In a recent Webmaster video, Matt Cutts acknowledged that Google has been experimenting with internal search engine iterations that operate entirely without links. While the outcomes have been subpar – “for now,” Cutts noted – this revelation hints at the possibility that the significance of the once-mighty link is being reevaluated within Google. This could mean that they are developing a version of the PageRank algorithm that isn’t as reliant on the link graph, potentially signaling a significant shift away from PageRank as we know it. The question is, when might this happen?

In a world where links hold less sway, we sought the wisdom of SEO and inbound marketing experts… Don LaFontaine, Master of the “In a World” Movie Trailer Voiceover To shed light on this evolving landscape, we posed three key questions to a panel of esteemed SEO and inbound marketing specialists:

1. Is the value of links diminishing over time? Do you anticipate a future where backlinks lose some or all of their influence in the PageRank algorithm? If so, how soon might this occur?
2. Imagine a scenario where Google search functions without links, similar to what the Russian search engine Yandex is pursuing. What metrics could potentially replace links?
3. Considering the inevitable evolution of the algorithm, how, if at all, should SEO professionals adapt their content marketing and link building approaches in the coming years? We received insightful perspectives on the future of PageRank, links, and SEO from industry leaders including Aaron Wall, Rae Hoffman, Brett Tabke, Michelle Robbins, Julie Joyce, Rand Fishkin, Glenn Gabe, Barry Adams, Alan Bleiweiss, Larry Kim, Pete Meyers, Eric Enge, and Dharmesh Shah (click their names to jump directly to their insights). Get ready to have your mind blown! Here are their responses, presented in no specific order:

Aaron Wall

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

As more factors come into play, almost all individual signals decline in importance, and links are no exception. One might argue that variables that are gaining prominence are an exception, but even then, the increasing prevalence of ads in search results offsets some of those gains. Over the past five years, links have been losing weight due to the integration of other metrics and the rise of algorithmic and manual penalties. The rate of this decline is influenced by a multitude of query- and vertical-specific factors. Some queries are localized, some feature paid vertical ads, some have abundant usage data that can be incorporated, some are mobile-centric, and some have Google using its knowledge graph to scrape and replace results. These variations impact different areas to different degrees. In certain areas, SEO might remain viable for small businesses for another five to ten years. In others, SEO will have a near-zero chance of profitability unless undertaken by players already algorithmically favored. Even in seemingly favorable cases, Google can drastically alter outcomes overnight across entire verticals. Consider the historical algorithmic performance of Ask.com and BizRate on SEMRush. One is an extension of Google, while the other clearly isn’t.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

As noted earlier, Google can leverage vertical-specific metrics for aspects like location. Additionally, there’s a near-infinite number of ways Google could analyze its passive tracking of users from logged-in accounts, Google Chrome, Google Android, Google Fiber, and so on. They can further utilize credit card registration, YouTube usage data, location, search history, Google+ activity, and more to gauge the trustworthiness of user accounts. The differential and deferential policing of link-based activities system effectively achieves a form of selective link removal. One way Google “uncounts” links is through extensive algorithmic and manual penalties, rendering links irrelevant for some while retaining their value for others. The widespread dissemination (and even amplification) of fear-mongering regarding links by certain link analysis tool providers further removes specific link types from the equation.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

Any strategy that’s scalable and widely scaled will inevitably be labeled as spam, unless it is done by the home team. Therefore, the more distinctive and challenging your efforts are to replicate, the better. One approach is to prioritize brand building and secure funding from venture capitalists connected to Google Ventures, potentially gaining exemption from algorithmic and manual scrutiny. Offer Google a glimpse of your revenue potential and your chances of success skyrocket. The disparity in outcomes is akin to comparing CustomMade or RetailMeNot to TeachStreet or a small, independent e-commerce store. The search engine advertising biases that Google’s founders cautioned against in their early research were less of a warning and more of a roadmap for Google. When Google acquires MediaOcean, expect TV ads to have an even greater impact on “organic” rankings. Aaron Wall is the owner of SEOBook.com_._

