Thread: Edu/Gov + FB/Twitter Links

I watched this video by Matt Cutts, where he talks about edu/gov links having the same weight as other links.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxTmZulcQZ0"]YouTube- How do you rate links from sites like Twitter and Facebook?[/ame]

What do you think?

Well now this is some news for sure. Many people including me and tonnes of other reputed sites including seomoz have mentioned that .edu and .gov backlinks carry more weight as compared to other TLDs.
For those who say 'Pagerank doesn't matter', well the video has the answer, 'reputation' of a link seems to be more on the basis of 'Pagerank' now(apart from relevancy/traffic and some minor factors) as domain extensions aren't considered.

Thanks for the share 5starpix.
Btw, where do you get these videos, i've seen them at many forums and blogs shared by their respective webmasters and members.
Is there a particular blog/site where Matt Cutts or Google posts such video updates or are they from multiple 'Google blogs'?
Thanks.

Yes, there is a google youtube channel dedicated for these videos.
There are about 180+ videos.

YouTube - GoogleWebmasterHelp's Channel

Matt Cutts' answers a bunch of questions sent in by users

.edu inks were surely of great value even if they had zero PR. But looks like they've been exploited so much that Google might had to demote them equivalent to other links.
But I do sense, they still have that value.

In this article, I’ll go deeper on the case that people are spending hours on. Most people (including me) say that links from .edu and .gov websites give more weight than links from for example .com, .net or .org. The reason for that thinking is because it is a lot more difficult to get backlinks from those websites rather than getting a link from a normal website. But after viewing some videos from Matt Cutts over at Google, it’s kind of proven that every link is treated the same…

You can read more about .gov and .edu better than other tld's on my blog

It isn't the biggest article there is, but I'd like to get a discussion going -- in this thread of on the blog

Greetz!

Originally Posted by Aquarezz

But after viewing some videos from Matt Cutts over at Google, it’s kind of proven that every link is treated the same…

This is not necessarily proven. Do you believe that Matt is completely honest and knows everything about G's algorithms? He is primarily a public relations rep and liaison to the SEO community. I see his job as one where he attempts to steer the SEO community into doing things the way that Google wants you do them.

There may actually be something to his claim that there is no advantage with .edu and .gov. .edu links have been abused for years. It may be a matter of what type of .gov or .edu link is obtained.

I had a client several years ago that was spending a fortune buying sitewide links on stanford.edu and other .edu sites. He had over 50,000 paid links pointing to his site. His site was in the top 5 for all of his major keywords. I warned him of an impeding change in G's algorithm and advised him to stop buying sitewide links because sitewide links were being discounted and obvious paid links were going to be penalized. He ignored my advice and dropped to about page 20 in Google.

In one of the rare occasions when I have seen a personal response when using Google's re-inclusion request, the Google rep indicated that the site had been penalized due to the use of suspicious linking, including excessive "link rings." I found the use of terminology to be interesting because "link rings" was a term from the 1990s. A G rep at one of Search Engine Strategies conferences told me that the term refers to sitewide links. That is not what it meant in the 1990s.

The site did eventually come back in the rankings, but it had to ride out a 6 month penalty.

So are you telling me that if a site gives me a sitewide link, it could eventually hurt me, TopDogger?

No Kovich. He's saying that his friend bought 20,000 links, and I assumed most were sitewide links.

Do this and you're asking for trouble.

Thanks for clarifying it, seems interesting to know that stuff!

And wow, 50,000 paid links? Should've costed a lot Even at 1$ per link it is a lot

Originally Posted by Aquarezz

Thanks for clarifying it, seems interesting to know that stuff!

And wow, 50,000 paid links? Should've costed a lot Even at 1$ per link it is a lot

Companies spend tons of money on paid links. The issue on edu / gov links still has to be proven though. Can we really trust everything they say?

Here is the thread on NB: http://www.netbuilders.org/promoting/edu-gov-fb-twitter-links-14616.html

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxTmZulcQZ0