If you're willing to do anything, then undoubtedly you can start a buzz. However you reveal more about yourself in so doing, than you reveal about the buzz topic. You're quite right, this is not the way to get attention.
Chris Goward
· 1 year ago
Lyndon removed his post explaining how he did it, but you can read a copy here:
just in case anyone is interested in lyndons full post (since he has now removed it) this is a link to someone that saved it. ;-) ps, lyndon's post was removed because he knew it was creating drama for him..so here's the post in full, if anyone is interested. http://www.widerfunnel.com/traffic-building/when-linkbait-goes-mental
Matt Bailey
· 1 year ago
Great article, Jonathan.
As a journalism major at university, integrity was always one of those things that was constantly advocated and reinforced. Blurring the line between journalism and marketing (I hesitate to call this marketing) is a very dangerous practice.
SEO's of all types and tactics advocate open disclosure, and I don't see where disclosure was provided in this case. I hope that I am wrong and it was provided at some point. I also can't excuse the media from their severe lack of judgment in running an article without checking their facts.
Tactics like these bring linkbait to a new low, and will negatively affect the perception of an already tarnished industry.
Matt
Doug Heil
· 1 year ago
Very, very good Jonathan. What is almost as appalling as the fact that so many in the SEO industry think this tactic is a good thing, is also the fact that quite a few so-called leaders in this industry are totally silent on the issue. That speaks volumes.
I guess most in our industry just don't give a hoot about how we all get incoming links...as long as we all get them in some way. Fake or true; anything goes. I really do equate it with blackhat search engine spam. There is similar characteristics as blackhats get links any way they can as well. Wasn't this tactic all about getting the links for Google? Sure it was. It's pure blackhat spam as it cannot be anything else.
And yes; big media should take responsibility, but that's not my concern in this case. This Lyndon guy offers up both SEO and social media services which means it's the territory of every legit SEO out there.... which also means it puts another nail in the coffin of an industry slowing dying due to it's own people.
Kevin Cheng
· 1 year ago
Faking stories and spreading rumours to generate links is just plain wrong and unethical. Anyone who possesses decent writing skills and above average creative could create stories that diggers and other social media followers drool. It's alright for sites like the onion to publish stories like that since they are notorious for entertaining fake stories, but not on sites that people visit for real articles.
Sherwood
· 1 year ago
Anyone have an issue with the fact that journalists and editors no longer fact-check anything?
In an election year, I certainly have an issue with it.
Kimota
· 1 year ago
Oh I agree. There are a number of worrying questions that come out of this event. At some point, there will be a backlash that says we want to maintain the internet as a source of reliable information. We need to stop blurring the line between fact and fiction.
Lorm
· 1 year ago
I agree with Antcliff. When it can get you so many backlinks and newspaper coverage, whats wrong with lying a bit? In my eyes this was a brilliant idea!
Edwin
· 1 year ago
This provides each website with a one way non-reciprocal link. This technique has evolved from reciprocal linking.
Matt Cutts
· 1 year ago
Nice summary, Kimota.
"When it can get you so many backlinks and newspaper coverage, whats wrong with lying a bit?"
Lorm, it's a short-term tactic that burns credibility. In this case, for example, it certainly lowers trust in money.co.uk and Lyndon.
Russ
· 1 year ago
what? like this doesn't happen 1500 times a day with completely twisted Digg headlines. It's even worse to do it with headlines because people read those so much more.
Dan
· 1 year ago
This story made it all the way out to Colorado and was on all of the radio stations. Do any of these other news sources that just copy other news sources do any due diligence?
Kimota
· 1 year ago
It has been amazing how media networks have revealed their shortcomings with this debacle. Last night, Australia's Media Watch program on ABC television covered the situation.
While I absolutely agree with your criticism of this tactic, the episode also proves the current lack of integrity of all journalists, including mainstream ones. That so many media outlets carried the fake story without checking the facts for themselves I believe is a correct reflection of journalists and the editors that employ them. Unfortunately for quite a few years now we live in a media society where even the traditionally trustworthy newspapers so frequently mis-report basic facts, name the wrong people / companies, and generally prove they really do not care about the truth. What Lyndon has done, although it should be punished as spam in its online context, is no different to what other journalists do on a daily basis.
Rebecca Leaman
· 1 year ago
I suspect this will be a case of short-term gain for long-term pain. Or that *should* be the case: but realistically, it is likely that this furor will simply bring more clients beating a path to the gentleman's door. There will always be those for whom the ethics of such a link-bait event are outweighed by its efficacy and audacity.