Rae Hoffman

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

While I believe Google would be thrilled to reduce the significance of links in search engine rankings, I don’t see that as a realistic possibility in the near future. Links are fundamentally the currency of the web, and I doubt Google can fundamentally alter that anytime soon, especially considering that links have value beyond search rankings. What seems more plausible in the next few years is a more robust “checks and balances” system for links. This would involve Google examining external factors in conjunction with a link to determine its true value. Currently, they assess the quality of the linking site, but what about other factors? For instance, does the link get shared on social media, and if so, by whom? Does the link generate traffic to the linked site, and if so, what are the bounce rate, time on site, and other metrics of that traffic? How is a site’s overall traffic profile affected after link bursts? For example, if a site typically receives 100 visitors per day and then experiences a surge in inbound traffic and links, does its traffic stabilize at a higher level, say 120 visitors per day, once the initial spike subsides? This leads us to Google’s aspirations for Google+. They want to know who authored the content containing the link and their area of expertise. In an ideal world, Google would recognize my authority on SEO and affiliate marketing, and the articles I write on those topics, along with the individuals I link to, would carry more weight. However, if I were to write about gardening, should that content and its outbound links also receive a boost simply because I’m considered “authoritative” in a different field? Google aims to definitively answer “no” to that question. Essentially, I think Google is trying to eliminate the value of easily “scalable” links. All their recent actions, both in terms of penalties and their stated future direction, point towards this goal.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

I believe they could utilize many of the aspects mentioned above in such a scenario. However, I don’t think they’re looking to replace links entirely. If I were them, I’d focus on developing more effective methods for “validating” links.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

For almost a decade now, I’ve been advocating for a link building approach that heavily emphasizes traffic generation rather than simply “link development.” Websites that prioritize content creation to solve problems, as opposed to solely chasing “search traffic,” have had a distinct advantage in securing robust search engine rankings for several years, and this advantage will only grow if they maintain this strategy. “Content marketing” has been around long before it was labeled as such. Many SEOs make the mistake of analyzing analytics reports solely through the lens of search traffic. It’s crucial to examine reports filtered by direct and referral traffic as well. If these aren’t increasing alongside your link building and content marketing efforts, then your links aren’t defensible, and more importantly, you’re not building a defensible online business. Counterintuitive as it may seem, by placing a greater emphasis on growing the non-search traffic segments of your audience than most businesses currently do, you’ll ultimately achieve stronger and more resilient search engine rankings. Rae Hoffman, AKA Sugarrae, is the CEO of PushFire.

Brett Tabke

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm?

Yes, the web has essentially been reshaped in the image of PageRank. The value of links is now debatable. While Google has implemented numerous workarounds over the years to maintain the validity of the PageRank-based algorithm, it’s evident that the significance of links as a metric is questionable in most instances today.

Do you foresee a future where back links lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm?

I believe this has already happened to a significant extent. Google is actively pursuing ways to “devalue” links as a ranking factor. A backlink from a PR9 page once guaranteed top-page rankings for relevant keywords. Today, that same link holds minimal value on its own. This downward trend in link value is likely to continue.

If Google search did work without links, what metrics would replace it?

Remember how Google developed its spelling suggestions? They analyzed common misspellings, like “britanny,” and then leveraged user input to determine the correct spelling. They apply this same principle to all their spelling suggestions, effectively using crowdsourced intelligence to guide their spelling algorithm. They could potentially adopt a similar approach for search results. Therefore, I envision a couple of ways Google could potentially eliminate the PageRank algorithm: (a) Human reviewers manually scoring pages. (b) An algorithm driven by user behavior. (c) A hybrid of both (a) and (b). Imagine 1,000 individuals tasked with reviewing websites. If each person could evaluate one page per minute for 6-8 hours daily, that equates to 360,000 pages per day. Within a week, they could score the top results for (roughly estimating) 75-80% of the links in search engine results pages (SERPs) that users actually click on. To refine this further, they could conduct weekly reverse quality assurance checks on the most-clicked links to obtain scores from multiple reviewers and calculate an average group score. In essence, they could “hand-score” the entire set of top-clicked SERP links within a couple of months. Now, envision them doing this consistently for, say, the past decade. Why would they need PageRank when they have human rankings? Consider the vast amount of click and traffic data Google has at its disposal:

