas and your blog content is supreme. thank you for the free stuff. i will continue to visit your site. MP

  30. TekCrunch says:

    I like the halloween themed stories. Interesting questions, too. Hopefully you’ll take this response in kind. Any website that wants to not be crawled by google can do so, trivially. So the copyright example seems to fall flat. If you don’t want visitors, lock your doors. On the other hand, is it ethical to pay for links? In the short run it skews results towards those who pay for popularity. In the long run it makes google get better at figuring out what’s legit and what’s not. Ultimately, it’s not about the money so much as whether the links turn out to indicate good content. Pagerank is just a pointer. Ultimately, the content is what matters.

    1. solmri says:

      Everyone else likes it…..

  31. Johnresa says:

    I would be concerned if this was any other site but Google. It just goes to show that trusted companies seem to have more liberties than others. Getting your site on Google’s list is a good thing though and I suppose you must make sacrifices to get what you want.

  32. Jessica M says:

    For someone who doesn’t know much about pagerank, paid links and being “crawled” by google this is interesting. Makes me think that copyrighting is hypocritical on the internet yet everyone has to cover their behinds in order to make a business online.

  33. This is a very interesting argument and is hypocritical of google. BUT they are the power player on the internet, and are the most used internet.
    They are able to dictate the terms, just as wal mart can decide what price it wishes to buy products from suppliers. This is the way of the business world, it may not be fair, but who said life is?

  34. josuefears says:

    I find this interesting about Google. I use Google very often almost for an basic search. Google is useful because it links to everything.

  35. Have to agree that google’s policy is stupid. There will always be successful black hatters (or capers!) that will coast on under the radar, and this makes it hard for the people following the white hat policies to keep up. It’s also hypocrisy to allow big companies to buy links to increase their ranking, but not individual users. Sounds to me like tax regulations… but that’s a topic for another day!

  36. Draek88 says:

    Wow. I never thought about it like that… Google IS basically just copying all of our stuff and hosting it on its website in cache… I mean, that’s pretty much what a search engine is supposed to do, obviously – But from a legal technicality point of view, that does create a very interesting copyright situation. I wonder, has anyone ever been crazy enough to try to sue Google over this behavior?

  37. irfan says:

    This is very interesting. I agree that it is difficult to figure out how google works, and the idea of many links is one to consider.

  38. solmri says:

    An interesting post revealing the dark side of the most successful tech company of our times.
    Reveals the fact !!!!

  39. solmri says:

    An interesting post revealing the dark side of the most successful tech company of our times.
    Reveals the fact !!!!

  40. TekCrunch says:

    I thought about this some more, and the following really stuck out at me: “Now because Google can make someone a millionaire almost overnight a lot of people want to please them, so many people follow Google’s rules voluntarily…I have noticed some people confuse Google’s rules, with actual law that you can go to jail for. So far, Google has not taken control of the country, the state or the city I live in, so until they do, Google’s rules are to me simply what they want, but nothing most of you have ever agreed to.”

    Google has too much power to be that ambiguous. When the dictator calls you into his court and asks you to voluntarily do something, is he really asking? Google can squash websites with a single semi-colon, so I think when they make guidelines they should either be very loose or very strict. The middle ground leaves a lot of uncertainty, and the company has been known to suddenly and severely come down on those who go against its practices.

  41. Jaleesa says:

    I have to say, that this doesn’t come as much of a shock to me. Google having a “dark side”, is exactly what I last wrote about!

  42. TaiMan says:

    You really shouldn’t use google as an indicator of how something is going to do in terms of popularity. Good is a search engine and a popular one at that, but it doesnt dictate fame. Nothing does. In short don’t let google be the judge, jury, and final say and how you choose to run things. The internet is a vast place with millions of sites.

  43. RLH087 says:

    This explains alot. I was sick of getting all those SPAM ads (and phone calls) trying to sell me Google adwords. Well, they would tell me it was free, and they would say, “ok, the DISK is free, but then you have to buy Google ads to make money.” Maybe not in those words, but pretty quick. Thanks for this article–Google is not the boss of me! -lol

  44. Mully says:

    All corporations of the size of Google have a darkside. There might even be something to be said that without that darkside they would not have got as bis as they are. I know that sites like Bing are trying to crack into that market but could we really do without Google?

    1. chipper7 says:

      I agree with this. Now knowing this up front, it is up to us to decide if we want to put up with this ‘darkside’ in order to reap the benefits that come with it. Is the ongoing infringement worth the rewards? Where do you draw the line and say no?

  45. Rachel says:

    This was a pretty interesting read. You can find pretty much anything by using google. Apparently, google can find pretty much anything, period. Kind of a scary thought, isn’t it?

  46. Clark Cliff says:

    The Google cached is indeed problematic, since people can avoid going to the cached site by using Google cached. Therefore, Google is getting more page views on the work of other people. And that created problems to Google from the on line press, because of the ads in Google News. But since Google states the source of the page, gives the creator very valuable free advertising and allows an op-out , won’t be easy for someone to sue them.

