The SEO industry has a few renowned figures who speak for it in a way. They’re mostly North American industry heavy weights who are often in the business since the nineties of the last century. Some of the loudest voices started later, like Rand Fishkin or Aaron Wall. Nonetheless most people would agree that Danny Sullivan for instance, host of Sphinn and lead editor-in-chief of Search Engine Land is one of those authorities.
I’m from Germany and in no way in the centre of what is considered the SEO industry.
I rarely speak at conferences or write for search marketing publications. My contribution is mostly blogging for the likes of
- SEOptimise
- Hubspot Internet Marketing Blog
- Google Blogoscoped (back in the days)
aside of my blog. Also I lead two SEO 2.0 communities, one at Mixx and one at Social|Median. I’m quite popular on Sphinn despite of my “non-English native speaker” background. Not everybody likes me on Sphinn though. Jill Whalen of High Rankings has repeatedly attacked me in the Sphinn comment section over the last months. This week she did it again, subduing a post of mine on SEO ethics.
Jill Whalen is regarded by some as an authority in the industry. She is also a writer for Search Engine Land, the above mentioned very respectable search industry resource.
While I tend to ignore unsubstantiated criticisms usually I can’t this time due to the fact of being attacked by a person like this who is regarded by both insiders and outsiders as an authority, it would be dangerous to ignore that, not for me mainly but to the industry as a whole.
To be honest I do not regard Jill Whalen as an expert, not due to the fact that she has singled me out on Sphinn repeatedly and tried to subdue my latest post on SEO ethics. Also it’s not just the fact that she advertises her company as a self proclaimed “expert” in the title of the home page. I do not regard her as an expert due to her writings where she offers wrong and misleading advice. Of course not everything what she writes is wrong. She gets the basics right and is good at repeating well known facts like the one I wrote myself about roughly 14 months ago, that usability and SEO are one. It’s a fact SEO experts have written for years about:
- SEO with Usability: What People Want
- The importance of usability and SEO
- Usability and SEO: You can’t have one without the other | WebFeat Multimedia Inc Search Engine Optimization
- Usability and SEO
- Usability & SEO – Two Wins for the Price of One
- Usability and SEO – Red Light, Green Light – Cre8tive Flow
The question here is: Do we allow people to speak on behalf on the industry and to subdue dissident voices just because of their elitist position?
I’m fairly new on the international SEO scene but I have gained a reputation quickly for speaking out in a different manner, speaking out in way that makes sense to people both with an SEO background and out of the broader public.
I’m not a member of SEMPO and people do not believe me just due to a big name or a famous brand. People agree with me due to merit.
When I err, people stop agreeing. I don’t have followers, I have readers. When I started blogging about SEO I expected more controversies about my take on things but there were only rare incidents where people felt obliged to dismiss my writings. So I was always glad for feedback, both negative and positive. I have even come to terms with the most ardent conscience and outcast of the SEO industry, Doug Heil, after a heated web discussion. Doug is by now a regular reader and welcome commenter on my blog.
When I got angry for being shut up on Sphinn without a proper explanation, people on Twitter were quick to point out that Jill Whalen is a much bigger authority than I am and what’s more important, that it’s nothing personal despite her history of annoying me on Sphinn. She is so much more of an authority that she hasn’t bothered to join the discussion here on the blog, that’s below her level I guess. Sadly her comment is far from self explanatory, to me it amounted to a misunderstanding of my article. No, some SEO people I know from my involvement in a SEO forum in 2006 were eager to convince me that I have not enough reputation to argue with such an authority and should get over it.
“OK, I’m willing to learn, maybe I am wrong” I thought and I checked Jill Whalen’s High Rankings to clarify her official position on SEO ethics. I mainly found an article from 2004 dealing with the subject. The main argument of this post is basically that no SEO tactic is unethical. It’s maybe plain stupid as it might not work but even such techniques as
doorway pages can’t be considered unethical.
