Sometimes the things that Google do just make my head hurt, aka "the unnatural link warnings". I am pretty sure most SEO agencies out there will have come across at least one of these, I know I have, and most new clients come with one these days.
But I'm not too sure how many other SEO's have had the link warnings with "Examples" of the kind of links that are causing you the issues, I have. But what surprised me more than anything was the 6 links that the Mighty Google shared with my client, one was an old ezine article which was 6 years old and the other five were from scaper sites that had used the clients RSS and wrapped Adsense around them.
Well roll forward SIX months and today Barry at SEroundltable noticed this on the Google webmaster help forum:
OMG, the BBC got a link warning! Aat first I just smiled and started to move on then in the back of my mind I thought will this affect them in any way, so I went to the BBC clicked on a recent story and copied some text:
"A 15-year-old boy has denied killing a pensioner who died when she was mugged for her handbag."
I then searched Google :
HMMM I don't know who syndicated who first but it's all duped, so I took another approach:
I decided to look at www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21784141 even I was surprised with the 31,603 links in Ahrefs the story only went live today !!
So here's the issue everyone is just using the BBC's RSS on their websites.
1) If you can get 30,000 backlinks in few hours for free, how many links would you buy?
2) If the BBC have done nothing but syndicate their website like millions of others, why would Google send them the unnatural link warning.
3) But this is the BBC, what if it was just another website that got hit, just like a new client of mine that is now spending 1000's on the clean up of links that they never purchased, they just created great content on their site and let people syndicate VIA RSS.
4) I'm sorry to say it but @bbc have you thought about a rebrand? What's the cost of cleaning this lot up? :
Because of one stupid mistake .. RSS