I’ve mentioned in the past that I consider there to be 3 broad categories of SEO, measured in large part by the aggressiveness of the methods used to rank websites.
While it’s common to see two categorizations, it is a little rarer to see the middle ground discussed, and that’s a shame. “Grey Hat” some might call it or even “Blue Hat” but in reality, for those that look to tread this middle ground, it’s simply “effective”. It’s a constant search for the narrow line between long term success, and getting any success at all.
Want to cut to the chase. Scroll down to the bottom of this post and take “The Acid Test” as described in the last section for yourself.
Stop Being Scared of Success
Scared Of Taking The Steps To Success? Knock That Fear Out Now!
I’ve got my hands on a new tool that tracks websites progress over time for a particular keyword/niche, and I’m going to let it run for a month or two and see than changes in a couple of broad market areas. Then see what offsite SEO seems to have been carried out on the sites in question to see what tactics win and lose in a “broad brush” sense. If the tool does what it is supposed to do, then I’m really looking forward to using it and introducing it to you guys.
Why on Earth…
Good question. The market for Black Hat tools, services and methods is open to a lot of negative discussion, and I’m not one who likes to get an in box full of spam or see my Akismet stats tell me my site was hit 7,000 in one day by comment spammers.
Some tools are pretty much just for spamming. They have little or no time for content, they may scrape a few snippets while they run from site to site posting, but that’s barely even a secondary consideration to the quantity of links they create.
Likewise, sites that employ dodgy methods to get you to click on virus ridden files, won’t close, drop cookies without telling you, add stuff to your browser you don’ want, blackmail you with false accusations of the unthinkable. These are pretty well known and rightly condemned as very low practices indeed.
So, a service like MOZ that provides some tools for the diligent, hardworking webmaster to use to analyse the competition, keep an eye on his rankings and have an overview of his or her social media – that’s ok right? Isn’t it?
Well yes – sort of.
But it’s not the tools, it’s the way they are marketed. It’s the subtle arm twisting and fib telling that goes on to get the average business owner to think they are getting something special. The allusion that they are, in some strange yet indefinable way, buying some sort of Search Engine Slap immunity by signing up and following these methods and using these tools.
The idea that there is such a thing as a defined White Hat way that Google actually approves of (there isn’t and they don’t by the way)
First though, I thought it might be helpful to explain what my own categorization means. So here is a run down of the issues I believe White Hat SEO has as espoused by the “MOZ” brigade among others.
The General Idea Behind White Hat (Homeopathic) SEO
Oh dear, I’ve fallen into the trap of using a derogatory term straight away here. White Hat SEO as preached by the likes of MOZ a broad brush overview. Yes it’s all common sense stuff that would take anyone with the wit higher than a village idiot no time at all to work out for themselves.
- Writing content solely for the reader
- Optimizing on site navigation
- Encouraging social interaction
- Ensuring technical aspects of your site are of high quality (server speed, up time etc.)
- Using multiple media types where appropriate
- Avoiding over commercialization
- Not using any tricks such as cookie stuffing, fake doorways, un-block able pop-ups, hacks worms
- Being an active member of the community, you are looking to serve.
All pretty sensible stuff. Nothing there that is remotely objectionable, and for the most part things that, as a webmaster looking to get anywhere you should do.
I’d argue that some of these are not really optimization for the search engines. Some are more to do with engagement and social media, but that’s no bad thing. Diversifying your traffic sources is a great idea.
Caveat: I’m not talking about micro niche marketing here. The situations I’m describing are for moderately well-established niches with medium competition for page one spots at least for the main target keywords or phrases.
With that in mind, let’s look at the pro’s and con’s of White Hat SEO. First, I’m going to whisper something that you probably already knew.
All business is risk. Every decision carries consequence. Because there is a risk in taking positive action is not a good enough reason in itself not to take that action.
Weigh up the risks – the time, the cost the pros and the cons them take the right action for your risk profile.
Failing to Take Action Will Lead to Failure – Every Time.
No business works without risk
Strengths
Well, it’s probably a little safer than other methods and requires little technical expertise once the site is built.
Asking your web builder to apply sensible navigation and insisting on having a good reliable host is likely to cost a little more and require you use a good designer, but, once done, it’s pretty much a case of letting it be.
Weaknesses
The three issues with this are:
It isn’t completely safe, in fact it can be argued that is only a little safer than getting out your spam gun and going crazy with the trash links. It is somewhat safer I’m sure, but there is a perception that by following these methods you are 100% secure in terms of retaining a good relationship between your site and Google’s anti-spam measures, and that is very far from the truth.
It is slow. In all but the weakest and newest markets, getting any positive movement at all using these methods alone could (and in practice does) take anything from 3 months to “never going to happen”.
Got the best product and the best message? Rarely helps. You might try building up a media buzz outside of the SE’s to see if the increased noise and “natural” links that are created gives you traction, but in practice you had better have a darn good product and a very clever marketing department – not to mention a sizable budget
——————————————————————————–
In Summary. Balance Effectiveness with Caution
Finally, when you do get some positive movement, you will be beaten 9 times out of 10 by those that use more effective methods. You might even be beaten long term by those who just outright spam.
