Google’s latest offsite (link building) algorithm update, dubbed ‘Penguin 2.0,’ was released Thursday, 5/23/2013. If you have noticed any wild swings in traffic, and or your search engine rankings on Google, you may have been impacted.
This post is more to start a conversation than to be a definitive source of information about Penguin 2.0.
Most large, well-known brand sites are doing just fine, as usual. Some not-so great, spammy sites continue to rank well, unfortunately. These sites have a few things in common including:
This is further evidence that Google continues to favor sites that foster active conversations about their subject matter. By hosting a forum, the site positions itself as an authority on their topics. Having an active community of users producing discussion and commentary about their content also makes that content seem more valuable, as it provides evidence that the content is being read and that people find it useful or interesting enough to spend time commenting on it.
Exact match anchor text means that a text link from one site to another uses a keyword phrase that the site is trying to rank for, as opposed to the company name or the words ‘click here.’ In the past, sites which have relied too heavily on inbound links using exact match anchor text have been targeted for penalties, under the assumption that such links are likely to be artificial rather than natural. With Penguin 2.0, however, Sites that have link profiles composed of over 37% exact match anchor text links are ranking well.
Site wide links are links which appear on every single page of a site. The most significant example is probably blogs, which often feature a sidebar of links on every single page. For a large blog, adding a link to the sidebar can result in that link appearing on thousands of pages. The concern is that a site suddenly gaining so many links from a single domain could look unnatural. However, there is evidence that at least some types of site wide link are acceptable. For instance, the previously mentioned forum links in the footer do not appear to stop sites from ranking well.
For instance, if a site A is a news site that links to two sources of information to illustrate a point, site B and C, it will rank better than if it just links to site B as a source. Varying the link text slightly by using a plural version of a word to differentiate is better. This is evidence that Google places more trust in sites which use multiple citations to back up the validity of their information.
For example, websites with links from very well-known sites like NYTimes.com or TechCrunch.com continue to rank well. Links from wikipedia seem to act as a safety measure to limit the severity of a Penguin 2.0 penalty. Google’s emphasis on quality over quantity means that it values a small number of links from high-quality sites far more than a large number of links from low-quality sites, and it seems that having high-quality links can even serve to counterbalance other flaws which might earn a penalty.
For example Hubpages seems to have made a big gain back where as Tumblr got destroyed (or that could just be because Yahoo bought them).
Stay Tuned for Comparisons of Websites that were Negatively Impacted by Penguin vs Websites that were Positively Impacted
We will have more data to share as time goes by and the sample size of our data grows. Use our FREE Google Penalty Checker if you think you’ve been hit with a penalty.
Discuss your questions, comments and findings below.
President & Founder, Tru Family Dental
Marketing, Dependable Cleaners
President, Frame Destination
President & Founder, Family Travel Association