Amazon Black Hat SEO Re-directs for Google Hummingbird

Once again Google is playing games with search.
In this case they are allowing Amazon.com to perform re-directs from URLs other than their own to boost Internet presence and SEO (in other words, what is called “Black Hat” SEO).

What is “Black Hat” SEO you might ask?
It is the manipulation of search engine via many different methods make a web page appear more relevant, accurate, authoritative, etc. than it really is.
Also reference:
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/B/Black_Hat_SEO.html

Google claims to watch for this, but considering how much Black Hat SEO Amazon.com practices, it is obvious that Google is clearly looking the other way.

Here is just one of re-directs by Amazon.com:
This URL:
www DOT novalek.com/kordon/articles/breathing_bags.html
To this URL:
astore.amazon DOT com/novalek-20/kordon/articles/breathing_bags.html

The original URL is an information page at Kordon about breathable fish shipping bags.
The re-direct is to a page on Amazon selling multiple items, BUT NO INFORMATION!!!
I have found many similar instances of information pages I or others have referred to being hijacked by Amazon.com to selling pages for related and often only marginally related products!!
In the instance above, the product in question does not even appear on the re-directed page! Talk about poor page relevance, yet Google allows this!

Please note I have broken the URLs above with a “DOT” as I do not want to aid Amazon and Google with their allegedly dishonest practices with any more ‘free’ links

Another aspect of Google algorithm changes Amazon has taken advantage of is the so-called Google “Hummingbird” update.
Here Google is playing thesaurus with our searches, and converting often longer phrases into different keywords, often with similar meanings, but still quite different.

Reference:
http://www.northcutt.com/blog/2013/11/what-we-actually-know-about-hummingbird-and-keywords/

An example here would be the search term “Aquarium UV Sterilization”, which is a scientific process, not a product.
HOWEVER the unique scientific information pages are NO longer found in Google search (these are in DuckDuckGo and other true/better search engines).
Instead we find in their place again crap content such as Amazon once more peddling a “Green Killing Machine” which is a product that does not even carry out this process in the true scientific sense!

What is interesting is one of my articles was plagiarized and manually dropped by Google in favor Amazon, About.com and other Google Pet websites, so we know that Google is well aware of what is going on with Amazon and others.

References:
*http://www.myopinions-carl.com/2013/09/amazon-google-in-bed-search-adwords.html
*http://aquarium-digest.com/2009/10/26/uv-sterilization/

In Summary
I do not think any honest or moral person should be utilizing Google Search nor purchasing anything off from Amazon that that they can purchase elsewhere.
Believe me, there are many alternatives to Amazon!!

See also this newer post,
I will NOT Shop Amazon, I will support Small business:
https://cstrohmeyer.wordpress.com/2013/11/29/i-will-not-shop-amazon-i-will-support-small-business/

Also consider DuckDuckGo for your searches, NEVER Google!!
Reference:
https://duckduckgo.com/

For an excellent review of TRUE UV Sterilizers that actually perform the process of true level one UV Sterilization in aquariums or ponds, please read this article:
http://aap.atrixnet.com/?p=490

Google Search, SEO, Penguin, Panda & Matt Cutts

Google Search has really “tanked” as of 2013 as per search results in my field of expertise; aquarium and pond information.

While it has been over a year now since the Google updates that precipitated this fall from relevancy for Google search results, the results continue to get worse rather than better as in some previous Google updates where Google appeared to tweak/fix bugs in their updates.

Now the only fix is that the big players such as About.com, Amazon, Fish Lore, Pet Co, Dr. Foster, etc.-etc. now dominate results, often with poor content and worse, often incorrect or irrelevant web pages for the search query used.
My personal opinion is that Matt Cutts and Google know full well that their results are junk, they just choose to ignore as their intention is to generate more revenue from these poor results by increasing Adwords users and campaigns there of.

However this is where they may be wrong and this may be Googles eventual downfall.

Assuming even if these were to bring in more revenue from Adwords in the short term, the out cry on the internet that I read is that Google search results are increasingly bad.
This can only result in less and less users of Google Search and thus less and less clicks on Google Adwords.