  47. Adam Johnson says:

    The author has some great points about the Google being ethical towards website and blog owners with regards to their traffic. Although Google is a great company, sometimes big brother should step out of the way.

  48. This is pretty spooky, but there’s no way it can be stopped. It is pretty much understood that whatever you put on the internet is public domain. If you put a video up of yourself and are humiliated by it, you only have yourself to blame. That is the same with pictures and every thing else. Google has the right to do access this information, as does everyone else, they just have easier methods of getting to it.

  49. pasta646 says:

    Google makes the rules and in this case, I would agree with them. In any game, there’s ways to get ahead by skirting them. Keep using the strategy for which you are winning.

  50. I don’t think that dark side of Google should be avoided.

  51. jackjack3 says:

    So your complaint is that it is unethical for Google to attempt to return the most relevant searches to their posters and to weed out those who abuse their algorithm? That seems a little entitled – to believe you have a right to harm someone else’s product and not get slapped down for doing it. You’re playing on Google’s turf and until they are doing something actually anticompetitive they are in the right here.

  52. Zampano23 says:

    At first glance, all this seems a bit hypocritical and evil. But if you really think about it, would Google work as a search engine if it didn’t copy the things on every website?

  53. Tahlia42 says:

    I was with you when you were talking about staying very white hat with your SEO techniques. The repercussions for getting caught are very steep.

    I happen to agree with Google, however, about wanting the links to be relevant to the subject matter. Their entire business model is based upon providing spot on information to their customer’s queries.

    Their desire to not have paid for links is pretty hypocritical of Google. They highly rank certain paid directories (Yahoo in particular), which is essentially a paid link. There should be more consistency in that regard.

    Overall, this scared-y cat personally keeps things completely above board in her own SEO endeavors, but she does appreciate the creativity that goes behind some of the black hat work-arounds.

  54. SammiiDarko says:

    I don’t know, personally I think it’s not at all wrong for Google to search and “copy” this information. We’re not looking at it like Google is copying it and reproducing it. We’re looking at it like, I made a website with content on it for a reaosn, I want it out there. So Google puts it out there. For free. You know, if you don’t want your information all over the net, DON’T put it on the net. It’s really, honestly, that simple. Nude pictures of yourself? Don’t do it. Photography you haven’t gotten copyrighted? Don’t do it. Seriously, if you don’t want it out there then you don’t put it out there and if Google shows it to the world, don’t blame the search engine getting you the attention you wanted when you could take action, yourself.

  55. coperk12 says:

    I really think in regards to things like pictures, that by putting something on the internet you should not expect it to not be seen, distributed, and indexed. In regards to websites, the benefits for webmasters really outweighs any negatives, so that isn’t an issue. Great article!

  56. aimzilla says:

    You seem to be oversimplifying the idea of copyright. What google is doing with your content is indexing it, not trying to copy it and pass it off as their own. Besides, the web as an innovative wasteland is much more appealing than the over-regulated mess of other media.

  57. Dave says:

    I think that like with most of what goes on in the rest of the world and history for that matter, when it comes to making money, someone is always going to look for an angle. If the people at Google are smart enough to find an angle in that gray area that appears just legal enough, then that’s just successful capitalism.

  58. Lydia says:

    That is absolutely ridiculous, however it shows you what power can get you. I think its quite funny that its not a two way street. However its google, google! Google is like the superman of the internet world. Of course they can do what ever they want!

    1. Kallendor says:

      It’s kind of interesting to see how a major corporation like Google is spreading its tendrils throughout our everyday lives. What started off as a search company that was going up against Alta Vista has turned into a mega-corporation that develops every kind of software out there from a competitor to Microsoft Office to software that runs your television.

      I don’t know whether to be frightened or happy about this sort of development. 🙂

      1. anybee says:

        I totally agree- Google really is a force to be reckoned with, and sometimes I am just in awe of what an impact they’ve had on today’s culture and society.

  59. Listen, When it comes to companies of that size its hard to fight against the grain. However, It is a good idea if the profit point is right to buy links.

  60. rizinuptruth says:

    Google is such a force that it is now a verb. No force is either good or bad completely. We live in a google world now and that means that privacy is not what it was b4. Yah, if you don’t want it to be out there, take it down…better yet, think before you post.

  61. ZephyrStar says:

    Its interesting to know all of this about google. I still think it is a better search engine/email provider/etc. than Yahoo.

  62. Teejums says:

    The internet, being a still relatively new thing, should really have it’s own set of rules and regulations. I don’t think cyber property should have the same level of domain as actual, tangible property.

  63. Levi says:

    Google is another mega-corporation that has claimed its seat finally on the most richest list of all corps in the world. Google now controls the internet and anything they please they will do. But this doesn’t have to be a bad thing in any sense.

  64. h says:

    Google has revolutionized the technology field. Cloud computing, gmail, Google Earth are great advances. Who are we to complain?

  65. Jen says:

    It’s interesting to know the relevance between google and some other mega corporations. The digital age has allowed so many people to push too far into people’s private lives and yet many find it socially acceptable.

