I personally don't think ethics have anything to do with it. We aren't talking about ranking porn for terms like "Teletubbies" What is not ethically right about doing something that gives you the edge in getting a related site to rank first for a related search term?
The vast majority of "black hat" techniques are just based on getting tons of pages indexed and turning the massive amount of un targeted traffic to money in tiny increments. The only Blackhat techniques that I know of , I think I am pretty well versed, that help for actually competitive rankings, are automated linking programs like guestbook, wiki , log and forum spamming when I first started doing SEO, link trading with unrelated sites was black hat too If the technique doesn't generate links then most likely its not going to increase your rankings, at least in google, there are some games you can play with content in yahoo of course, but nothing that I have seen that will get you to the top of financial or other really competitive terms. Do you guys have any examples of spam sites that rank well for competitive terms?
At the end of the day, the search engines have to care about "Spam" sites and seek to eliminate them. For example, if you type in the name of a book that you want on Google, MSN or Yahoo and the first 10 sites which come up are all Adsense list sites, you will get frustrated because you have not been able to get the information that you wanted. That happens enough time and you switch search engines. So, at the end of the day, the search engines want to provide a service which will provide the most relevant information possible based on your search. As such they will always be tweaking and improving things to ensure that happens. In the long run, black hat techniques for spam or unrelated sites will be shut down.
It's how you achieve that though, and the tools and methods you use to get there... http://syndk8.net
I am the only one that has seen spam last years in all the SEs ? Some of it can and it does. Although, sites that make the most money online tend not to be blackhat or spam. Different strokes for different folks.
We've discussed this in the past I think... 1 black hat site might not make big bucks (Although they certianly can), but 1000 of them do
Was thinking more on a global scale.. Take the Alexa top 500 for example.. Most of black hats are probably making more than me, not really what i meant.
The approach for BH is different though... The idea isn't to have the highest traffic - it's to have LOADS of sites that get a bit... Anyway, I know what you mean...
Just read through the thread - it's been quite interesting. I've only recently started reading about SEO and associated areas. Before then, I considered all that sort of stuff somewhat "beneath me" - I worked as a programmer and i've just finished a degree in computer science. For that reason I consider myself to have something of an unique perpective since I am basically one of the "slashdot geek" purists, and now I'm entering a very different world. However i'm having to learn as I go for my new job and what i'm learning is quite interesting. In my opinion, if you're going to say any SEO is unethical, then you might as well say it all is - it's basically artificially distorting the results of painstakingly concieved algorithms which were designed by people who want to sort information. It's a kind of reverse engineering - and everyone would agree that that's unethical. Some SEO is more unethical than others - auto generating content, than writing a script to add your link to wikis, blogs and guestbooks would be at the far end of unethical - responsibly building links to a carefully constructed and written site would be much less unethical. It's still "unethical" though, because you're soliciting links - most search algorithms, at least initially, worked on the principle that links grow organically. Having said all that, most business practices are unethical in some way - so while it's unethical, I certainly wouldn't have any qualms about using "white hat" SEO on a regular basis. Why do I draw my line at white hat? Because i'd be pissed off if my wiki or blog was spammed. Others might draw their line at a different point - thats their perogative. My practical views differ greatly from my rhetoric - my real opinion? To be honest, what it really comes down to for me is the presence of a tangible product. If there isn't one, then it isn't really a long term business. A tangible product doesn't have to be physical - it could be a forum community for example. But if you're selling a tangible product then there is real life in your business. There are different models - a forum might have PPC advertising, an online shop might sell widgets - but they still have something to offer. I can't see much of a difference between an affiliate or PPC site that has been white hatted or black hatted - they're both as much of a waste of time as each other. Both drive up the prices of the products they sell; the end result is that the consumer pays more. I say all this, but the company I work for has several exclusively PPC sites, so i'm a hypocrite Just my 2p...
I also have BS in CIS and worked as a programmer for a couple years before doing SEO, half the seos on this board are also programmers I thought SEO was kind a bunch tricks and hype, still do a little bit, but once I learned that I could earn about 2-3 times what I would make as a programmer doing it, I had more respect for it.
That's interesting I didn't know that. Don't get me wrong mate, i'm not getting on my high horse or anything - just thought i'd get all soul-searchingly honest for everyone . It's an interesting area, there's a lot of money to be made, and to be honest, practically i'm very different to what i'd like to be like!
JamieC Good perspective and summary on the topic. I especially liked your differentiation of sites that actually have a purpose or a product vs. those that are just there for clicks....