(7)
On Friday, I broke the news that Google changed their link schemes guidelines on widget links. In short, they made a change that explicitly named what types of links within widgets were bad and that not all links within widgets are bad.
Google also made two smaller modifications to the link schemes document, which seemed very small, so I didn't cover them.
Truth is, even the widget topic was probably not worth covering because it makes no difference to Google's guidelines. Yes, it appears different but it was just a wording change to clarify what Google's stance was. Their practice didn't change - they only penalized sites with "keyword-rich, hidden or low-quality links" not all links within widgets.
How do I know this? Well, if you trust Matt Cutts, Google's head of search spam. He tweeted later in the day:
Thx to @dannysullivan for pointing out that we could clarify our stance on links embedded in widgets: http://t.co/038YpFwyPj
— Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) January 10, 2014The reason the change was made to the guidelines page was to clarify the language after Danny Sullivan pointed out the confusion on the page to Matt and his team.
So again, nothing changed in practice but on paper it did.
Forum discussion at Twitter.
Comments:
Josh
01/13/2014 05:11 pm
Any common sensed mind would take this into account for any future link building. Google often says enough without saying much. Major hints are dropped in this, IMHO.
Durant Imboden
01/13/2014 05:18 pm
I think you may cause a panic with the word "Update" in your headline. :-)
Alexander Hemedinger
01/13/2014 07:33 pm
Danger Danger Will Robinson
menachem rosenbaum
01/14/2014 06:55 am
I'm glad you posted about this I understood that all links from widgets are a problem. So thank you!
Barry Schwartz
01/14/2014 10:55 am
No. I didn't say that.
Francis
01/14/2014 04:22 pm
Call me a cynic but it strikes me as Google somehow looking for a fudge that will allow the big guys to not get penalised for using/having used widget links. Of course the new wording is unclear. A child could see this. Seems to be a similar stance on "quality" directories. You don't pay for a review. And even if you did, you still pay. A paid link is a paid link. A widget link is a widget link. They should NEVER be allowed and you must treat all cases fairly and equally.
menachem rosenbaum
01/15/2014 07:54 am
Correct you did not say that. That is what I understood before you posted about the subject. I thank you for posting about this especially after saying "probably not worth covering"