Blog

Autospam Fail. Still. In 2010. Jesus Wept.

by

The cackhandedness of autospam hasn’t got any better has it? Here’s something I found on Vanity Fair (and no – you may not ask why I was reading it!) It’s fantastically stupid on many levels – and this screencap is only about half of the actual ‘comment’.

  • First link first: We get asked a lot about this but it’s something we’ve extensively tested. If you have two links on the same page using different anchor text  to point to the same target URL, then Google only passes keyword relevancy for the first one. Something to think about if you’re writing a blog post for someone and are thinking of putting two different anchor text links in it. In this piece of inane shit, there are around 43,433 links on different anchor text that are entirely wasted.
  • It’s Vanity Bloody Fair! Trying to spam a major media brand like this is like playing chicken with Walter Sobchak. The people behind Vanity Fair are Condé Nast – one of the most venerable publishing brands in the world with some incredibly high profile publications in their portfolio. This is the kind of company being wooed by high level advertisers and potentially schmoozing with the like of, say, Google on many fronts. You want to run the risk of pissing those guys off? Best of luck on the dole queue.
  • It’s not even relevant: The spam in this case is for various items of fashionable apparel. And it’s on Vanity Fair – a huge name in fashion media. Great! Only it’s been dumped on a page with no relevance to fashion. They could have chosen any one of a million posts on this site and had a bit of content relevancy but instead people have to figure out what connection venerable film producer Jerry Weintraub has to particular brands of handbag.
  • The comments are brought in with Ajax. This means they’re not even indexed by Google. Try viewing the page without Javascript turned on to see it in action. Ergo, no link juice. A few seconds of testing could avoid this.
  • It’s so obvious it makes you shit yourself.  Even if it worked as an SEO tool – which it doesn’t – there is still a commercial possibility in a comment link. Done correctly on a relevant post on a high traffic site could send you potential customers or generate further natural links. But seriously… who’s going to click one of these links? Only a moron. And morons are probably not your target market. And of course, it’s sheer obviousness is the kind of thing that makes a peeved site owner hotfoot it over to Google to report you for buying links – which even if it doesn’t work is just generally bad Karma.

If someone is doing this kind of thing on your behalf… stop them. Like yesterday.

14 Comments

  • SEO Italy 1140 days ago

    http://seoitaly.it

    Uhm, ok, everything correct: but what about “Condé Nast – one of the most venerable publishing brands in the world with some incredibly high profile publications in their portfolio” letting spam get into (and stick to, the comment is still there) their pages??

    Reply
  • Jonny Scott 1140 days ago

    http://www.caliberi.com

    I really really am struggling with this first link counts stuff… I just don’t buy it! Been through the SeoMoz stuff….
    Sharing is caring…?

    Reply
  • paul carpenter 1140 days ago

    http://www.itsafamilything.co.uk

    @SEO Italy – yeah I know… the mind boggles. Guess the comments are retroactively moderated, which is commendable but you’d think a spam filter would catch it first. Hell, WordPress wouldn’t let that through.

    @Jonny Scott – we’ve done numerous tests and it definitely works. Try it for yourself.

    1. Set up two links with completely unique anchor text on a single page – say “garymarshmallowhead” first and “jonnyhatesjizz” second.
    2. Point them both at a single URL on another domain
    3. When Google index the original page search for both phrases in your test
    4. For ‘garymarshmallowhead’ you’ll find that the target page and the page with the link on it will show in the results
    5. For ‘jonnyhatesjizz’ only the linking page will show up in the results.

    The first link passes keyword relevancy, the second one doesn’t. QED! :)

    Reply
  • Sam Daams 1140 days ago

    http://twitter.com/samdaams

    Lol, this is the kind of spam I don’t mind getting as it’s so easy to detect. The really smart ones are the beast.

    One thing, as I’ve had this discussion with a few folks now, with Google threatening to crawl jscript, point 4 would be moot? Or is it still mostly a case of ‘do it on some sites, not on others’?

    Reply
  • Carla Marshall 1140 days ago

    http://www.sorbetdigital.com

    Is a unicorn avatar obligatory these days?

    Reply
  • Carla Marshall 1140 days ago

    http://www.sorbetdigital.com

    Yes, it would appear so…..

    Reply
  • SEO Italy 1140 days ago

    http://seoitaly.it

    I like mine!

    Reply
  • Andy 1140 days ago

    http://www.andrewblackburn.co.uk

    Talking of spam, what’s with the 3 pop up windows as soon as you load the VF site? *eugh*

    Reply
  • Tahire Khan 1140 days ago

    http://www.blogonlinemarketing.com

    Thanks for the post Paul, interesting about only the first link being passed for relevancy, haven’t tested that myself so it certainly is food for thought.

    thanks

    Reply
  • Tim Hatton 1140 days ago

    http://www.hattonmarketing.co.uk

    As well as spamming Conde Nast, they’ve pinched all the padding content from a Daily Mail story about Coco Chanel…

    Reply
  • David Bain 1140 days ago

    http://www.26weekplan.com

    It all seems to come down to the lack of work that most spammers put into promoting their websites. By nature spammer try to do as little work as possible, but this makes them even more obvious to the outside world. Unfortunately there will always be somebody trying these age old tricks. More fool them.

    Reply
  • imnotadoctor 1140 days ago

    http://www.imnotadoctor.com

    @Jonny Scott – I support Paul on the whole first link thing.

    I have tested this 2 years ago and found the same findings.

    Like Paul said test it yourself,

    Reply
  • Geoff Jackson 1135 days ago

    http://www.clubnetsearchmarketing.co.uk

    I can’t believe there are thousands of idiots still applying blog comment spamming to their SEO techniques still! And what’s worse, many of their clients are clueless and unaware at how rapidly they are approaching either a penalisation by Google or complete brand destroyment! (Yeah, I know that’s not a word, but it seemed fitting).

    Reply
  • David Z 917 days ago

    http://agnarchy.com

    I get dozens of these every day on the two hobby sites I run – primarily Ugg boots (but otherwise the same as the Timberland example), and various prescription medications and racy stuff. Thanks to akismet I don’t worry about them and spend minimal time reviewing a handful of false positives, etc.

    I’ve always wondered where it comes from, and I’ve often caught myself feeling sorry for whoever is paying someone to do this (probably without knowledge of what they’re actually doing!). Thanks for a good read!

    Reply

Write your comment

Optional

The Bronco Family
Work With Us