We have four websites in the legal field. One is a larger umberella site for the law firm and its two main practice areas which are criminal defense and injury law. The second is taylored specifically to DUI defense.. The other two sites are blogs with articles on DUIs and the other on personal injuries in our state. Our concern is that we don't want to be prcived as spamming the SEs. There is no duplicate content and no interlinking between any of the sites. What issues should we look out for to steer clear of being banned. Thanks for any input. Please excuse me if I placed this post inappropriately.

As long as you don't have duplicate content on the sites then there really isn't an issue--and there never will be.

The only "penalty" you could incur is a penalty if you inter-link those websites. If you must inter-link them, you might consider using the rel=nofollow attribute on your links.

even if search engines did not exist business would still run multiple brands and marketing fronts. so long as it seems legit then you are probably fine.

> If you must inter-link them, you might consider using the rel=nofollow attribute on your links.

I do not like using the nofollow link idea as using it could seem as though you think there is something wrong with linking between them.

if you were afraid of being punished for cross linking maybe you could serve the ads via ad servers, use redirects which made it look as though you were tracking the traffic, or something.

Not much time, but as per request of blog reader (http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/002039.html), I am reposting my comments here. I did plan on writing something specifically for the forum but it has been a crazy day.

What hurts me more is the next response, "The only "penalty" you could incur is a penalty if you inter-link those websites. If you must inter-link them, you might consider using the rel=nofollow attribute on your links." Is that true? Well, it is possible. But interlinking four Web sites can rarely get anyone penalized. Plus if they are all related and linked to in a manner that shows it is done for business reasons (i.e. Jupiter, Developer Shed, etc.) then there is nothing wrong with it. Four web sites, I would go on record as saying, no problem. But as Tim Mayer said, it is all about "intent" and since search engine algorithms are so smart to figure out "intent" when it comes to spamming, and since Google doesn't hand remove sites, then you should have no problem interlinking four web sites even with improper "intent". (Sense my sarcasm there)

Well two comments really - firstly I promised to post something on behalf of Wit Don't be afraid to interlink four on-topic sites of your own, especially if they're of decent quality. It is nigh-impossible to get banned for interlinking on a small scale, and it's highly unlikely to even get the littlest of penalties.

Just don't make the (subtle) interlinking coincide with some REAL questionable stuff...

Remember that reports for being banned after cross-linking often don't mention that the links were to/from badly cloaked or auto-gen sites, ringing dozen of alarm bells even without the cross-links. Start to worry as soon as you have 30 sites on the subject ;)

and secondly although I rarely subscribe to the sentiment "do what you'd do if the search engines didn't exist" I think this is one time when it does apply.

If the only reason you haven't linked your sites is because you're scared of penalties then don't worry - I have a client with five sites and each of their navs link to the others; they did that years before we'd thought about SEO and they still do and as far a I can see they've not been penalised for it (they don't all rank top for all of their keywords but that's not a penalty that's just needing more SEO) :)

We have four websites in the legal field. One is a larger umberella site for the law firm and its two main practice areas which are criminal defense and injury law. The second is taylored specifically to DUI defense.. The other two sites are blogs with articles on DUIs and the other on personal injuries in our state.If you link appropriately, you'll have no problem; for example, all should probably link to the umbrella site, and the two DUI sites would doubtless interlink, but only install links in other directions as would make sense. I doubt there's a reason for each site to link to every other; but probably a case for most linking to most.

The question remains, why have so many sites, multiplying your seo effort, risking duplicate content concerns and potentially confusing your visitors?

The question remains, why have so many sites, multiplying your seo effort, risking duplicate content concerns and potentially confusing your visitors?
one could guess
- different brands
- different services
- different locations / target markets
- appealing to different stages of the buying cycle or different offerings. a person buying a $49 beat your DUI ebook might not be the same exact client that would have thousands to shell out for some of the court costs.

seobook has it right. There is branding involved from practice area to practice area. As for the blogs they preform well in keywords with very little seo effort on our part besides the fresh articles.Thanks for the replies and help.

Flash, I'm not an SEO and I don't think most of the responders in this thread are actually SEOs. Like any replys in a forum you have to take what is said with a grain of salt. We are people who try to keep up with what is going on with the SEs for the most part.