Again, the perception of “White Hat wins the long game” is an oft quoted one, but the truth of it is pretty much scotch mist. You might stand a slightly better chance of retaining high rankings over time, but the emphasis here is on “might” and “time” as far as time goes, you better not be in any hurry for your website to turn a profit.
I’m going to add a fourth issue here. Not really a problem with the method, but for the gurus it attracts.
Many White Hat method sellers are racketeers, snake oil sellers and, most of all, fear mongers.
The processes they espouse eschew most forms of automation and the logic behind them is very simple indeed once a site is built.
It’s an A,B,C list of the most basic common sense rules that anyone with an IQ north of 60 could work out for themselves within minutes.
Yet they have products – bloody expensive products at that, recurring subs for “tools” that measure your sites progress or examine your niche. They might even claim these tools and the reports they create are in some way really unique or powerful. Even worse they might claim to have cracked some of the logic Google and the other search engines use use to rank sites.
In truth, the reports are not special, they are not better than those costing 1/5th of the price elsewhere and they certainly have no inside track into any search engine algorithm.
They are offering watered down techniques that amount to little more than common sense alongside tools that are multiples more expensive than other equally good functionality you can find elsewhere.
So how do they get away with it?
Marketing! Next question.
Sorry, that’s a little facile. It’s very clever marketing. Creating a warm none confrontational environment that preaches values that, to the uninitiated, seem as warm and homely as mom’s apple pie.
But the cleverest thing they do, the thing that all good marketing is based on, and the aspect of their methodology I find most despicable is that they…
White Hat Editorial Designed to Create Fear!
Fear is a massive motivator for marketing. It could (and often has been) argued that fear of one sort or another is the single biggest emotion that marketers play on.
Fear of missing the offer, fear of being seen as different if you don’t have the latest fashions, fear of not taking advantage of a situation. Think about the last few adverts you saw on any media. I bet they all played on fear of this type in one way or another.
Some are subtle. For example, The holiday bargain that you want. You are going to book a holiday anyway. You know places at the resort you are interested in are finite – the advert puts these two factors together and just reinforces something you already knew anyway. You want to go on holiday, and you risk not getting the one you want if you leave it too late.
Other fear mongering is far more sinister
Contrived Fear – None Existent “Enemies”
White Hat evangelists fear their site being penalised by Google, or their site being beaten by a site that uses (in their entirely subjective – and indeed in most cases hypocritical opinion) not White Hat.
However, Google and the other search engines are never identified as the enemy. They are the service providers whom you just need to play ball with.
The enemy is anyone who uses a method that is different from their own to rank websites.
Now let’s get one thing clear, I alluded to it above. Google do not condone ANY form of link building, keyword manipulation or technical massaging of a site beyond making it as usable and transparent as possible. Beyond that you are not playing Google’s game – in my opinion (and that’s all it is) once you take one step over that line – you are not White Hat.
How “dark” you millinery attire is is again a matter of degrees and subjectivity. Some apostles of MOZ claim a sort of moral superiority. That’s a level of arrogance that takes some beating.
You don’t need to be black hat to catch the wrath of these myopic minions, you just need to be sufficiently different from them. You just need to eschew some of the grovelling luddite attitudes they swear by and look to sensibly automate and actively market to be seen as the guy in the black 10-gallon hat strolling into town.
Is this a natural state of mind? In an internet full of ideas and differing methods is this form of marketing elitism a natural consequence of individuals observing cause and effect in SERPS?
Of Course It Isn’t.
It’s a consequence of the deliberate fear mongering that the likes of MOZ actively participate in. Fear mongering based on very little fact.
Check out just about any phrase or term ranking outside of the top 500 commercial terms, and the same webmasters using the same techniques are there as were there in 2004.
Look inside the top 500 and you’ll still see many examples of sites whose marketing would be considered Black Hat by all but the most egregious spammer still lurks, many have been there for years – some since Google began.
Conversely take a look at the forums on MOZ and Google Webmaster to see countless examples of webmasters with sites promoted with no more than a little social media push. Sites that register few or no links and seem to have followed all the rules… still hammered by Google penalties. There are a lot of these.
The Digital Marketing Acid Test!
Look for the examples of failed and hammered sites in moderately commercial niches that are held up as examples of “what not to do” by the likes of Moz.
No really go and have a look. Check out the copious examples of where (according to their standards) a good site has overtaken a “bad” one.
Still here?
Oh, you’ve been, and looked and found that they have never given an example.
Well go to GWMF – SEJournal or somewhere similar and look at their examples of good overtaking evil.
What do you mean they don’t have any either?
Well look back to the major updates from Penguin or Panda, check the archives, widen the search.
Still no luck?
Thought not.
And that’s all you need to know.
Originally published by Paul Rone-Clarke on demondemon dot com