The saddest thing about this opinion is that she earlier in the article explains how SEO professionals should care for ethics in their profession to later dismiss ethics in SEO as a whole. So the very same person who is meant to look after ethics in SEO, the SEO professional, is meant to ignore it.
In this light I finally understand her comment in which she repels ethics in SEO:
desphinning because it’s quite a leap to say that people who follow google’s guidelines would somehow also not be ethical.
Ethical SEO for Jill Whalen is not ethical in the sense that ethics is defined. It’s just a positive label for not breaching the Google TOS at most. Her point is that SEO does not need ethics. You can’t be unethical in doing SEO. In case you want to do SEO for a serial killer it’s OK as long you don’t use “stupid” methods that might get you in trouble.
This is the philosophy also criminals employ: It’s all fine as long as you don’t get caught.
To be honest: I do not want to represented by such “authorities”. If you disregard ethics and you don’t care whether you sell guns, tobacco, gambling or escorts it’s up to you. You want to spam the hell out of Google? It’s your problem.
My problem starts when you try tell people about ethics and you try tell people what SEO is all about. Especially in an industry like SEO which has severe reputation problems. So don’t make me shut up on SEO ethics, you shut up and do your business in the dark instead of making a whole industry appear in a bad light. The “anything goes” mentality has brought some people from SEO behind bars already.
Also it’s sad to see Digg-like bury brigade being established over at Sphinn.
Related posts:
- Top 7 Top SEO Myths Lists [Meta-List] ;-)
- 5 More Design + Usability + SEO Articles: The Clean Dozen
- Authority and Trustrank
- 7 Business & Blogging Clues a Puppy Can Teach You
- 7 Rules of Ethical SEO You Ignore Probably as a White Hat
Additional comments powered by BackType
This thing has 15 Comments
I haven’t been following your argument with her, but it seems like you are getting into a personal response. To an outsider, you’d do better by trying to refute her argument with facts. Is there a pragmatic argument for the ethics you present?
Hi Tadeusz
I read your article on ethics and I have to say my reaction was that you’re starting to believe your PR…
Ethics are a luxury; some people can afford to turn down business because they don’t like aspects of it – other people have to keep a roof over their children’s heads.
We’re fortunate that we’re doing OK and can afford to be picky but I’m not going to look down my nose at someone who cannot afford to pick and chose their clients.
Secondly, ethics are not as black and white as you would have people believe – I have absolutely no problem in keeping a charity in the top three for their top key phrase in Google by blog commenting on their behalf – and the bloggers are happy for me to comment because I’m adding to their content. IMHO blog spam is only spam if it doesn’t add to the conversation and I would argue that the bloggers are intelligent enough to police their own blogs without you deciding they’re not capable; and you have to police on their behalf.
Lastly, if you have a problem with Jill I think it’s more appropriate you conduct it in private.
I enjoy SEOBlog for it’s content on SEO rather than hearing your opinion of other SEO.
This article kind of cracked me up. I am behind your content 100%. I have read you for a while and I do not find myself disagreeing with you much. Jill kind of seems a little angry or jealous.
Man, Tad when are you gonna grow up? You’re such a baby.
Same type of stuff i got in an argument with you over in sphinn a few months back – “boo hoo someone doesn’t agree with me so now I am going to blast them on my blog!”
Grow up, suck the gallon of lamesauce which sits on your lap and go outside for a walk.
Yo, SEO bitches… quit telling this guy he should conduct his fight in private. The interwebs is all about super awesome fights being conducted in public. It’s about giants falling. It’s about pseudo celebrities who got the jump on keyword stuffing and blog spamming a few years before the rest of the world acting as if they found the holy grail loged in their asses.
Content is King!
Long live the Whale!
Pimp Daddy SugarRae
Matt Cutts 4 Life!