Stan Dubin
· 1 year ago
The fact that this Lyndon chap considers he did nothing "wrong" by using a news-formatted article to create false news for his client, well, that's astonishing on one level, but every industry (and area of life) has its bad apples. And the really bad apples are those that don't have the luxury of self-criticism. Lyndon might eventually rue the fact that his client's reputation will have been diminished, but not because he particularly cares about his client's well-being, but that it might affect his ability to secure new clients.
Kimota
· 1 year ago
It has been great to see the comments over the last few days completely supporting the criticisms of this controversial - I hesitate to call it a technique. Lyndon and others are still adamant that the critics are in the minority and that he has received afr more support from respectable figures in the industry. Personally, I doubt this, as every other site that has covered the topic outside the Sphinn community has been almost universally horrified.
Some people have tried to imply that by protesting, we are merely "giving Lyndon even more publicity". The assertion that people should keep quiet for risk of drawing attention to the offender is laughable and only convinces me further that there are many people in this industry without the critical faculties necessary to truly understand the issues created by online marketing.
Jen
· 1 year ago
Funny, but I don't remember all this outcry over the fake Blair Witch story of those college students missing in action out in the woods and that was a lot bigger than this. Didn't most just buy their ticket to see the film, found out the story was a hoax, and still have at least a little admiration of the filmmakers for their clever marketing?
Was that different from this scenario because that was marketing a movie and not a website as in this case? (But then again, their movie was mostly marketed BY their faux website--which was getting lots of links--so that can't be it. Hmmm...
ICANN reseller
· 1 year ago
Thanks a lot for a fine read about linkbaiting. Although this scenario is somewhat immoral, it does work.
Keep up the good work!
propecia
· 1 year ago
it is an interesting method whether or not you agree with it.
chantix
· 1 year ago
the mock story is definitely well played. good choice of crimes.
Judy Shapiro
· 1 year ago
Seeding a fake story nowadays is about as easy as the “pump n dump” stock email scams of last year. This type of scam (yes I will dare to call it how I see it) can take place because while the internet connected us all – we have not yet created the authentication layer of the internet.
So while it is tempting to bash this tactic… it is short sighted. Instead, it would be far more productive to solve the underlying vulnerability which is that you can not verify what you see online.
The good news is that there are Internet technologies out there that can create this “authentication layer” so we can indeed verify content, identities and websites. That’s how this silly type of nonsense will wither of it own accord.
As it should.
Danny Thornton
· 1 year ago
Wrong? Yes.
Unethical? Yes.
Cleaver? yes
Would I go to that level? NO
Craig Wilson
· 1 year ago
Congratulations.
This post is a finalist for The Moggy Awards for media and marketing post of the year.
All Comments
the people's fence.
If you're willing to do anything, then undoubtedly you can start a buzz. However you reveal more about yourself in so doing, than you reveal about the buzz topic. You're quite right, this is not the way to get attention.
Lyndon removed his post explaining how he did it, but you can read a copy here:
http://www.widerfunnel.com/traffic-building/when-linkbait-goes-mental
just in case anyone is interested in lyndons full post (since he has now removed it) this is a link to someone that saved it. ;-) ps, lyndon's post was removed because he knew it was creating drama for him..so here's the post in full, if anyone is interested. http://www.widerfunnel.com/traffic-building/when-linkbait-goes-mental
Great article, Jonathan.
As a journalism major at university, integrity was always one of those things that was constantly advocated and reinforced. Blurring the line between journalism and marketing (I hesitate to call this marketing) is a very dangerous practice.
SEO's of all types and tactics advocate open disclosure, and I don't see where disclosure was provided in this case. I hope that I am wrong and it was provided at some point. I also can't excuse the media from their severe lack of judgment in running an article without checking their facts.
Tactics like these bring linkbait to a new low, and will negatively affect the perception of an already tarnished industry.
Matt
Very, very good Jonathan. What is almost as appalling as the fact that so many in the SEO industry think this tactic is a good thing, is also the fact that quite a few so-called leaders in this industry are totally silent on the issue. That speaks volumes.
I guess most in our industry just don't give a hoot about how we all get incoming links...as long as we all get them in some way. Fake or true; anything goes. I really do equate it with blackhat search engine spam. There is similar characteristics as blackhats get links any way they can as well. Wasn't this tactic all about getting the links for Google? Sure it was. It's pure blackhat spam as it cannot be anything else.
And yes; big media should take responsibility, but that's not my concern in this case. This Lyndon guy offers up both SEO and social media services which means it's the territory of every legit SEO out there.... which also means it puts another nail in the coffin of an industry slowing dying due to it's own people.
Faking stories and spreading rumours to generate links is just plain wrong and unethical. Anyone who possesses decent writing skills and above average creative could create stories that diggers and other social media followers drool. It's alright for sites like the onion to publish stories like that since they are notorious for entertaining fake stories, but not on sites that people visit for real articles.
