Where Do You Stand on the Paid Links Issue?
Since I wrote about how bloggers make money I have had three different people asking about the controversial topic of paid links. I know from past experience when one or two people ask there are usually many more people who are interested, so here are my thoughts and a small poll to see how you stand on the issue 
It seems to me the various positions can be summarized as follows. Let me know in the comments if I have missed any.
- Against - It’s bad for the web - This is the position of Google. Their opinion is that links count as votes and they find it hard to tell if a vote has been bought or given freely. They don’t want to rank sites highly that have bought the position (unless the site in question is buying Googles own Adwords advertising).
- Moderate - It predates Google so they should butt out - Many people who actually don’t take part in the practice of buying or selling links nevertheless do not think it is Googles job to tell webmasters what they can and can not do where linking is concerned.
- For - It is good for webmasters, good for buyers, and good for audiences, do it! - It is easy to like this form of monetization. Text Link Ads pay well even to the average webmaster, particularly when compared to the most common Adsense payout, without forcing the inventory in your face, and reward webmasters regardless of traffic. Buying links has been a proven traffic method for a while now, in fact there are some niches where the practice is so common place I am told you can not compete without taking part.
- Depends - Sell ‘em by all means but be careful buying - The buying side of the equation poses more risks than the selling side though I am told the key is to make your link patterns look natural by mixing up where you get your links from.
Where do I stand?
My opinion is closest to #4. Full disclosure, I worked with Patrick from TLA for a long time and think he is a thoroughly good bloke so am perhaps more sympathetic to the company than I would otherwise be That said, if you are having a hard time making money off your blog I think Text Link Ads is a great scheme.
I don’t really care for Googles position and I believe if there is going to be a Policeman of the Interwebs it shouldn’t really be a monopoly that makes millions from monetizing spam like they do. Google incentivise splogs and click arbitrage with Adsense money so isn’t it a bit hypocritical? They even get users to out sites that are selling links. I am by no means an expert on all the nuances of this debate but is there only me that thinks what you will get is competitors playing dirty rather than honest search users filling those out? Perhaps I am opening myself up for a search penalty now saying that
Don’t think for a minute it is just the little guys who sell links. Huge properties do it. No, I am not going to out individuals, but many of the biggest household names and organisations on the web have sold links.
I do agree with one point that Matt Cutts makes, it is better for all parties if the links are relevant. The best approach is that put forward by Jeremy Zawodny (who happens to work for a big search engine, hmmm).
I rejected the on-line casino, drug sales, cheap hotels, and really offensive stuff–basically, anything the reminded me of blog comment spam I’ve bit hit with or that sends me to a sleazy feeling site. No need to encourage ‘em.
If you can earn a couple of hundred dollars a month selling links, is a penalty so bad? If Google decides your site no longer passes “juice” I don’t think most people would notice, but if your site loses rankings there could be more pain. I would actually advise people to build up non-Google traffic sources so one monster company can not arbitrarily hold you to ransom in this way. Fact is, most of the people who look to Text Link Ads as their major source of income isn’t getting much love from Google in the first place.
While I know bloggers with small blogs who are making hundreds of dollars a month with TLA, I also know there are also webmasters who look down on the practice. Everyone has their own thoughts and it is nowhere near a clear issue. My advice is to look around your niche and ask around. If you would like to check out more information about selling links on your blog, visit the Text Link Ads site here. While there is no commitment required to investigate further, that is an affiliate link and demonstrates another way you can earn from the system, you can make $25 if your click leads to a sign up
Am I wrong? Is this bad advice?
Do not think from what I have said my mind is made up. While I didn’t want to sway the poll, as I say above, I have given advice on the topic already so I thought the honest thing was to let you know my thoughts. I am still completely open to persuasion on this. If you have thoughts or links that show a good argument in any direction, please share in the comments.
