Comments on: Matt Cutts Suggests Google Penalties For Fake Stories

By: Waardevolle SEO & Internet Marketing artikels - week 25/05/2008

Waardevolle SEO & Internet Marketing artikels - week 25/05/2008 — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:50:28 +0000

[...] als laatste duikt onze held Matt Cutts weer eens op met de leuke mededeling dat fake of misleidende verhalen op het net het risico lopen om een Google penalty op te lopen. Zag ook ergens (vraag me niet meer waar) dat sites die worden verkocht en veranderen [...]

By: June SEM Links | WebGeek

June SEM Links | WebGeek — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:02:54 +0000

[...] Matt Cutts Suggests Google Penalties For Fake Stories | Nick Wilsdon [...]

By: The SEO Industry Needs a New Term for Linkbait - Part Deux: Lyndobait Anyone? | WebGeek

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:45:23 +0000

[...] not familiar, I suggest you read Search Engine Land’s coverage. Nick Wilsdon also has some excellent coverage of the story along with Google’s [...]

By: Google to Police ‘The Truth’ — SEO Zeitgeist

Google to Police ‘The Truth’ — SEO Zeitgeist — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 05:38:41 +0000

[...] media, and the SEO behind it also mentioned it on their site. The SEO space as a whole began debating the legitimacy of such tactics, and Matt Cutts even commented on the issue: My quick take is that Google’s webmaster guidelines [...]

By: Daniel Benton

Daniel Benton — Wed, 28 May 2008 07:52:11 +0000

rel=”not-true” is the funniest thing I have seen in days.

Maybe someone should let theonion know that satire=evil

By: SEL | Doing A Fake Story For Linkbait? Disclose — Or Face The Wrath Of Google | Searchsavant - The SEOintelligence Blog

Mon, 26 May 2008 04:57:39 +0000

[...] Nick Wilsdon highlights how Matt stepped into the discussion, with his comment over at our Sphinn forums: My quick take is that Google’s webmaster guidelines allow for cases such as this: “Google may respond negatively to other misleading practices not listed here (e.g. tricking users by registering misspellings of well-known websites). It’s not safe to assume that just because a specific deceptive technique isn’t included on this page, Google approves of it.” There’s not much more deceptive or misleading than a fake story without any disclosure that the story is hoax. [...]

By: Waardevolle SEO & Internet Marketing artikels - week 25/05/2008

Waardevolle SEO & Internet Marketing artikels - week 25/05/2008 — Sat, 24 May 2008 12:29:28 +0000

By: Rob Metras

Rob Metras — Fri, 23 May 2008 20:02:30 +0000

Amidst the annoyances about Matt’s comments I think we have lost sight of the underlying problem. Main stream media is so lazy to be publishing the drivel without fact-checking justifies the lack of public confidence in the media, not the link-baitor or satirist, depending on your point of view.

By: Questions for Matt Cutts: What about April Fools fake content | Zeta Interactive Agency

Fri, 23 May 2008 12:59:25 +0000

[...] Wilson authored a blog post on the subject, which got the Sphinn crowd worked up into a frenzy, but I came away with a very simple point of [...]

By: Matt Sawyer

Matt Sawyer — Fri, 23 May 2008 08:40:01 +0000

This isn’t Google’s job – they rank pages according to their relevance to a search query – nothing more nothing less.

Getting into a debate about the factual basis of an article is dangerous territory for them to be getting into.