Google Caught Cloaking and Keyword Stuffing

[grnidone]

Sorry for the one liner, but I'm off to a meeting. I find this very interesting indeed.

http://www.threadwatch.org/node/1774

Not News.

Google Has been using these kind of methods for quite some time.

[I, Brian]

Do you have any actual prior examples of keyword cloaking, rather than IP redirection, though?

Certainly looks like quite a story.

[mtnviewmayhem]

Originally Posted by lots0

Not News.

Google Has been using these kind of methods for quite some time.

Yes. I'd like to see more examples of Google offering different content on their web pages when browsing with the user agent: Googlebot/2.1 (+http://www.googlebot.com/bot.html)

Do you have any?


<title>
traffic estimator, traffic estimates, traffic tool, estimate traffic
Google AdWords Support: Can I get traffic estimates without adding keywords or creating ads?
</title>

So one example is not good enough?
My suggestion is that you take some time and do your own research. The examples are and have been there, if you look.

...when browsing with the user agent: Googlebot/2.1

Now why would google use a user agent sniffer? Serving content based on the user agent is soooo 2001.

[mtnviewmayhem]

Originally Posted by lots0

So one example is not good enough?
My suggestion is that you take some time and do your own research. The examples are and have been there, if you look.

Now why would google use a user agent sniffer? Serving content based on the user agent is soooo 2001.

Look where?

[xan]

Wouldn't all this imply that Google was cheating to get ranked by itself?

[seobook]

Originally Posted by xan

Wouldn't all this imply that Google was cheating to get ranked by itself?

certainly not the proposed democratic web concept they talk about, eh?

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Apparently Google have banned itself for cloaking! Yes, it's not a joke, so they did!! ... sorry, but that is toooo funny

See GoogleGuys reply here:
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/28470.htm

However, it also raises a few questions unaswered

1) Why do Google apparently have a build in cloaking system in their own publication software (see GoogleGuys answer for details that describe this as a general function within the support publishing system)

2) It looks like the system is made to work for all engines - so do Google cloak in general to gain better rankings by keyword-stuffing and title spamming?

3) Has Google completely lost tuch of what goes on inside the Plex?

4) What happens to the employees that apparently cannot even live up to Googles own TOS - or, do the TOS not count for Google?

5) Do Google employees really know this little about SEO that they don't know how to rank a PR10 site properly? (please, hire ANY SEO and they'll show you - ranking a PR10 site is SO DAMN easy it should almost be illegal!)


There are probably more relevant questions to ask - but I am sure there are no good answers ...

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Oh yes, one more relevant question: I hope they get all the money back from the internal "SEOs" that have done this as we all know Google recomend a full unconditional money back guarantee on all SEO work your company pays for ... right?

[PhilC]

Originally Posted by lots0

Serving content based on the user agent is soooo 2001.

You must be new to the game. user-agent cloaking went out years before 2001

[PhilC]

Originally Posted by Mikkel deMib Svendsen

4) What happens to the employees that apparently cannot even live up to Googles own TOS - or, do the TOS not count for Google?

Of course they don't. They don't have to comply with any Terms of Service of it because they are not making use of the service - the *are* the service

You must be new to the game.

Not new, but newer (and better looking) than you...

[PhilC]

ooooo.... I think we should ask the girls about that

Originally Posted by PhilC

Of course they don't. They don't have to comply with any Terms of Service of it because they are not making use of the service - the *are* the service

Right on. On the other hand what Google did wasn't the best move regardless of the reasons. I think they realize that. But it has made for some interesting reading the last few days.

[xan]

what I mean is they do what they like. It is irrelevant for them to rank high, its their engine.