Now click your vote in the poll, I am looking forward to seeing how you guys think about this issue
Posted on September 10th, 2007 by Chris Garrett in Marketing
I sell text links on a few of my sites and I buy text links when I find a good deal. As far as I am concerned it is none of Google’s business what I do with my links or who I buy a link from.
BeachBum Michael
If you have a few sites selling links I guess you are making reasonable money at it? Do you sell through a broker like TLA or private?
Google is becoming a dictatorship in a lot of ways and makes the task of webmaster very difficult. Links, paid and otherwise should be the webmasters obligation since the site is. The webmaster is going to know what is best for the website more so than Google. The shell game that Google is playing keeps Google fat. Encouraging other search engine traffic is the best idea I’ve heard. Change isn’t always for the better and often hurts. Being ruled by dictators sucks.
Yes I think there is no doubt Google have a great search product but they have a lot of influence now over webmaster behavior and have many webmasters scared and second guessing not what is good for readers but what is good for Google.
I can’t see the problem myself. The quality of Google’s search results is Google’s problem, nobody else’s.
Me neither, I don’t think a paid link is any less of a vote than giving a link because they like the person or because they want their attention. Perhaps the strong stand Google is taking shows they are not doing as well at detecting these links as they would like?
I’m all for selling text links. If it links to a spammy site then I wont sell it because it makes me look bad. It’s an issue that fixes itself. Just like any capitolist society it should be moderated in extreme circumstances, i.e. when a large corporation buys out all the links etc.
Luckily in most cases a site will have many slots and new sites arrive all the time so it would be difficult for any one company to buy up too many
Google’s results are already skewed by who is prepared to put the work in and those who are not. Buying links is just an element of the professionalisation of the web. The idea that somebody can just throw up a site with absolutely no thought to search engines is dead, and has been dead for some time. SEO/link building and the rest are just marketing. Marketing is a good thing, right?
I would say so
The web is a democracy and it tends to self regulate itself - for the most part. The are economics involved in Web publishing such as hosting and bandwidth costs that need to be balanced with some sort of return for the individual/company that is publishing information. This is why I have no issue with selling or buying links. As someone already mentioned, if the links are crap then don’t put them on a site. You end up voting for a better web.
Jack is right - the quality of Google’s search is their problem - not ours.
In addition, Google can sell and broker links, but doesn’t want others to do the same, please…
Lastly, the idea of placing a link/sign/ad to your location is as old of marketing technique as you can get. Probably dates back to the first caveman who painted an arrow on rocks to his place of business and saw his business double.
To think that Google has that much power to say, you can’t advertise, but through us is crazy. NBC can’t do that. NO OTHER industry (tv, radio, magazine, newspaper) could even think about trying something like that. The idea is laughable…But somehow Google has that power…
@Cash Flow Guy - Yeah if you are looking to pay for hosting then providing you have an identifiable niche then text ads should more than cover it
@mark - Good point, I can imagine Ug the mammoth chef doing just that
I started selling text links ads on my blog through TLA a few months ago. I like the extra income. I actually make more money from the Google ads on my blog and they are currently situated further below the fold on my blog.
I do agree with you Chris. I don’t think anyone one company should tell the rest of the web how webmasters should monetize their site. Imagine the backlash if it was Microsoft and not Google taking this stand…
I think it would be nice if we could separate the paid links from the free ones but that is not possible. I do believe that clarity is a great thing but few people practice it. Buyer beware and all that…
Me, if I made money as a blogger it would surprise me. If I can make a few dollars now and again, it would be nice. I just don’t want to compromise the trust I have earned with my 35 readers.
Anyone who reads my blogs knows I don’t have a problem with paid links. I like to post them in relevant blogs, though, and work them into posts that actually reflect my life and philosophies. I try to stay away from some altogether since they would just scream “paid post!” and they would be far, far from relevant to anything I would ever post about.