Here is just one comment from a Google Sponsored Forum:
“Google used to be great, … had it as my home page for all browsers. Once the Penguin update came out I can’t find anything relevant online? Search results have become worse than Yahoo and Bing, which is saying something. Sure, I get that Google wants to cut down on spam, and feature their PPC Ads, but the inability to bring up content that actually relates to the query is a cardinal flaw with this new update. I sincerely hope that Google’s management will recognize the mistake they made in their algorithm and correct it before they lose all credibility as well as loyal supporters.”

Source:
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/websearch/f2sh29vW-ik

Back to assumptions, I personally think that these poor Google Search results will even hurt in the short term as the costs per conversion of Google Adwords has gone up considerably in recent months/years.

Here is another quote:
“Setting up and running an Adwords campaign is a daunting task. It requires understanding of keywords, Adwords campaigns, writing effective ads, and many more factors. I don’t know many good business people who can run effective Adwords campaigns.”

Source:
http://www.mastergoogle.com/blog/white-hat-seo-is-dead.php

I would add to this that good search results and effective Adwords go hand in hand, so when the search results tank, the conversion rate drops which I know for a fact can and does happen as per my own Adwords campaigns and website tracking statistics.

My theory based on the information at hand is that when the search results are poor, the person searching clicks though web sites quickly (probably subconsciously), both organic and paid, due to the amount of poor or irrelevant content that now appears in a Google Search query. So even if a website with relevant information and good content is clicked on, the person searching spends much less time on this site than they would have in the past.

Here are just a few search queries that now yield poor results via a Google Search:

*Aquarium UV Sterilization
This search now yields NO true information web sites, yet alone good, accurate and researched information on the subject.
Worse is the fact that many of the products, rather than information (the term “UV Sterilization” IS A PROCESS not a query for products) that now dominate the results are not even capable of of true level 1 UV Sterilization, such as the “Green Killing Machine”

What is also interesting as per this query is that the leading authority web page about the process of aquarium & pond UV Sterilization disappeared after part of the researched content was copied by about.com.
Google appeared to give credit to their spam buddies at about.com rather than the website that had this content for years and had done the research leg work. Shortly there after, the in depth 32 page article was no where to be found with a search of the quoted text acutally bringing up the content used by about.co without permission.
On a positive note, about.com added a note 2 months later to their webpage giving credit back to the correct website, but the damage was done in the eyes of Google Gods (not so Bing, DuckDuckGo, & other vastly better & more honest search engines).

*Aquarium LED Lighting Information
This result is not quite as bad as the last query, however cut and past websites such as “aquarium-lighting-guide.com” which is nothing more than cut and paste webspam are now present.
As well one of the most in depth, constantly updated, 7 content rich web sites on the subject by a friend of mine is no where to be found:
http://aquarium-digest.com/2010/04/11/led-aquarium-lights-lighting/

* Aquarium Nitrogen Cycle
This again yields cut and paste web pages from Google darlings such as about.com and others.
As well the results include factally inaccurate information such as the suggestion to use “Raw Shrimp” to cycle a fish aquarium when in fact this was discredited more than a decade ago as it can and does introduce Saprolegnia to aquariums.

*Aquarium Planaria
This is one of the most disgusting Google results (mind you I have nothing to sell here, in fact it is others that are capitalizing on these incorrect Google results to sell snake oil products such as Green Leaf Aquarium).
This is a case where Google’s Algorithm no longer gives credit to real research, due to their strange reasoning with how they deal with links since the dishonest Penguin updates.
Now poor content is king and cut & paste is the rule of the day.

In this particular result, the results are 100% scientifically incorrect and the most simple of research would prove this. However Google’s “pet” authority websites have repeated this lie so many times it has become truth in Google search results.
From Adolf Hitler: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed”
Sad that one needs to quote Hitler to prove a point about Google, but sadly this is the company Google keeps now

Here is a correct result:
http://www.fish-as-pets.com/2007/11/planaria-detritus-internet-answers.html

IN SUMMARY;
I would suggest readers tired of terrible Google search results and what appears to be constant lies from Google’ so-called SEO guru Matt Cutts to join this Facebook Group:
Boycott Google Search

Further References:
*http://www.myopinions-carl.com/2009/07/google-lies-dishonesty.html
*http://www.myopinions-carl.com/2011/05/testing-googles-new-farmer-panda.html