Anyone have an issue with the fact that journalists and editors no longer fact-check anything?
In an election year, I certainly have an issue with it.
Oh I agree. There are a number of worrying questions that come out of this event. At some point, there will be a backlash that says we want to maintain the internet as a source of reliable information. We need to stop blurring the line between fact and fiction.
I agree with Antcliff. When it can get you so many backlinks and newspaper coverage, whats wrong with lying a bit? In my eyes this was a brilliant idea!
This provides each website with a one way non-reciprocal link. This technique has evolved from reciprocal linking.
Nice summary, Kimota.
"When it can get you so many backlinks and newspaper coverage, whats wrong with lying a bit?"
Lorm, it's a short-term tactic that burns credibility. In this case, for example, it certainly lowers trust in money.co.uk and Lyndon.
what? like this doesn't happen 1500 times a day with completely twisted Digg headlines. It's even worse to do it with headlines because people read those so much more.
This story made it all the way out to Colorado and was on all of the radio stations. Do any of these other news sources that just copy other news sources do any due diligence?
It has been amazing how media networks have revealed their shortcomings with this debacle. Last night, Australia's Media Watch program on ABC television covered the situation.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2256090.htm
While I absolutely agree with your criticism of this tactic, the episode also proves the current lack of integrity of all journalists, including mainstream ones. That so many media outlets carried the fake story without checking the facts for themselves I believe is a correct reflection of journalists and the editors that employ them. Unfortunately for quite a few years now we live in a media society where even the traditionally trustworthy newspapers so frequently mis-report basic facts, name the wrong people / companies, and generally prove they really do not care about the truth. What Lyndon has done, although it should be punished as spam in its online context, is no different to what other journalists do on a daily basis.
I suspect this will be a case of short-term gain for long-term pain. Or that *should* be the case: but realistically, it is likely that this furor will simply bring more clients beating a path to the gentleman's door. There will always be those for whom the ethics of such a link-bait event are outweighed by its efficacy and audacity.
The fact that this Lyndon chap considers he did nothing "wrong" by using a news-formatted article to create false news for his client, well, that's astonishing on one level, but every industry (and area of life) has its bad apples. And the really bad apples are those that don't have the luxury of self-criticism. Lyndon might eventually rue the fact that his client's reputation will have been diminished, but not because he particularly cares about his client's well-being, but that it might affect his ability to secure new clients.
It has been great to see the comments over the last few days completely supporting the criticisms of this controversial - I hesitate to call it a technique. Lyndon and others are still adamant that the critics are in the minority and that he has received afr more support from respectable figures in the industry. Personally, I doubt this, as every other site that has covered the topic outside the Sphinn community has been almost universally horrified.
Some people have tried to imply that by protesting, we are merely "giving Lyndon even more publicity". The assertion that people should keep quiet for risk of drawing attention to the offender is laughable and only convinces me further that there are many people in this industry without the critical faculties necessary to truly understand the issues created by online marketing.
Funny, but I don't remember all this outcry over the fake Blair Witch story of those college students missing in action out in the woods and that was a lot bigger than this. Didn't most just buy their ticket to see the film, found out the story was a hoax, and still have at least a little admiration of the filmmakers for their clever marketing?
Was that different from this scenario because that was marketing a movie and not a website as in this case? (But then again, their movie was mostly marketed BY their faux website--which was getting lots of links--so that can't be it. Hmmm...
Thanks a lot for a fine read about linkbaiting. Although this scenario is somewhat immoral, it does work.
Keep up the good work!
it is an interesting method whether or not you agree with it.
the mock story is definitely well played. good choice of crimes.
Seeding a fake story nowadays is about as easy as the “pump n dump” stock email scams of last year. This type of scam (yes I will dare to call it how I see it) can take place because while the internet connected us all – we have not yet created the authentication layer of the internet.
So while it is tempting to bash this tactic… it is short sighted. Instead, it would be far more productive to solve the underlying vulnerability which is that you can not verify what you see online.
The good news is that there are Internet technologies out there that can create this “authentication layer” so we can indeed verify content, identities and websites. That’s how this silly type of nonsense will wither of it own accord.
As it should.
Wrong? Yes.
Unethical? Yes.
Cleaver? yes
Would I go to that level? NO
Congratulations.
This post is a finalist for The Moggy Awards for media and marketing post of the year.
See more at www.mediahunter.com.au
or http://tinyurl.com/6c9bxp
This post was WINNER of the inaugural Moggy Awards for best Australian media and marketing post of 2008.
Well done.
See the awards and other placegetters here http://tinyurl.com/7elcfr