I do disclose on all my blogs that some links have been paid for. I think it’s important for anyone who does this sort of income generation to let their readers know that from time to time, there will be sponsored links. I have actually become a customer of some of the links I first placed as sponsored! This means I’ve blogged about them again, at other times, for no compensation at all.
How would Google know which are sponsored and which are not, if I am including links to sites I like anyway? Google is not the internet god, and should step back from trying to work in that capacity.
I actually haven’t tried TLA yet, but I do some work for other companies. Adsense has paid me a whopping $24 in the TWO YEARS+ that I’ve had them on my blogs.
Thanks for this post and the opportunity to share my opinion and vote in your poll!
3 and one half. I’m somewhere between #3 and #4; whatever works to my benefit without fooling the customer works out best.
I’m somewhere between
“It subverts search engine results, so is bad for the web” and “Google shouldn’t regulate something that predates them. If people want to buy or sell links it is nobodys business but theirs” because I agree with both statements — it is bad for organic searching, but it’s also a perfectly valid business choice for both the buyer and the seller. I also agree that “It is a great way to monetize a site, particularly for blogs with low traffic,” but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that I actually encourage it. I don’t discourage it, per se.
Good an ambiguous, eh? ;]
Kristen
All internet advertising is paid links. Google’s moves are self-protective and hypocritical.
As a WordPress theme designer, I have an interesting perspective on this. At the bottom of my free WordPress themes is a link back to my blog. I paid for that link… with labor. When people use my themes, that link is how they “pay” me.
Except that no money has changed hands, it operates exactly like paid links do. The result? The homepage of my blog has a PageRank of 6 and my Technorati authority is over 7,000.
None of these links are relevant in the way that Google would like them to be, but I am rewarded rather than punished. This is why Google doesn’t like paid links–they work. Google can say what it wants, but as long as paid links work, people will buy and sell them.
Great post Chris.. As far as selling links.. I figure if you’re going to exchange links anyway.. somebody might as well make some money on it. As long as it’s done responsibly and you’re not just link whoring (for lack of a better word) with any and every site that’ll post a link for you regardless of focus. I don’t really see a problem with it.
As far as google.. somehow along the way google turned into somewhat of the “Big Brother” of the internet. To me, It all has to do with confidence, expertise, etc of the designer/developer putting a particular site together. I think a lot of designers understand the “sites that suck” concept and depending on google isn’t nearly as much of a concern. Like you said.. the ability for google to “ransom” the site virtually disappears.
So really i don’t have a problem with responsible link selling/buying but I really see google in sort of the same light i saw my parents in my teen years… the more they tell me not to do something… just made me want to do it more. It’s a rebellion thing I guess. Maybe not the best practice for some people but.. then again.. Damn the man! haha
The Internet also predates Google. Maybe we should make them stop crawling that, too.
Come on. Google has every right to do whatever they feel best to protect the integrity of their index. They’re not handling this issue well, but it’s still THEIR index.
If paid links are good for your users, then they’re good for your blog. But if there’s no way on Earth that anyone reading your blog is remotely interested in those links and your buyers are just doing it to try to manipulate Google, then that doesn’t seem quite right.
The blogs I read may sell links as advertising, yes. Better yet, sell to advertisers that would appeal to your audience. But to disguise paid links as editorial content? That doesn’t seem ethical, even without involving Google.
Honestly, I’m not entirely sure where I stand on this debate, which is funny, since part of my current day job involves SEO (though, I work mostly on the organic/natural side of things, so paid links don’t really enter my daily conversations, other than what I might read on various SEO blogs).
Having said that, I don’t necessarily think that paid links are a bad thing, as long as they are still relevant. If the link is relevant, does it matter that money changed hands? The reverse is true also: if a link is irrelevant, does it matter whether it was given for free or not?
Quality links are quality links, and bad links and bad links, regardless of whether or not money changed hands.
