result

Most link building by many SEO firms is absolutely not natural but is actually blackhat according to Google. If you have to pay for it, request it, comment for it or insert a hyperlink in your article to achieve it, then you are manipulating Google search results and Google terms that as blackhat. You just really should view lots of video's by Matt Cutts to understand that if you do any among the above, you then are creating links manually and violating Google's TOS.

It simply baffles me how many SEO experts will quickly denounce Cloaking as unethical or against Google's TOS or merely label it as spam which manipulates search results but then each day create artificial, manual or software generated backlinks for clients.

If you are distributing countless articles with links or posting on blogs/forums to get backlinks or using automated backlinking software, isn't that also spamming to govern google search results?

There is also a silly mindset that whitehat SEO is free or risk and blackhat is totally full of risks. Really? What number of whitehat sites, that supposedly conformed to most of Google's TOS, suddenly lose their ranking and their business when Google decides to complete a major algorithm update? Ha! Where will be the reward for loyalty from Google?

So does blackhat or being unethical really exist anymore? Isn't this really about traffic, conversions and surviving within an ever tightening monopoly created by Google that we now are left with few other options, unless to line the pockets of Google shareholders.

The talk on whitehat versus blackhat is becoming de-emotionalized and fewer religious overtones over the years. When I started off with SEO services back during the nineties, the controversy was all about ethical versus unethical SEO. Plenty of hard core reactions then to what was, after all, merely a technological, and not a theological or moral issue.

Add to the ever growing domination of Google which marketers are forced to address online also it all becomes clear. You can arguably say that online commerce as a whole has matured, as, it goes without saying, has the SEO industry proper.

As of late, when we speak with clients they happily consider the choices even if you ask them whether or not they desire to opt for a whitehat or even a blackhat approach. Clients will openly inquire about efficacy, the relative risks involved and thus on. So it's a basically unexcited, hands-on discussion, which is an excellent thing as far as we are concerned.

We are experiencing much more openness towards cloaking as an SEM strategy when compared to five years ago. Generally, corporations aren't as impressed or as easily fooled by the various search engines (especially Google's) fear, uncertainty and doubt tactics regarding anything they don't like.

The tortuous argument that blackhat is risky and whitehat is safe is ludicrous to the extreme. There is no promise by Google that whitehat SEO will bestow you superior rankings. Like there is no agreement that if you control good rankings, Google will guarantee that you benefit from ranking consistency subsequent to an update.

Ethical or whitehat behavior only makes sense amongst equals. Consequently, as an online organization, are you actually an equal to Google? No, you're not the odds are stacked firmly against you.

Fantomaster world renowned customized Cloaking & IP Delivery SEO Services.

iAutoblog the premier autoblogger software