• Durant Imboden

    Makes sense. It would be more reasonable to tune out irrelevant backlinks than relevant ones.

  • Durant Imboden

    Makes sense. It would be more reasonable to tune out irrelevant backlinks than relevant ones.

  • http://jameshalloran.net/ James R. Halloran

    Very interesting. That’s why it’s still wise to practice good backlink strategies like guest posting and blog commenting, but the fact that spammy links still account for the majority of this is still bothersome.

    There’s got to be a way they can filter it all out eventually.

  • http://jameshalloran.net/ James R. Halloran

    Very interesting. That’s why it’s still wise to practice good backlink strategies like guest posting and blog commenting, but the fact that spammy links still account for the majority of this is still bothersome.

    There’s got to be a way they can filter it all out eventually.

  • atentat

    Where are your social signals now?? Backlinks is what it is. Everything else is useless. Especially social signals.

  • atentat

    Where are your social signals now?? Backlinks is what it is. Everything else is useless. Especially social signals.

  • Durant Imboden

    Yes, I did. And “backlink relevance” clearly includes backlink topic relevance. (Google has come a long way since PageRank was introduced in the late 1990s.)

  • Durant Imboden

    Yes, I did. And “backlink relevance” clearly includes backlink topic relevance. (Google has come a long way since PageRank was introduced in the late 1990s.)

  • Christine

    A big slap on the face of those, who say links are dead ! , infact experts has always been of the opinion that there is no better quality signal than links to determine a site worth.

  • http://charismaworks.com.au/ davidbobis

    Great to hear that (quality) link building isn’t dead.

  • Joe

    Every good SEO in the industry knew backlinks still works. But at what cost and what risk?

  • Christine

    Every good SEO is well aware of the risk and cost.i-e either they are doing it just to manipulate results or they are providing something useful to users and taking credit in the form of links..

  • Ian

    How does Matt Cutts’ team measures it is ‘worse’ when turning off backlinks? I’m sure there are several subjective answers but how exactly do their internal experiments measure it.

  • http://www.it-sales-leads.com/ Barbara Mckinney

    One thing is certain: interlinking sites doesn’t help you from a search engine standpoint. The only reason you may want to interlink your sites in the first place might be to provide your visitors with extra resources to visit. In this case, it would probably be okay to provide visitors with a link to another of your websites, but try to keep many instances of linking to the same IP address to a bare minimum.

  • dsottimano

    I’d love to hear what Amazon and Ebay CMOs would say if you told them not to link to their other sites like Audible, or Shopping.com. Where in the world did you get your information?

  • http://www.seo-theory.com/ Michael Martinez

    I think he was simply giving viewers the 30,000-foot view and nothing specific should be read into what he shares.

  • http://www.it-sales-leads.com/ Barbara Mckinney

    What I’m trying to say is that we have to focus on relevant links. It’s useless to link your other site if your readers don’t find it usefull for them.

  • http://www.globalwebforce.com/ William Forrest

    Yes, readers can probably click the backlink if it was relevant to the content or article that they read. Especially, if they are curious enough on what information that they can get when they click the link. But sometimes, non-relevant links are click also just out of curiosity of the readers. But it ends up into frustration because the link is not related on the content that they read. This is a bad for site also because you drive a traffic but turns into bounce rate.

  • UK Tutoring Services – Cambodi

    Does the Big G have a G spot?
    Answers on a dirty postcard please.

  • http://www.brickmarketing.com/ Nick Stamoulis

    I would actually love to see what Google looks like with no backlinks. Would big brand websites benefit or actually be hurt because of it? Would smaller sites have a better chance at success or would the road to the top be even harder for them? I wonder what they saw that made them realize backlinks still matter, even if there is a lot of noise out there.

  • Dan Patrick

    Agreed. I don’t care what anyone says, links will never be dead. Non-spammy links are essential in good website design and copy and will therefore be rewarded by Google. Subsequent updates will just get better at finding less relevant/spammy backlinks.

    Now, I also believe that Social Signals WILL have a future, but Google will have to sort out whether they “fit” in the overall personality of the user and are therefore organic or are spammy shares. Until they have that worked out, Social Signals will remain a correlation, not a causation.

  • dsottimano

    Yes, you should focus on relevant links, and yes you should link to your other properties in moderation, even if readers find them useless – useless defined as having a low to zero clicks. Your original comment is still wrong, I don’t know where you got that information, but it’s wrong. Look at Amazon’s footer – http://www.amazon.com/ see the links? They acquired Quidsi solutions in 2010, and are giving them a boost in search by distributing Amazon’s pagerank. Totally legitimate, and fair. Read through this: http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-says-it-is-okay-to-link-your-sites-together-but-in-moderation-157141

  • http://miklinseo.com/ Miklin SEO

    I wonder though if media sites connected to press release syndicates will ever get penalized.

  • Chris Gedge

    Every SEO manipulates results. That is the job!

  • http://www.wordpresscorner.com/ Marty Rogers

    Hopefully that brings a swift end to those doom-and-gloom ‘R.I.P. Backlinks’ posts we so often found on here. Hurrah!

  • Mark

    How else will it continue on with its big brand dominance without it?

  • Marketing MadEZ

    The quality of his videos decreased lately, they are not as useful as they used to be. But it is always interesting to have his point of view.

  • http://www.baratilla.com Jay Baratilla

    This is technically an old info for long-time white hats. But an annoying lecture-repeat for grays and black hats.

  • Mayank Jain

    Google was formed on PageRank patent. I do not think they will ever ignore the backlinks for SERP. However, if G+ and other factors will get advantage, that is also manipulative but it’s not easy to fake G+ nowadays , so be careful. Since, we provide our website analytics to Google, it’s a foolishness to use fake profiles because such profiles enhance your bounce rates as those are concerned only with number of likes. Only thing remains important is lowering your bounce rate and create backlinks for brands in high authority site in your niche.

  • Kyle Hikalea

    I’m a firm believer that social signals (i.e. a ‘like’ or a ‘share’ or a ‘+1′) are being indexed in very much the same manner that regular follow links are. How much value they carry versus’ standard links is the big question.

  • http://www.crypton97.us/ Tri Wahyudi

    This means when a link is placed on directory link, also still affect the position in the search engines :)

  • Billy McAllister

    Dan,

    I agree with you. Links are not dead and never have been. The links are dead debate just continues much like the “SEO is Dead” debate. Just comes out when there isn’t enough interesting reports/news.

    I do believe that social signals are weighted in the ranking algorithm but very little. I do not believe that Google will truly take social signals into a larger account in ranking until: Twitter better handles fake accounts, therefore, reducing ‘fake’ retweets, etc.

    And when Facebook (more like the users) reduce sharing articles that are from unreliable sources and straight click-bait.

    So, yes, social signals will have a future, but Google will not risk their search reputation until Facebook and Twitter get their spam under control.