HOWEVER, it’s never really that simple, is it? When money is involved, people might be much more willing to give a link to a site that they otherwise wouldn’t–relevant or not–because they don’t want to turn down the profit.
I guess I can kind of see both sides of the issue but, my opinion leans more toward paid links not being such a bad thing, as long as the links are kept relevant. If you’re selling text links, ask yourself: “Would I link to this site if he wasn’t paying me to do so?” If the answer is no, you might want to think twice about giving the link.
Having said that, I really don’t know all of the subtle nuances of this debate, so I’m keeping a very open mind, and am willing to change my opinion in light of new information.
i just recently got adsense on my blog and i’ve been looking for ways to spread my earnings but with the current policy of adsense it would only hurt the blog. it seems that you have to have a strong presence to deal with the penalty from google, or make a totally non google site. and it seems to generate more money from the latter of the 2.
It’s true that it’s bad for their search results but, quite frankly, I don’t see much wrong with it. If people want to make a buck or two with their blog, that’s cool. I don’t believe that google should have first and last say on traffic as many bloggers tend to feel.
They believe that google is the only source that really matters and that is exactly what google wants them to think. I admit that google is what I use most places I go on the web, but I don’t think it should be treated as the end all solution.
Just because they’re big doesn’t mean they can bully people.
I haven’t bought or sold links, but I don’t like the fact that Google tries to control it. They didn’t create the internet, Al Gore did.
if the link contains related topic, what is wrong with that? even if it is a paid link. Anyway google is sooooo smart to detect if they are related topics right?
If people buy links to improve their search engine rankings, and to get a higher Google page-rank, they shouldn’t object when Google penalises them for manipulating their ranking algorithms.
But my vote goes for the third option.
Well, I’ll go for option 4. But by this selection I mean limited buying rather than careful. Or you can also give a careful buying another name as ‘limited buying’. Personally I don’t for wild buying rather a moderate options works better!
Google is large enough that they really don’t need my blog space, or any other space, for their ads. I would much rather run ads from small companies and protect what online independence we have left.
I’m a fan of Google and most of their products. But I have to say, they’re being a bit hypocritical on this issue. After all, aren’t the Adsense ads they serve up on my blog paid links? It sounds like they want it their way or the highway!
Furthermore, if I attract outside advertisers who want to pay for some content-related links on my blog, I don’t see what business it is of Google’s.
@George - There would be pitch forks in the streets if it was Microsoft
@Roger - Yes the trust thing is a delicate balancing act
@Ann - I am sure TLA will pay better than you are getting from Adsense
@Matt - Yeah I guess most of us have a mix of opinions depending on how they are implemented
@Kristen - Ambiguous is fine
@Michael - What do you think about Mat Mullenwegs tirade against sponsored themes?
@Scott - Yeah, stick it to the man
@Jordan - That’s the thing though, they are not talking about their index, they are talking about OUR sites. They have every right to decide what happens in their index, their site, such as dropping or devaluing me, but me linking to you is not happening in their index, it happens between our sites so I don’t see why they should call the shots
@Adam - It is funny, a lot of the SEO people I know don’t buy links but tend toward #2
@doug - If you focus on people and not Google you will get far more traffic and links, and paradoxically find in fact Google treats you better
@Jeremy - Because so many people are addicted to Googles traffic they play by their tune, understandable I guess
@Steven - Heh, Al Gore will never escape that accusation will he
@Reztar - Supposedly!
@Mohsin - The way I look at it, look at John Chow. He got penalised by Google and his traffic went up
@BlogOxide - Careful is good
@SageRave - Good call
@Brad - As many people have said, perhaps they want the only advertising to be sold through them
#4 - the only reason people think links are bad for the web is because Google and some idealists told them to.
The notion that paid links cheapens the web is the craziest idea I’ve ever heard because it runs counter to every other type of marketing that exists. The market will correct itself with paid links where the users do not receive value. They’ll stop following the links or visiting the sites that have them. Case closed.