  66. tarpisi says:

    I don’t think you understand copyright infringement, which makes the basis of your argument against Google inherently flawed. As for the idea (presented in the comments) that online property should not have the same level of protection as “tangible” (I think you mean “physical”) property- that idea is frankly ridiculous. How are words any less valuable online? If you are willing to pay for a book from Barnes and Noble, it should be expected that those same words presented in an online format should be equally protected from theft. With the proliferation of e-books and the amount of content presented on iPads, Kindles, and other devices, it’s necessary to provide even more copyright protection for unique, web-based content.

  67. Karen says:

    It’s all about the money isn’t it? In reality that’s what it all boils down too. In my opinion, Google does not want anyone to be better at them in what they do, while making more money than them as well. That’s the only reason they have rules, so they can stay keep their status, stay on top, you know. But it really doesn’t matter cause Google is the sh…!
    So, just follow the rules, besides everyone’s gonna be link rich right…lol.

  68. Tony Glover says:

    What Google is doing is to control capitalism that runs the country. They have the money and are the ones that influence politicians and policy but unfortunately that will continue to be the way. People need to stop relying on Google as a search engine and start using something more reliable, that does not use copyrighted material.

  69. Jeanne says:

    Now I understand why when a friend of mine “googled” her name she saw photos of her that she didn’t even know existed when she found “links” to her name that she wasn’t aware were out there! This is also very frightening to know there is absolutely no privacy. Google rules the world.

    1. John Kobal says:

      In fact, you can see a lot of private things when you google people you know. Google is the Big Brother and knows you best !! Scary !! 😛

  70. Niki says:

    Isn’t it sort of expected that if you put something on the internet, that it belongs to everyone, not only to you? So google has the right to take this public proerty and use it. If you don’t want people to see it, then keep it off the internet.

  71. John Kobal says:

    Google is a monster. It looks most times like a friendly and good monster. But monsters are dangerous. Let’s wait this monster don’t get anger.

  72. i feel that google has realy made its name known as one of the best marketing ventures in the world

  73. Drivsy says:

    It’s definitely scary to know that everything about your life may be stored in a database that everyone has access too.

    A fine article exposing the dangers of mass-information collection. The only true way to get away from it is to not use the internet, and that’s practically impossible.

  74. Victoria says:

    I had thought about this issue in terms of blogging before. I don’t like the idea of Google sharing my content. I know that can be disabled and that is what I have done on my own blogs. I admit I never thought of it in terms of other websites. I spend a lot of time at my company trying to get Google to pay attention to our website 🙂

  75. JonnyV says:

    Google’s info gathering is a double edged sword. It’s totally invasive and rips privacy to shreds, but it also provides a really great user experience. I don’t think they should be hypocrites about paid links though. Maybe they don’t like the competition?

  76. KaniDelski says:

    Hmm. This is interesting since to me google has became somewhat a monopoly. I mean, they are buying a lot of websites out there and are releasing technology as well, like the google phone released a while back.
    Plus, of course google has all this money and all this power to be able to do the things they do. I do however, find it unfair about the infiltration of privacy, but, life isn’t fair and plus, google just has the resources to do so. Kind of sucks, in my opinion…

  77. I agree with them as for the internet Google is king especially with the kind of services they offer to webmaster or to the internet. If there were other services better than Google, it will be a hit.

  78. Very convincing and interesting article. Gives very good example and good reasons to buy the selected product.

  79. Hmmm, definitely an interesting argument. Despite what may seem like an invasion of privacy by google’s bots, I think most folks on the internet find the publicity Google brings them useful. You seem to sort of flip-flop on your thoughts of the mighty Google-beast in this, but it was an interesting enough read.
    Mostly, it reminded me of the xkcd strip where Google realizes they have all the power to be an evil corporation but no good ideas for how to screw people over.

  80. eliastehi says:

    The argument is interesting but I think that it is useful for many people to have information on their websites linked to Google. There is a disadvantage to anything advantageous and I therefore do not think that the privacy invasion by Google to one’s website is a very big issue.

  81. sswwss says:

    Google has been selling all of our info and search’s to the government now for years. I personaly think we need a site that protects evenything about us….to include our searches and so forth. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING

  82. wellread1318 says:

    Can Google really do that? I thought that stuff like that was illegal. It just goes to show that big corpoations can do things ordinary people can’t.

  83. AK says:

    Google is definitely one of those internet entities which seems to ride a very carefully balance seesaw. It’s almost inevitable that one day it’ll lose it’s balance and that makes me very leery about the amount of influence and control they have online. While they are a unique and constantly forward thinking company, their monopoly like status makes me nervous for the future of personal anonymity and freedom we have so far enjoyed on the net.

  84. Big corporations always do the stuffs like this and I think these stuffs make something positive to achieve – even we all can see in the john case also.

  85. ikki says:

    great post, good information about Google SEO

  86. I fear paypal WAY more than I fear google. Any company as big as Google can screw you, but when they screw a thrid of their customers then that’s something to fear.

Comments are closed.