Max Minzer originally shared:
This G+ post of mine might not be worth it and I might be wasting my time but, as much as I want to ignore this, I can`t resist to respond. Want to share my thoughts and journey...
I have great respect for +Carson Ward (rarely see him in person but feel like we`d be great friends if we hung out more). I totally agree with main concept/mindset of making something people want (that`s something Matt emphasized in his interview with +Eric Enge recently) but disagree with the whole approach and effectiveness of using better words and focusing on "real" goals. We can totally build better websites, better content, and better messaging; built something people want, they will want to share what we have made and said and link building (or link earning, or link acquisition or whatever you want to call it - it makes absolutely no difference) is not on the way of any of that.
Carson sort of mentioned (on Twitter, I think) that his argument is not just about changing "link buliding" to "link earning" (play of words; though I`m getting this impression) so I`ll ignore that part. I think ditching "link building" phrase because it`s "abused" makes absolutely no sense. It`s just like the argument of ditching "SEO" term. Shall we chat about "inbound" (http://goo.gl/Z2MTO)? Let`s not talk about this "we need to stop calling ourselves that because we abused it ourselves" nonsense. Enough about this...
I`m not a link builder.
Here`s where I`m coming from: I started as a link builder when I started online. I then (some years ago) started to sort of avoid mentioning link building as I learned more (I started to have mindset Carson`s talking about in his post) and preaching that great content doesn`t need ANY link building. I then saw more of online & real world: more stories, more businesses, ... I also started #maximpact and met a ton of great people, including many professional link builders. I had topics on link building on the show and heard/learned from a ton of smart people, both specializing in link building and marketers who don`t do and specialize on link building. As someone who knows about the topic, I learned that I was on the other point of extreme at the time. I slowly started to change my mind and my perception about link building/earning/acquisition (again, makes absolutely no difference how you call it). I`ve read and experienced many things over 9 or so months after that...
I`m still not a link builder (i.e. I`m not biased about defending it)
Just like with any other marketing effort (content, CRO, ...) , there`s a professional approach (not a bandwagon) to link building and not many people know how to do it right. I must say - only a few people I know know their stuff. I have great respect for them as professionals. They have the right mindset about it too. Same, for example, applies to content marketing (some strongly argue to call it "strategy, " which, again, makes no difference but the play of words) - there are very few people who know what they are doing. Others are lying on their website and social media descriptions by pretending they are experts in the field.
Eric`s interview with Matt (http://www.stonetemple.com/link-building-is-not-illegal-or-bad/) was a culmination point for me. Google, contrary to how Carson interpreted it, confirmed my belief and mindset about link building. Google is not at all against link building.
Now to the points:
1) Link building isn`t a process or goal
Direct link building is a process that only a spammer or link buyer can do. That`s as far from truth as it can get.
What is link building then? All I read in this part is "we heard from so and so..." So what?
Talking about link building (measurement) is not on the way of focusing on profit (goal of measurement). I`m talking about professional consultants who understand who to present what they do to the client. Good doctor has to talk about amputating infected leg when "focusing" on saving patient`s life (opposite direction example but I hope you get the idea).
It takes a series of goals to get to ultimate goal. It takes multiple micro-yes to get to ultimate YES. Even if link building is not a process or a goal but just a benchmark (and I agree that it`s a benchmark) - does it mean we should stop talking about it and "remove" it?
2) Google wants to kill "link building" as a process
Like I mentioned multiple times above, recent interview with Matt reinforces importance of proper link building with the right mindset.
Also, I`m honestly confused - is it "process" or is it not (point #1 above). Here it sounds like IT IS a process that Google wants to kill...
This just reinforces my belief that this is all about playing with words...
3) Modern Google is not a link-counting machine
What were links meant to measure in the first place?
Word of mouth online. That`s what I learned in my search history lesson. Links are and will continue to be important. Algo will simply become more sophisticated at analyzing them. That`s what I heard from Google in the past year/recent months. Links will have their place. Social will have its place. Authority signals (if Google will figure it all out in the future) will have their place. The more signals, the better. There`s no reason to remove something that works very well now and will work even better with other new signals.
4) Qualifying "good links" doesn`t stick
Rankings and links are benchmarks. Absolutely true.
Define "real goal" please. Profit? Talked about it in #1 above. Link building is a benchmark but also a micro-goal and practice in some way. Not the only one. There are many other decisions and practices that lead to profit (real goal).
There are good and bad practices. You need to qualify them. There are good and bad practices in medicine and science fields to achieve the goal (sorry, coming back to this scary example - chop leg with axe or use scalpel and appropriate tools). There are good and bad ways to get links in link building. The issue is with practitioners though, not practices. But qualifying does help to filter practitioners.
5) Link obsession can hurt relationships
For bad link builders and with state of obsession - yes. What does it have to do with "link building?" Let`s talk about proper ways of doing A, not rejecting A because someone is overly obsessed and abusing A.
6) Focusing on links leads to missed opportunities
Again, has nothing to do with removing link building...
Focusing on social media leads to missed opportunities...
Focusing on content marketing leads to missed opportunities...
Focusing on traffic leads to missed opportunities...
Has nothing to do with the effort itself.
7) Marketers should differentiate their services from spammers
No. Marketers should provide outstanding service so they have nothing to prove to anyone. Period.
Look at other industries. They have the same problems in some way or the other. The difference is - they don`t talk about differentiating their services but rather focus on providing outstanding service. They also have strictly defined regulations and guidelines enforced by societies & special groups. We, on opposite, try to make definitions more confusing, remove borders and have people who can effect change run and redefine things their way.
So, what should we do instead?
Certainly not the change of words or usage or better words
That never did and never will change anything.
This solution shocks me...
That`s all I have to say, about that
There`s no better solution than to do outstanding job.
It`s true offline. Why should it not be true online?
Yes, Carson talks about do better marketing but I don`t understand why there`s this _So, what should we do instead?_ -> Use better words stuff???
Do the hard work and stop talking about trying to differentiate yourself from bad apples. That`s the problem with this article and that community in comments - trying to differentiate by changing labels is the main focus there. All that will happen is people will move to be "inbound marketers, " abuse that and will seek another name. People will ditch "link building, " call it "link earning" for now, abuse it and will then call it something else to "differentiate." This labeling will never stop, will not make the industry better and will change NOTHING.
In any case, I`ll be glad that this bandwagoning will ditch "link building." It`ll be easier to see true professionals (my observation and experience for the past year or so).
Great ideas in this post. Just wish this was a post about link building being included into the whole conversation about effectively creating things people want and spreading word about these great "things."
There`s no reason to remove "link building" from our vocabulary.
+Carson Ward, this is not targeted directly at you. Just the things we disagree on. I`m looking forward to chatting with you soon :)