Personally I don't think you would run into any problems in linking those sites together based on your initial post. If we saw the sites we might be able to give you a more informed opinion. Basically without seeing the sites we are completely guessing IMHO.

I guess I have to ask this. Why 4 sites? I would find it much easier to manage one site.

since Google doesn't hand remove sites,

Rusty I have to ask you about the above statement. Can you give me a link to an official statement about this. I do realize Google tries to deal with most spam issues with their Algo. Are you sure they never hand remove sites?

I wont deny that it would be easier to have one site. Due to the branding in each niche this is not a option. Again the blogs recieve very little seo and preform well with fresh posts. Again its not "easy" but the attorneys like to write as much as they like to talk,so its convenient.

Rusty I have to ask you about the above statement. Can you give me a link to an official statement about this. I do realize Google tries to deal with most spam issues with their Algo. Are you sure they never hand remove sites?(Sense my sarcasm there)

Flash213, I assume that your blogs must already be linking to your other sites in some way anyway? Otherwise they are pretty pointless (unless they really love to blog).

they really love to blog
great news. good on them. everyone should have at least 5 to 6 of them. I do :D

flash212: I would be very careful about interlinking sites. The idea that you can't or won't get a penalty for interlinking 4 or 5 sites is bogus in my opinion. First I would move each site to a different hosting company if you have not already done that. Makes it less chance of being picked up by a filter. I would even hide the whois on them.

One of the most important thinks to do if you are going to interlink a group of sites for click though traffic is don't use keyword rich anchor text but domained anchor texts.

i.e. <a href=http://www*domainame*com>DomainName.com</a>.

This makes a clear statement that you are not interlinking to pick up ranking weight from the external inbound links from your other sites. Inbound links with keywords in the anchor text carries a lot of ranking weight these days, especially with Goggle.

I have seen large networks of site that are interlinked on every page and are not banned and have seen smaller networks of sites that interlinked and got banned. I just looked at a group of sites today where there was over 20 sites and they were all interlinked from all page and been that way for years and no ban. Last week I look at a programmers set of sites where he had 5 beautiful sites all banned over linkfarming.

I have a number of related sites and I am scared to interlink them even with domained anchor texts as I realize when you get banned by Google you basically have to start over.

Hopes this helps a bit.

Flash213, I assume that your blogs must already be linking to your other sites in some way anyway? Otherwise they are pretty pointless (unless they really love to blog).


The blogs were linked to the corresponding sites until recently. Since then we have created consultation submit forms for the blogs and stoped linking. Even without the forms I would hardley consider them "pointless". We have been told by clients in the past they found the sites to be a good resource of information.

*What issues should we look out for to steer clear of being banned.*

A thread title like that and Flash213 gets encouraged to crosslink his domains?

Somewhat bizarre...

The blogs were linked to the corresponding sites until recently. Since then we have created consultation submit forms for the blogs and stoped linking. Even without the forms I would hardley consider them "pointless". We have been told by clients in the past they found the sites to be a good resource of information.
mmm. I meant that from an SEO point of view a blog is unhjelpful unless it it links to the main site(s), advertises the main site(s) or drums up business for the main site(s). I'm sure they're very interesting but I'm assuming they were started to help the business.

Somewhat bizarre...
Not at all. I've seen lots of cross linked domains which aren't penalised. I'm sure there are lots which are too, but reasonable cross linking in itself doesn't penalise domains. Scroll down to the bottom of this page - look at the 'Jupiter Web Networks' section. I don't see much of a penalty being applied here.

I agree with SEOBOOK and others.

Cross linking sites of a related company should not be a sin. Nor do the engines look at it as such if you have other good points.

If you are trying to link all the sites togother - I personally wouldn't cross link all 12 (or whatever) together. Link like ones to like ones, and you can link each site to your main corporate identity or whatever.

Think AOL linking to Time Warner and Time Warner having a listing of all of its sites.

I should have been more clear. The main intrest in linking would be from blog to corresponding web site. There is no need to connect all of the current sites together. And to seobooks delight we are starting another blog.

