Article I came across Hyperlinks are dying and Google’s to blame

[Kay]

You may not, Kay, but the way some people jump into panic-mode at every Google rumour makes me think an awful lot of people (who should know better) do.

Yes, and that's the mindset that many have been brainwashed into. I was a bit like that until I discovered EP. I relied on G for my traffic and AS for my money. A lot of dependency on G. Right from the moment I joined up here, I started to discover that there was more to life on the Internet than G. Having gone through the EP boot camp, I see things a lot differently now. I don't rely on traffic from G and I don't sit back and wait for them to pay my bills every month.

It's not always easy to break away from any kind of cult or dependency, but EP has been the catalyst for me to do it.

But I would not blame G at all for the brainwashing in the first place. It's all those people out there still promoting stuff about how to get high rankings in G as though that's the only path to make money online. I wrote an article the other day about Google-proofing your website. Some people are selling stuff to do that. And what are they suggesting? Google-proof your website by playing more games to fool G. My idea of Google-proofing is not to rely on G.

[JJMcClure]

The so-called "emotive" words are just shorthand. Obviously I don't think of G as a sentient being who throws thunderbolts from the sky at me if I fall foul of the algo.

Yes, and that's the mindset that many have been brainwashed into.

It's not always easy to break away from any kind of cult or dependency,

But I would not blame G at all for the brainwashing in the first place.Google-proof your website by playing more games to fool G. .

lol, thanks for the examples. And... you often use phrases like 'not dancing to their tune' or 'another Google whim'. Maybe you spend too long on EP

If a politician were doing what you do when you talk about Google, it would be considered spin.

Bottom line, hyperlinks are not dying and never will, it's just another one of those 'SEO is dead' type stories and everything Google are doing (not forgetting that they helped make the problem worse in the first place although I was already spamming Alta Vista before Google even existed) is going to improve the overall quality of their index, which most people seem to think IS the entire WWW anyway.

[BentAnat]

Quite frankly, that article screams sensationalism to me. I raises some interesting points, but claiming that Google is "killing the hyperlink" is clearly stretching everything.
Google's "best practice" advice has always been "make content for people, not machines". Obviously, Google's algorithms (so as not to sound like Google is a sentient being) would prefer organic links to mass-links. This kinda makes sense to me.

That said, Negative SEO seems to be a relative (and quite possibly a hysterical) term as well, when we look at an article recently published by SEOMoz: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/googles-u...links-warnings
I have not personally gotten any warnings, though.

[MobiPete]

Unfortunately... or fortunately depending on your mindset. Google does have the lions share of SE traffic. Having said that, most all refer to Google in a personal way because it makes a lot of the rules and those rules can have an effect on how we come in the SERPS. But the important thing to remember is that although Google is a very large entity on the web, it's a business and it's not a perfect business. Their business can affect our business and so a lot of people do try to build with the intent of getting better results on Google. I think the best way to look at it is to try to understand that Google's position is that they want to be the best SE in the world. They work on the basic premise that if someone searches for specific search term that they should be able to find what they are looking for and not be tricked into ending up somewhere else.

Considering this, I think a person should build a site that delivers what the searcher is looking for. Keep it natural, build it slow enough that it seems natural and keep your hyperlinks relevant without overusing them.

Remember that people come to your website to find information. Give them the info they want and gently guide them to the solution they are looking for while giving them an opportunity to be exposed to your desired outcome.

[JJMcClure]

They work on the basic premise that if someone searches for specific search term that they should be able to find what they are looking for and not be tricked into ending up somewhere else.

Exactly, and that wherever they land it should be useful. So given that they're a business and taking into account the premise above, if they choose to rank their own services over others because they think that's what's best for their users and their business, who should say different?

If you become phenomenally successful in your particular context until people like Yell start crying and saying 'boohoo it's not fair', you should be punished for that? This isn't like Microsoft having a monopoly on PC software because they had to monopolise the PC manufacturing market to make that happen, Google is just a search engine and there's plenty of competition.

[Slowdive]

Exactly, and that wherever they land it should be useful.

However it often is not useful, if we are honest? Its not based on usefulness at all its based on how many signals, % of keywords, age of domain and perhaps links generated.
A lot of profitable google searches yield dodgy, irrelevant or outdated results. Some of my niches I am topping better sites, some others I am being topped by clearly unscrupulous tactics. No amount of updates, changes or new ways of seeking out signals has changed this. So ultimately google has at least partially failed. However they do not actually care, they want to slam anyone gaming them, elevate those paying them and let the rest sink or swim. I am alright with this approach, I would do the same if it was my business and no doubt. However I do struggle to look at Google and go, well done! Visionary! a company really adding value to my internet.

As a counter they do offer some really useful services, they have crept into so many aspects of our lives and been embraced by a world wide majority so good on them. They have succeeded and no wonder people, not just on these forums talk about google as a personable and evocative entity they have become part of our daily lives.

However talk of google aside, the common hyperlink is an endangered species as these days I can go and fetch your article paste it on my blog, write 150 words, tag it no follow and pretend i generated content. As -apparently- nofollow kills all value in a link the small guy is in severe and definite danger. If your not SEOMOZ or matts blog, sites that may in fact be beneficial to link out to what motivation is there to link out anymore? What reason or why would you use a follow link vs no follow on a blog these days?
So what we are left with is new ways to game the SE's and we will all read about them in a few months once some people have made money from them and a high level of paranoia.

Google as a company whether we view them as evil overlord, omnipotent provider of quality content or a bunch of confused people in a board room, will always have one problem. How to separate content from an SEO attempt, the sites or web-masters who can guess how to send them the right signals under this new system will profit, some will sink and the home based blog business will as always flounder. So the moral of the story remains the same if you have more than 30% of traffic through one channel, its time to panic and make some really weighty changes. Its also time to stop "dancing to G's tune" and go hey I do follow, I do link out liberally, I do get a lot of mentions, I will run my site. Which is more or less what most of us on EP do unless we are planning a transient site.

However to deny that Google has made getting a back link more complicated and has in fact devalued links in general is just wearing blinders. Those in the know adapt and after some trial and error laugh it off but in reality the majority of sites fall into two categories. The amateur and the idiot, one is becoming scared to link and one is still trying to link to everything. Both of those scenarios we can thank Google for, but hey could be worse if Bing ruled the world EMDs would be worth millions