Negative SEO: Does Negative SEO Really Exist?

"Negative SEO" in Mandarin...supposedly.
Negative SEO

“Negative SEO” in Mandarin…supposedly.

Ever since the Penguin algorithm update, I’ve heard and read lots of speculation regarding using so called “negative SEO” to harm your competition. A client asked me, almost worried, “What if our competition uses the Penguin update to kill us with bad links?”

While I understand the importance of link building, my current opinion (which I reserve the right to change at any time), is that negative SEO is nothing to be concerned with, if you’ve been doing everything else correctly.

Now I just read an article in which some SEO experts (black hat hackers) used negative SEO to knock a site from page one and they even used charts and graphs. I won’t link to the article, because it’s just too stupid for me to share If you want to find it, just Google it.

In the article one of the sites that they claim they were able to knock off page one of Google is now currently ranked number one for the very long tail keyword that the negative SEO guys made the subject of their article. So the algorithm might have a knee-jerk reaction to a bunch of bogus link building (negative SEO), but it looks like that site is right back on top. Basically, the article, only a couple of months old, is already irrelevant.

So I won’t waste your time, dear surfer, and make you read a bunch of drivel.

Just as I’ve stated that I can rank a site well without linking at all, I don’t think I can destroy your competitors with negative SEO either. (Please don’t ask.) In other words, no matter how much the SEO Gurus scream about the importance of links, I think they are marginally helpful and thus, marginally harmful.

Here is my theory: At the same time the Penguin algorithm change came out, Google also nailed people who bought links by the truckload over the past few years. I know they did because I know people who have received messages from Google about having bogus linking. I also know some people, black-hatters to the core, who were knocked back pretty heavily in the search.

However, I don’t think that was an algorithm update, per se. I think that was a housecleaning by Google. Like, a one-time blast to get rid of the worst offenders, and then we all tremble in fear, seeing how bad these bad links really were and then we all find God and SEO is good again. Cue the trained bluebirds and butterflies.

But if it were a permanent and important addition to Penguin, getting rid of your competition would be easy-peasy, lemon-squeazy. Wouldn’t it?

So you’re ranked number five? Just buy links from porn sites for the four sites that rank above you. No problem, you’ll be number one in a matter of weeks!

The logic of so-called SEO professionals astounds me. First, the everyday SEO moron tries to be an “expert” by simply using a computer program to create links all over the Internet. Then, that same moron gets nailed when Penguin does the housecleaning thing I mention above.

Continuing on the illogical path of an idiot, the same “SEO Guru” now believes that you can take down a competitor by creating negative links in bad neighborhoods.

It makes my head hurt.




Let all the stupid flow out… Take another deep breath… Now exhale all the stupid. There you go.

Creating the crap links in the first place didn’t help you. Thinking that you can harm your competition using the same idiotic techniques that you were foolish to use the first time? You need to get a job digging ditches and leave your mother’s basement now.

It’s like intentionally staying one step behind Google, instead of remaining one step ahead. I am going to remain one step ahead and concentrate on my own clients, not my client’s competition.

As my third grade teacher used to plead: “Keep your eyes on your own paper for goodness sakes!”