The truth is that search engine optimisation has always been about coping with continuity and change. However, not all consultants have seen it that way. They have developed an attitude towards Google which is far from healthy. Even four and a half years ago, there were some consultants who were wasting their precious time by complaining about the way in which Google attempts to prevent the manipulation of the search results. In 2012, crackdowns on dodgy practices have provoked many similar squeals of protest.
This isn’t quite a ‘told you so’
The type of SEO which never gets a site into trouble is actually quite clear. The creation of high grade unique content which is relevant has never hurt a site. This is after all what users are looking for when they visit a site. Google has been using its ethical framework to encourage sites to feature high quality content for a long time. The Panda and Penguin updates are best seen as efforts to promote progress in this direction. Google has been getting better at catching out sites which have been using dubious linking strategies.
Site owners and consultants who have been tempted by shortcuts to success are not evil. They have only tried to get ahead in a very competitive search world. However, if they have knowingly used unethical tactics they cannot justifiably be annoyed with Google. The excuse that others have been using manipulative practices does not wash. Those who have not stuck to the right principles always knew they were flirting with danger in their pursuit of faster results.
Imagine a world of scraped content
Everyone must agree that a search world in which content scraping was completely dominant would not be a pleasant one for users. Their levels of boredom would mount. Frustration at finding the same analysis repeated would make users less likely to make purchases. It is arguably a bit silly to object if Google shows its hostility towards scraped content.
Unnatural links: why would Google value them?
If a site earns a link from a relevant and high quality site, then this is obviously a good thing. If a link has been paid for or gained in an unethical manner then it seems unreasonable to expect that Google would regard it with approval. Sites which have been at the heart of blog networks cannot expect to be viewed favourably. Google wants to encourage sites to be informative and authoritative in their sector. This aim is fair enough.
Why do some consultants protest so much?
If someone works very hard at something and it brings them few rewards then it is understandable if they feel a little bitter. The fact that unethical consultants have not been operating in a sensible way does not mean that they are not disappointed when their schemes come to nothing. Site owners should avoid using consultants who have the wrong attitude towards the search engines. Those consultants who write many articles complaining about the rules of the game are not often going to be winners.
