Andrew Goodman recently posted about SEO industry reputation woes, but the real reason for the problem is the self serving agenda of search engines. Don’t underestimate the marketing of the search engines, which outside of their own link buying and selling, generally like to hint at this equation SEO = spam.
People spam everything though – media creating biased news, misquoting interviewees, blending ads in content, ads as content, free votes driving communities, deceptive article titles, spinning numbers from small sample sets, bogus posturing formated as research studies, etc.
Look at how much Google had to clean their PPC ads. Yet we don’t associate PPC service providers as people pushing thin content arbitrage sites, fraudulent search engine submission services, and off target cookie stuffing offer spams. Should we?
If spam is hosted by Google, ranked by Google, and displays Google ads, then why the need for outsourcing that fault? Why can’t we just call those people Google affiliates and leave it at what it is, Google = spam?
Some people claim that Google is out for the best interest of their users, but why the need for cost per action ads that are only labeled as ads on a scroll over? Ads cloaked as content are what is best for users? In a couple years we will see:
The game is now to manipulate consumers not only to click, but to take some further action. And I don’t use the word “manipulate” arbitrarily. This is about turning the web into one big pile of junk mail, aimed at getting you to sign up, buy, or commit to something that you hadn’t necessarily wanted.