*..look at the 'Jupiter Web Networks' section*

Pointing "new arrivals" to the likes of Jupiter Media or WebShed as good examples to be copied is at the least disingenuous, if not actually misleading, IMO.

well actually I was pointing you to it.

*..look at the 'Jupiter Web Networks' section*

Pointing "new arrivals" to the likes of Jupiter Media or WebShed as good examples to be copied is at the least disingenuous, if not actually misleading, IMO.
of course the average new webmaster probably does not be able to expect to follow the exact patterns of the largest web networks. I think she was just trying to show you that it is a common practice.

AFAIK both those networks pre-date G, so ipso facto their site-wide crosslinking cannot be for the purposes of increasing rankings or PR.

Moderate crosslinking for branding purposes should pose no problems, unless and until the overall site linkage pattern points towards a "links scheme designed..."

Unfortunately, subtlety and moderation are rarely evident when the actual purpose IS to increase rankings/PR.

Unfortunately, subtlety and moderation are rarely evident when the actual purpose IS to increase rankings/PR.
well, the search engines have yet to draw the lines in some sectors (http://www.seobook.com/archives/000912.shtml).

AFAIK both those networks pre-date G, so ipso facto their site-wide crosslinking cannot be for the purposes of increasing rankings or PR.

which is a perfect explanation of why site wide crosslinking should not be treated with suspicion by everyone and his aunt.

Either Google applies a special case to site wide crosslinks developed before it came into being - in which case it's demonstrating an understanding that such links can be for other purposes than scamming Goog and therefore we can reasonably assume that some cross linking is considered acceptable or it treats them no differently, in which case it's a relevant example of cross linking in itself not causing a penalty.

I'm sure cross linking can be a negative factor but genuine relevant links between a couple of sites aren't going to get you thrown out of the index for that alone. If you combine them with a few spammy methods as well then of course you might tip a balance somewhere.

*well, the search engines have yet to draw the lines in some sectors*

Wouldn't argue there's any hard and fast rule Seobook, which prompted my comment on not modelling on Jupiter.

I wonder whether or not only counting *1* backlink from any single domain to another would improve the SERPs?

I realize that in the case of academic environments, this would destroy the whole original concept of PR, but in the non-academic world, it might not be such a bad idea. Just count the one link with the highest link weight.

There are legitimate reasons why a site may link out to another more than once, but I'd really like to see a "before and after" of this approach. I suspect that the SERPs as a whole would be improved.

Ian

I wont deny that it would be easier to have one site.It may be easier but imho wouldn't be user friendly though, not at all. Especially with two of those sectors at cross-purposes at times.

One is a larger umberella site for the law firm and its two main practice areas which are criminal defense and injury law. The second is taylored specifically to DUI defense.. The other two sites are blogs with articles on DUIs and the other on personal injuries in our state. And the person who just got out of the hospital from injuries in a car accident caused by a drunk driver, or whose 3 year old baby has permanent brain damage from the parked truck being hit by a drunk driver (happened to someone I knew) definitely does NOT want to see your site about DUI defense - or the blog.

The DUI site and blog need to be linked to each other, they go hand in hand. But imho they need to be kept separate from the PI, it's unrelated and can't be logically explained except by reason of site ownership and/or rankings benefit.

IMHO if you look at it strictly from the user point of view - and could hypothetically explain to a search engine why you've linked the way you have you'd probably be fine.

You are absolutley correct Marcia. Your logic is exactly what lead us to having multiple sites. Seperate marketing efforts for different pratice areas is common in our industry. Thanks again to everyone posting.

We have four websites in the legal field. One is a larger umberella site for the law firm and its two main practice areas which are criminal defense and injury law. The second is taylored specifically to DUI defense.. The other two sites are blogs with articles on DUIs and the other on personal injuries in our state. Our concern is that we don't want to be prcived as spamming the SEs. There is no duplicate content and no interlinking between any of the sites. What issues should we look out for to steer clear of being banned. Thanks for any input. Please excuse me if I placed this post inappropriately.


Hi!There is nothing to worry about,as you said that,there is no duplicate content.So,you should not face any problem as such.And spamming,is when the colour of the background of your site,as well as color of the content is the same,making it invisible to the human eye.Take care of that,and don't worry,nothing will go wrong.All The Best.
Arsi