Miranda Rights over and out…
Hi,
I have read your SEO Ethics post and I do agree with you. Jill Whalen is a very known figure in the SEO Industry, you should not care about what others may think if your post. Probably most of those who points at you on twitter and other social platforms doesn’t take the time to read your post. Most people see what the “authorities” says and then go with the flow. Those of us who actually read the post find it really interesting. Regarding her post in 2004, the Search Engine Industry is changing all the time, so what might be useful then is not so useful now, and of course this is like “outing” her on an old post (not good).
In my opinion you do have followers, … things is your followers do take time to read your entire posts, and that’s what matters.
Just my 2cents
I think it all depends on the one who uses he same,.. Whats ethics in SEO and business? :)
Adam: That’s the point. There is no discussion. She successfully subdued it by voting it down on Sphinn so barely anybody beside her followers have even noticed. Also she didn’t bother to comment neither there nor here.
Who else should I address then? The SEO industry as a whole? There is one person responsible for this behavior.
Gidseo: While you may be used to SEOs lying to you to sell stuff, I indeed believe and practice what I say. My ethics in SEO post was based on my own experience, especially in recent weeks.
Indeed ethics is a luxury. If a person like Jill Whalen isn’t able to afford ethics after 10 years in the business, she does something wrong. Also she actively fights against ethics in SEO and advocates paid link etc.
I don’t want to police anybody. If you’re not mature enough to distinguish right from wrong I can’t teach you either. The issue here is: Somebody posing as an authority is spreading bad advice and subduing a debate on ethics.
Thanks Franklin: She is basically afraid to lose her position in the establishment. She has been around when SEO amounted to keyword stuffing and now when new people come up and support ethics he realizes that her authority fades with the younger generation.
streko: I’m not grown up? LOL. Indeed I’m a father.
Are you a parent? Apparently not. One of the first things you must teach your children is ethics. Not to take toys away from others, not to hit others, not to lie, cheat and steal. It’s difficult. All of those values are learned not natural.
So how do you want to teach your children when you support cheating your way up?
Miranda: I do not tolerate sexism and swearing in this blog. I didn’t delete your comment just due to it being representative of the view of the broader public. Next time I will delete such comments.
Federico: How true! I am still waiting for someone to show up here and to tell me that I’m wrong, that Jill Whalen does not repel SEO ethics as a whole. Also none of their followers had the guts to openly admit that they ignore ethics in SEO and business, that they don’t care whether the money comes from.
While the SEO game has changed since 2004 Jill Whalen’s stance on ethics hasn’t apparently.
Vishnu: “he same”? I don’t understand. What ethics is I have outlined in the post that Jill Whalen aimed to subdue on Sphinn to block any debate on ethics in SEO.
Thanks for the networking and public relations that set some people to be among the industry leaders while they have not ever practice SEO, they keep preaching you inapplicable SEO strategies I want to ask them if they get some clients those are willing to to do SEO for $200/month even $1000/month .. what they are preaching is something that need a team of 4 in house SEO people to be implemented .. wake up guys stop misleading the industry .. not all SEO guys having clients those are willing to pay $10 000/month to do SEO .. or to pay you $50 000 for one time SEO report
I started to read what you wrote and at the beginning i was sympathetic. As time went on however, it seemed to me that this is a personal argument spilling over into a blog. When someone has to dig into someones past comments, i always think that they are taking things just a little too seriously.
I hope whatever issues there are between you two get resolved.
If you are so impressionable, you will not be able to resist the other’s criticism.
This product sounds unfamiliar for me, so thanks a lot for this links’ abundance I appreciate it ‘cause I heard only positives recommendations from my acquainted.
Personally me, I highly appreciate such people like Jill Whalen, direct and straightforward, who do not affraid to speak up their opinion! Of course he may make mistakes, but I think such strong people are able to strike sail… That was my point of view
SEO is by it’s very nature and definition: unethical.
Accept that as a fact and you shall experience: bliss.
there are no stable ethics in capitalism, the rules are always pushed, look at where derivatives got us.