[ad_1]
Advertisement campaigns can be abrasive. We’ve all witnessed it. Sometimes, rather than building up their own offerings, marketers will choose an approach that drags the rivals down. Of course, there have always been some concerns with libel and slander and other bothersome legal issues, but they’ve never been enough to deter an immoral firm from attempting them. And today, thanks to the Internet, there are a plethora of new methods to get even nastier.
Is it true, however, that just because a new path has been opened to us, we must take it? Does this imply that we must automatically test the bounds of the law, algorithms, and ethical practises? In a nutshell, no.
Traditional negative ad campaigns have existed for as long as numerous parties have been marketing multiple things. It’s a logical result of having two products that are so identical that you can’t really persuade anyone that yours is better, so you try to persuade everyone that theirs is worse.
In politics, we see this all the time… and we even accept it. However, it is still done often in other industries. They are, however, cautious to apply a certain amount of tact, lest it backfire or result in legal ramifications.
And now, thanks to the Internet, new methods of negative advertising campaigns are possible. And some SEOs with a skewed sense of ethics are doing everything they can to take advantage of them.
Learning the search engine procedures or guidelines in order to determine what it will take to bring a website to the top of the search engine rankings has been the focus of SEO, or search engine optimization. To properly (and ethically) position a website, it takes diligent monitoring and rigorous respect to the standards.
Of course, as some businesses grasp the laws and procedures for conducting SEO responsibly, they begin to notice some gimmicks. And it’s through the techniques that they find loopholes. And by exploiting these flaws, they can intentionally influence the outcomes. These techniques are collectively known as black-hat SEO, and search engines will do everything possible to detect them, including punishing or outright banning a site.
Unfortunately, it is precisely as a result of these tactics that a new type of unethical SEO, known as Negative SEO, has emerged.
Negative SEO, like traditional negative advertising, focuses on knocking others down rather than raising yourself up. Negative SEO can take a variety of forms, all with the goal of causing substantial harm to someone else.
Google Bowling, bogus copyright complaints, click fraud, and phoney duplicate content are just a few of the strategies used. Many of these behaviours are malicious in nature, while others are the result of changing search engine policies (like in the case of Google Bowling). These tactics entail black-hat SEO, but not for your own site, but for the site of your competitors. In theory, this would result in them receiving penalties and you gaining higher rankings.
Is this something that actually works? Some people say yes, while others say no. “Almost nothing a competition can do to undermine your rating or get your site deleted from our index,” Google says.
Of course, that “nearly” has a shady ring to it, and unethical SEOs have seized on it as proof that it can be done (although it most likely refers to malicious hacker attacks and identity theft than it does search engine results manipulation).
So, how are traditional negative ad campaigns and negative SEO different?
Two, traditional campaigns try to persuade people to change their minds. Negative SEO aims to eliminate a competitor from the competition. If there isn’t a website to visit, you can’t choose to ignore unpleasant ads and go to their website.
These new and unethical approaches will continue to emerge as the Internet evolves. But the choice is always the same: do you want to improve yourself or tear down others?
[ad_2]
