When Google burps everyone feels it. Last month we reported that Google will never follow or 'remember' links with the 'nofollow' attribute. I surmise other major search engines will follow suit and adopt a similar policy in an attempt to combat link spam, bad link practices (i.e. .edu sites using their position to link to questionable sites), and link purchases. So what does this mean for future web ranking and SEO practices?

The Death of Linking?

Let's face it, the majority of web sites out there are not optimized by qualified web marketers. Why does this matter? Webmasters are semi-aware of the SEO world and many do pick up tid bits here and there about how to rank their web sites higher in the search engines. But only certain pieces of info actually make it into the 'mainstream' web world and I surmise that one of these 'leaks' of disinformation will be the treatment of linking (specifically outgoing links). Here is my reasoning expressed in mathematical equation.

If word gets out that Google will not follow any link with 'nofollow' + webmasters catch wind that one way you can hurt your own SERPs is by linking OUT to bad web sites = no reason that's stopping webmasters from completing a blanket 'nofollow' on every single outgoing web link.

So then, in light of this, if the regular webmaster who does not read 215 SEO blogs a day or who is aware of any 'Web etiquette' (see link Nazi post from a while back), what's stopping the majority of web sites from completely adopting nofollow on ALL outgoing links? If you don't want to take the chance then why bother taking the time to pick and choose? Just adopt nofollow on all links. Some do understand the value of linking, but if it's just for the user, then creating a link with nofollow accomplishes this task.

Seriously, in a free market enterprise where the bottom line is more important than 'link etiquette' what is stopping an all-out 'nofollow craze'? Someone chasing the bottom line could very well adopt a tactic of buying links galore and linking to nobody. Today that may be a viable option (although tomorrow it may not work.)

Here are some reasons why webmasters may opt to adopt blanket nofollow.

1) Why give if you get nothing in return? Yes, humanity would benefit from giving, but last I checked the business world did little for free.

2) So many blogs and forums, etc., are readily adopting nofollow, so why stop there? If people are now used to posting blog comments without getting link juice, they could very well adapt to not getting PR juice from any incoming link.

3) The fear of linking to bad locations will trump any feeling to give out links. If you had the option (let's say because of time constraints) to pick between allowing no links (thereby offering less to your users), or adding nofollow to every outgoing link, why pick the former when the latter has the potential to hurt your business?

4) They just don't know better. Seriously, if you don't know better than the prospects of maybe hurting your business will help your decision to 'nofollow' everything.

Is There Future for Web Linking?

In light of the nofollow schemes one thing is for sure, linking has changed dramatically and will continually evolve. If nofollow becomes widespread, if enough web sites adopt 'nofollow' policies, three things are worth noting.

1. What Google has started they must finish. By encouraging users to use nofollow, especially on paid links (linking being a major key in web rankings), Google will have to adjust their algo score to give links less weight. I surmise that implicitly they are vying for this scenario. It would also take care of the whole aspect of link buying. (Although I readily admit that there is no way search engines can determine with any certainty where 100% of the links came from. You can ask your buddy for a link in exchange for a beer, that's 'buying a link' but Google won't know. Nonetheless nofollow solves this anomoly.)

2. If links do not have value, or are valued far less than they are now (come on, any web site with a PR 7 link from a grossly off topic web site will do pretty well ranking,) what will reign in ranking web sites? Obviously content will supremely reign. Only problem is the algo's aren't smart enough to make a judgment call about the value of content. (Who's to say Microsoft's bit on malware is better than Joey Joe Joe in a world without links?)

3. If not content then what? Perhaps there will be a heavier component attributed to outgoing links without nofollow in the ranking algorithm. This may be one way to combat blanket nofollow practices, but then it forces webmasters to do more webmasting. Not such a bad thing, gives me more work .

Where does that leave us today? Stuck in the middle somewhere...? Links are still valued, but some may ask why bother with the whole linking 'for free' thing if only a minority of webmasters/marketers participate? I guess we'll have to be extra observant in the next few months after a few more Google 'data-pushes' and an algo change to see how linking has changed (in the eyes of Google). In the meantime just keep on throwing high quality mud (content) against the wall (web site) in hopes that it sticks (or at least becomes diggable).

[tags]nofollow, google nofollow, seo nofollow, linking nofollow, links nofollow, seo linking[/tags]