You want traffic? You gotta have in-pointing links. Rankings in the dumps? You need more links. Sales on a downward spiral? Beg, buy, borrow, or steal some links.

It’s pretty much the online marketing mantra.

Links, links, links. It’s enough to drive you crazy. And of course, every online marketing expert on the planet has an opinion; here’s what YOU need to do to get the links you require. Others have software tools to help you accomplish your link building goals. You’ll need to pay for those, of course.

With all the commotion, I figured it was a good time to get back to the fundamentals and examine exactly why it is that you need links, and what you should be doing to get them.

The easiest way to begin this discussion is to consider what it is that happens whenever you go to a SE (search engine), type in a query, and hit “Search.”

When you do this, the SE has to delve into its database of billions of documents, determine which one is most relevant to your search query, and deliver that back to you… in a flash (that is every SE’s mandate -deliver the best, most relevant results. If  it doesn’t, you’ll do your searching somewhere else… and the SE’s customers – their advertisers – will follow you).

To accomplish this task, every SE has a series of criteria it uses; these are called algorithyms. The simplest criteria is to analyze the text of the document being evaluated – it should contain the exact words (and perhaps synonyms) of the query you have entered. However, because on-page text is very easily manipulated by webmasters, and because the SEs recognize that such pages do not necessarily address the best interests of their visitors, other criteria are used in the determination.

Google was the first major SE to factor link analysis into its search algorithym.

It was a brilliant strategy.

On the Net, a link is essentially a vote of confidence that is extended from one web site to another. In other words, if a highly respected authority site links to another site, they are lending some of their credibility to that site. Sites that have in-pointing links from many authoritative sites are considered to be more “credible” than sites that do not, and therefore, more likely to rank higher for a niche related search query.

So obviously, in-pointing links have a huge impact on the ability of any site’s ability to rank well on the SEs.

Of course, there’s a problem with a lot of emphasis on in-pointing links. There are plenty of rich sources of information that have very little in the way of in-pointing links. Educational institutions, for example, often have fantastic resource-rich web sites… with little to no in-pointing links. Brand new sites are in trouble too (regardless of the quality of the content they offer). By their very definition, they have no links.

So if you want to speed up the process of getting your site listed and ranking in the SEs (especially Google), you need to be proactive; get out there and get some links.

But there’s a fine line here.

A line between a genuine effort to establish your site as an authority within its niche, and that of the manipulation of the SEs’ search results.

When webmasters discovered the importance of in-pointing links, many raced out and obtained hundreds – if not thousands – in an effort to increase their site’s prominence on the results pages.

Many still do.

Submitting to link farms, implementing automated link exchange programs, blog network submissions, etc, etc – these are all methods used to increase the perception that the linked site in question is an authority site. This is manipulation, pure and simple.

Remember what I said earlier? That’s right… it is the mandate of every SE to deliver the best, most relevant results to its audience.

This is a critical point.

When the building of in-pointing links threatens the SEs ability to do this,  OR when your link building efforts are not genuine, but an attempt to manipulate rankings, you can expect the SEs to strike back.

How do they do this?

Generally by downgrading the value of the links from all but the most credible of resources.

Some experts may argue that a sheer volume of links will help your site’s ability to rank well. I’ve seen enough examples to believe that this does work, at least for some SEs. But I suspect as they get smarter in deciphering “real” links from “bogus” ones, this tactic will no longer yield results.

Take, for example, the typical “reciprocal link exchange.”

In this, webmasters agree to host a link to each other’s web sites on a “links” page somewhere. Generally, this page is not easily accessed, but buried somewhere in the nether-regions of the respective sites. Neither webmaster actually wants you to visit that site, but they do want it to appear to the SEs as if they are actually sending a vote of credibility for that site.

This, from the SE’s perspective, is not a “genuine” link, but one who’s only purpose is to manipulate its argorithym. Ergo, reciprocal “link exchanges” are pretty much a thing of the past when it comes to building credible, in-pointing links.

On the other hand, a link – from a quality content page – to another quality site that enhances the experience of your visitors, is perfectly acceptable. Why? Because it adheres to the true fundamentals of the Net; it’s a REAL vote of confidence, a real indicator of credibility.

And basically, that is what smart link building really boils down to. Are the links you are seeking out ones that enhance the experience of your visitors? Are you proud of the sites you are affiliated with, hosting their links in prominent locations on your site? If the answer is no, I’d suggest re-evaluating your link-building tactics.

With that said, here are my recommendations for successful link building. First and foremost…

1) Create linkable content: This a fantastic strategy because it will garner links on its own; webmasters will link to your site to enhance the experience of their own visitors. Additionally, if you are actively searching out webmasters to exchange links with, and you want that link to matter, you need to have something worthwhile to link to. I receive tons of link requests at UltimateFatBurner.com, but I rarely accept any of them. The most common reasons for this are…

  • Content is not unique, or of sufficient quality to link to.
  • Content recommends products or services I refuse to be affiliated with.
  • I address the same material on my own web site, and an out-pointing link would not further enhance the experience of my visitors.

Having quality content also works with the SEs; remember their mantra? Deliver the best results to their visitors? If your site REALLY is high quality, it’s in their best interest to divert traffic to it. I hate to harp on it, but this element is critical. Great, “linkable” content is the foundation of your business, so make it solid!

2) Take a link building chill pill: Here’s another pet peeve of mine; receiving link exchange requests from the webmasters of 5 page web sites. Dude, there’s nothing here to link to! How credible would I look if  I linked to this? Hello?

Seriously… take the time to build your site into a real resource, before you ask other webmasters to present it to their respective audiences as one.

How long does that take? How much material do you need?

That really depends on your niche. If your topic is very specific and you can address it with a minimal amount of content, that’s one thing. If you can’t, that’s another. As an example, I’ve only recently started to build links to Real-Customer-Comments.com, a site I started back in 2007.

Since this site is basically a Web 2.0 visitor feedback site, it made sense to wait until there were enough visitor comments to make it worthwhile to promote as a destination. What kind of value does a visitor get by visiting a feedback site that doesn’t have any feedback? Now, with almost 200 products and 2,000 visitor comments, it makes sense to build links.

3) Use link building strategies that have “stand alone” merit: What do I mean by this? Use strategies that have a genuine value outside of link building, and therefore are less likely to be perceived as manipulation and be penalized.

A perfect example is distributing press releases via an online service like PRWeb. Press releases may be a good tool to boost your in-pointing links, and even if they are not, you are unlikely to be penalized by a SE for using them. Why? Because there are plenty of genuine, “non-link building” reasons for doing so.

Same goes for submitting articles to the top article directories. While I’m not convinced the value of such links provides much of a boost anymore, such submission is a genuine business building strategy.

On the other hand, paying to have your URL blasted to 10,000 blogs across an advertising network has no “genuine” purpose – it’s a blatant attempt to artifically manipulate the SEs listings. And that’s a dicey game.

My bottom line recommendations are simple…

Play by the rules. And work with the SEs, recognizing their mandate. There are short cuts to link building, but they do not adhere to these two rules. And, any results obtained by them will be short lived… especially as the SEs become better and better at distinguishing real links from spammy ones.

Stay tuned!

No related posts.