Matt Cutts Says Not to Use Article Directories for Links

Matt Cutts drives the point home not to use article directories for links in his new video.



And he provides more clarification on his tweet: https://twitter.com/mattcutts/status/428607043037958144

 

Now white SEO it is an adwords and google+

 

I watched this a couple of hours ago, I think article directories have had their better days but I don't think they are really penalized like people are talking about.
I recently put some links for a couple of new sites into a few article directories and a few weeks later the results seem to be like your average low quality links= not great but better then no links. The sites seemed to get a little better love from bing and yahoo then from google.

Articles are still in my seo tool box, I do try to get into the more quality sites.

Google says take down all links and use adwords, I don't really listen anymore.

 

There was a key bit of information in there that I suspect most folks will miss or ignore...the articles being submitted "tend to be a bit of lower quality stuff" that is "really kinda spammy content" and "we have some algorithmic things...which make it less successful now".

I didn't hear where he is truly attacking article directories and saying don't use them. What he is saying is that their algorithms are better at spotting crap content and syndicating crap content isn't going to be very successful now. Kinda a no-brainer...if they are not indexing crummy content well, having a crummy article on 100 equally crummy sites won't provide much SEO benefit. Does anyone really need Matt Cutts to tell them that?

He also cautioned that syndicating a single article won't do much. Could that be interpreted to mean syndicating several, higher-quality, non-spammy pieces would be more effective?

While he did say that article directories tend to be littered with low quality, spammy content; he never actually said don't use them.

 

He most certainly did. Did you read his tweet?

 

Has not almost all of the information coming out of Google the past year or so said, "Don't link build"?

Could this simply be yet another version of that, rather than a condemnation of a particular type of site?

Like so many of his messages, he stresses poorly-written, spammy content on sites filled with more of the same does not work.

Like so many of his messages, his carefully crafted words imply things but do not actually say them explicitly. Does the Tweet say "don't link build through article directories" or "don't use article directories"? Again, a subtle difference but not the same thing.

BTW, I do not own/operate an article directory or use them. I've always felt they were vehicles to spread duplicate content and give lazy web masters free content. I find it interesting when the topic comes up that no one brings up that syndicated content is duplicated content and adds little value to the web.

That said, I have seen a number of professionals successfully use article directories to build an online reputation - people see their writings and come to see them as an expert. They aren't link building per se, they are doing online branding - a distinction that often escapes most folks.

 

There's nothing carefully crafted about his words. He stated it in plain English for those that have the capacity to digest a very concise and clear message. Matt poses the question, "Should I build links using article directories?" in his tweet and then puts the word "(No)" in parenthesis after a link to the video. It does not get much clearer than that!

 

Becoming more and more true every day

 

According to google, if you build links, you are a loser...
However, if you use google, their affiliations, adwords; your approved...

trying to control and monopolize the internet to your will - priceless!

and that does sound like a hint that article directories are doomed!
not that they are good anyway...but if I were to send out articles, then
it would only be to the top 3-5, and they would be 100% unique. I do not
think people understand that spamming article directories dont work anymore....

You cant bulid links, you cant do articles, you cant do this, you cant do that....
I guess I will just sit here, obviously google is going to send me so much
traffic without doing nothing, so i guess i will just go watch TV....

Mr Cutts, why dont you just penalize every site on the planet now that
has links, and whoever is the better site in the end wins, and we know
how that will work out, the rich sites will stay on top, and the poor sites
will not even get indexed any longer, why waste anymore time....

 

It's just more Google hooliganism.

 

I am not educated, I had to look up that word. hahah.

Hooliganism is disruptive or unlawful behavior such as rioting, bullying, and vandalism.

 

Such a statement is true, in my opinion. It's not just article directories or web directories, but any website that links to another website is a lost opportunity for Google to (a) force more users to depend on search to find websites that they like and (b) drive more website owners into Adwords to spend money.

I think the sooner that people wake up and realize that Google's actions are driven by profits and not common sense, the better it will be to understand what is going on around us. Spam, quality and all that Google claims is a priority is actually secondary to profits. Google has help in accomplishing this with their lobbying group the Internet Association (http://internetassociation.org). All the businesses in that group rank really well. So do the hundreds of other businesses that Google financially backs in Google Ventures (http://www.gv.com/portfolio/).

Matt Cutts' beating on article directories is just a small move in a larger game of chess. Google aims to put the entire internet in checkmate so that they have full control and right now there is little resistance from directory owners, regular webmasters, government regulators and politicians. Imagine what the internet will look like in five years if Google continues to tighten its stranglehold over entire industries.

Just today Google reported earnings:

The CPC is dropping yet clicks on Google ads jumped 31%. How can this be? Is the internet growing that fast? I think not. To drive revenue in advertisements, Google has to drive more people into their search product and give other webmasters less of an opportunity to satisfy users on their own. Fewer people linking to each other, whether in directories or not, makes the general public more reliant on Google Search.

The whole issue about linking to each other, sending out/receiving link removal notices, etc. are anti-competitive policies by Google that should be dealt with by the proper regulatory agencies in each country. I'm sorry, but many directory owners are the ones carrying most of the burden from Google's policies.

 

As we might compare the internet to a nervous system for the planet, I don't think we have to worry about Google occupying the space known as the "brain". There will be attempts to centralize and control the internet. Right now, some folks at Google would like to think they can control how people link. I think they will be mistaken.

The main person that can control the links on a site is the owner of that site. This is how the internet was so amazingly designed, and why it will be impossible to control how people place links. By nature, the linking structure is decentralized. That means the only way to get at the data is go around mining it, and google has prospered as a result of the voluntary efforts of directory editors, and many others most of whom are granted copyright on the the content they produce. I think we are moving toward a time when people will not allow their content to be spidered as deeply.

Interesting times for sure, and lately we've been working on businesses that don't need Google. And believe it or not they exist! I have a feeling I am not the only one moving in that direction. When something reaches a stage where it seems irreplaceable, look out!

Now Google is a corporation with thousands of people in it. There are some great people doing great things there. It's not all bad, but I reserve the right to be critical, and like any other large corporation, there are some very selfish or idiotic people doing some selfish or idiotic things!

 

I would not be surprised if google come out one day and said links will no
longer be counted or worth anything, only your quality content...
google is so anti-linkbuilding, so it would not surprise me i guess...

 

They already have been, why would it not happen again?

 

Link building is a multi million dollar industry, Google sees that as money they are not obtaining. If they can kill other seo avenues that businesses have they are left with Adwords and what ever else google wants to make and charge for.

I bet we see more paid/premium listings for google maps and google+

 

The Associate Press is going to go out of business with this update as news agencies all use them as their article directory and use their database for research.

 

Translation, we're losing ad revenue.

 

why not now Google turn search engine to completely paid! A day after day new restrictions & useless updates.