Fused Nation - UK SEO Blog

A recent “article” posted by the boffins at Bigmouthmedia explains to users the benefits of using CSS for SEO and finish off with some great advice (emphasis added by me):

“But, everything that is good always can be abused. Certain SEO professionals can use XHTML and CSS to hide text on a page so it isn’t visible to the human eye, but can be seen by spiders. This is referred to as “cloaking”, a form of SEO spamming. Spamming comes under the title of black hat SEO or unethical SEO, which is an abuse of search engines and is never advised by ethical SEO companies.”

Funny how earlier this year, Bigmouthmedia were banned from Google by using CSS to hide content on their homepage.  SEO expert and all round guru Jill Whalen pointed out the reason at the time:

“They have a huge amount of content stuffed into a little tiny frame on the bottom left corner of their home page. Doesn’t really seem like it’s meant for their users, but who’s to say…”

Shortly after their outing, BMM changed the cloaked content into a little flash application that resulted in them being re-included into Google’s search index.  Denying any wrong doing at the time, Bigmouth were caught with their pants down when Matt Cutts confirmed later that they were indeed hand removed from Google (reported by SEObook on Threadwatch, blogging live from a WmW conference):

“Matt Cutts said that the site was hand removed from Google for spamming. He said they had about 13,000 characters in a 60 by 60 box.”

Sooo…logically we can say that Bigmouthmedia:

• Are unethical SEOs (or “Black Hat” SEOs)

• Are spammers

• Have abused search engines

• Used cloaking techniques

I mean, that comes from their own definition.  From the horse’s mouth as it were.  I’m sure many people already had that opinion of BMM anyway, but it is nice of BMM to admit it publicly.

What’s really amusing is that I used to work for Bigmouth and in a tech meeting I pointed out the shortcomings of that particular technique that was used on a client site, but it was largely ignored.  I left the company a few months before they were banned from Google but heard that the same technique was being used on a few clients’ sites as well.

Yawn!

Away from the specifics of this case, I gotta say I really detest the sanctimonious, preachy bullshit that some SEO agencies come out with, especially when they are as slimey and “unethical” as the people they are trying to position themselves above on the moral ladder.

SEO has been around long enough now for traditional marketing people to get their shit together and carry out due diligence on the work they are paying people to carry out.  But no, most are content with watching sales guy prance in, accompanied by their metaphorical fanfare of ethical drivel and usually take it at face value, despite the fact that most so-called “experts” in this field have less SEO experience than your average secretary.

I suppose it doesn’t help that a lot of what we do follows certain core basic principles - agencies hug their “intellectual property” close to their chest but its not to protect it from theft - it is to protect their wallets from the reality that basic SEO is pretty easy to do and most clients wouldn’t pay the prices that are charged if they knew that.  Of course many cases justify the cost on involved - banned sites, larger sites and indeed, many SEO agencies offer a great value for their service.  But the business world really needs to get their shit together to sort out their priorities.

I’ve gotta give a quick hat tip to SEOs that appreciate this.  The likes of Aaron, Jill, DaveN, Marcia, Mike, Danny, Jen, John, Brendon, Mack and countless others have for years given away free advice via their own sites, forums and conferences - and still all run successful and viable businesses.  The key here is the “advice” and not just bullshit SEO articles for the sake of “writing SEO articles because search engines like content”. 

OK, enough brown nosing! ;)  The point is that these SEOs and people like them aren’t better because they give away the goods for free - they are better because they are credible - their information is out there and up for public vetting - and this being the Internet n’ all you can be sure if they were talking rubbish someone would pull them up on it.

I think this is the key to success in SEO as time passes on - glossy sales pitches are 80’s transparent crap - a solid reputation on the other hand is instrumental to success online.

MG