2008/11/4 Gavin Pearce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "I might be being a bit blond here, but why even the need to have > "rel=nofollow" at all? > > > > It is supposed to be there to stop automatic and commercial links polluting > search engine rankings." > > > > > > ** Sorry I meant within the BBC related links section specifically. My bad > for not making it clear. > > > > > > Exactly Brian, I think we are on the same page … my point is why does the > BBC need to make use of JavaScript, or NoFollow tags for links to "key" > sites related to the story in hand? > I can see a good point about using a redirector as you can use it
a) test to see if the link is broken; and b) count the number of times it get used. I keep thinking of using a bit of "onclick=..." with an AJAX routine to do the testing and counting. It is a simple matter of returning a true value to allow the link to activate. I guess if it broken you could return false... > > > End-user generated content is a different matter … > > > > > > *Gavin Pearce* |* **Web Developer* |* **TBS > *The Columbia Centre, Market Street, Bracknell, RG12 1JG, United Kingdom > Direct: +44 (0) 1344 403488 | Office: +44 (0) 1344 306011 | Fax: +44 (0) > 1344 427138 > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Yahoo: pearce.gavin > *http://www.tbs.uk.com* > > > *TBS is a trading name of Technology Services International Limited. > Registered in England, company number 2079459.* > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Brian Butterworth > *Sent:* 04 November 2008 10:12 > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [backstage] "Greedy BBC Blocks External Links" > > > > > > 2008/11/4 Gavin Pearce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I might be being a bit blond here, but why even the need to have > "rel=nofollow" at all? > > > > It is supposed to be there to stop automatic and commercial links polluting > search engine rankings. > > > > > > I can understand on "user" generated content, but when it's a link to a > relevant and respected website on the topic in hand, than that isn't a > good or valid reason to use the "nofollow" syntax. In fact as stated > already, that's a large part in how the big search engines work. > > Google isn't likely to start penalising the BBC site as it's no doubt on > a "respected site" / "white list" somewhere else within the Google > system... > > > > But that isn't, to be fair, the issue. The issue is that even if the BBC > decides to link to an external site, if it uses either the methods > described, a visiting user will get there, but a search engine will dismiss > it. > > > > Incoming links are useful for SEO and to have them turned off from the BBC > is a big problem. Last time I had a link from a major BBC page to my site, > my usual traffic (and ad revenue) tripled for three days. But the link did > not boost any search engine ratings. > > > > > > > > > > Gavin Pearce | Web Developer | TBS > The Columbia Centre, Market Street, Bracknell, RG12 1JG, United Kingdom > Direct: +44 (0) 1344 403488 | Office: +44 (0) 1344 306011 | Fax: +44 (0) > 1344 427138 > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Yahoo: pearce.gavin > http://www.tbs.uk.com > > TBS is a trading name of Technology Services International Limited. > Registered in England, company number 2079459. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Belam > Sent: 04 November 2008 09:36 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [backstage] "Greedy BBC Blocks External Links" > > I don't think it is "evil", and as I've pointed out on their blog and > on Sphinn, since Patrick at Blogstorm himself applies "nofollow" to > all outbound links it is a little rich to be complaining that the BBC > doesn't provide 'trusted' links. Interesting point about how Google > can be expected to run a trusted link based algorithm in the future, > but lets not forget it was the search engines that concocted > "nofollow" themselves, and Google is these days notorious for > penalising sites in the rankings that it 'believes' are displaying > paid links that are not clearly marked as advertising. I've blogged a > little about the Blogstorm post as well - > http://www.currybet.net/cbet_blog/2008/11/bbc_news_clumsy_linking.php > > cheers, > martin > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, > please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > This message has been scanned for viruses by Viatel MailControl - > http://viatel.mailcontrol.com/ > > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > > > > -- > > Brian Butterworth > > follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist > web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover > advice, since 2002 > > This message has been scanned for viruses by *Viatel > MailControl<http://viatel.mailcontrol.com/> > *, a service from *Viatel <http://www.viatel.com/>*. > > > This message has been scanned for viruses by *Viatel > MailControl<http://viatel.mailcontrol.com/> > *, a service from *Viatel <http://www.viatel.com/>*. > -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