• Google Analytics: As the leading website analytics platform, Google knows the origin, destination, and ultimate outcome (satisfied visitor or “back button and try again”) of click paths.
• AdSense: This provides data on ad performance, including clicks and page views.
• Google Chrome browser: Usage data from their browser offers additional insights. This wealth of information equips Google with ample data to score pages for any given query. They know which links users follow to find satisfactory answers. With all this, why would they need a PageRank algorithm? They could be on the verge of eliminating both on-page and off-page factors altogether, instead relying solely on user behavior. Just as they allow users to indirectly identify spelling errors by presenting them with choices and observing their selections, they could empower users to train the algorithm based on their search behavior.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

I would prioritize all traffic sources that don’t rely on search engines. These efforts could then serve as content fodder for search engines, with any resulting search traffic treated as a bonus. Essentially, I would operate as if search engines didn’t exist (though I’m not particularly thrilled about that prospect). Brett Tabke is the founder of Pubcon and WebmasterWorld Inc.

Michelle Robbins

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I believe links served a necessary purpose in the early days of the PageRank algorithm, especially when no other reliable signals were available. However, this metric has always been highly susceptible to manipulation, making it an unreliable indicator at best. While Google can continue to play “link whack-a-mole,” I’m convinced that if they aim to deliver truly relevant and valuable results to users, they need to move away from heavily weighting links, or potentially eliminate them altogether. Google recognizes this, and we’re probably no more than a few years away from this shift.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Many believe social signals are poised to replace links in importance, but that’s simply substituting one flawed signal for another. I believe the true key to providing relevant results lies in connecting offline, behavioral data with the online data Google already crawls. Currently, Google attempts to tailor results based on their knowledge of individual users, gleaned from search history, social signals, and other online activities. However, this approach is proving insufficient and perhaps unnecessary. For instance, just because I frequently order pizza online doesn’t necessarily mean I’m the one consuming it. On the other hand, knowing that I physically visit a specific pizza parlor multiple times a month and spend 45 minutes to an hour there paints a different picture. This reveals insights about both my behavior and the popularity and potentially the quality of the establishment. So, in the realm of local business search results, what’s the most accurate indicator of a business’s relevance within a community? Consider two pizza places: Joe’s Pizza boasts 1,000 backlinks and a 4-star Yelp rating but only serves around 2,000 customers monthly. Paul’s Pizza, with maybe 100 links and no Yelp presence, attracts 5,000 customers monthly. Which pizza place deserves a higher ranking? Google understands that obtaining real-world behavioral data is crucial, which explains their heavy investment in the Android operating system. Their focus isn’t solely on creating sleek phones; they need reliable tracking devices. These devices, along with their apps, provide a wealth of data beyond just map searches and default search settings. They reveal where users go, where they shop, where they dine, and what they purchase. While the iOS platform poses challenges for Google in acquiring this type of data, they’re resourceful and will likely find ways to roll their own wifi hotspots, offer an app with instant authentication, and gain user acceptance. In exchange for free Wi-Fi, they can aggregate invaluable “location” data. It’s surprising that they haven’t simply partnered with Nielsen, which already possesses this data (see below).

Nielsen has extensive knowledge of people’s real-world habits, and it’s valid, impactful, and anonymized data that provides genuine brand and business signals. However, Google has a data acquisition bias, preferring to gather data themselves. We are witnessing some movement in this area, notably, the ComScore partnership. Pay close attention to Google’s partnerships, particularly their acquisitions, as these often provide the clearest indication of their future direction.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the PageRank algorithm?

SEOs need to adopt a “market as if Google isn’t watching” mentality. With the recognition that content truly is king, SEOs are now catching up to what major brands have known all along. For a long time, large brands struggled to grasp the significance of the internet, often having minimal or nonexistent web presences. This presented a significant opportunity for online-only businesses, allowing smaller players to compete with established brands in the digital realm. However, recent years and algorithm updates have led some SEOs to believe that “Google has a big brand bias.” I disagree. Google has a data bias, which translates to a content bias, and large brands have content—mountains of it, accumulated over decades—that they’re finally putting online. Moreover, brands don’t even have to exert much effort to promote their content; consumers happily do it for them organically and across various online platforms that Google crawls. Nike is a prime example. If Nike dominates an athletic shoe SERP, it’s not due to bias; it’s simply logical. To illustrate the power of traditional marketing and branding, and how a strong brand presence can translate to SERP dominance, consider a large brand with decades of content. Despite their website remaining dormant for 2-3 years (no updates, changes, or new content), within three years of relaunching, they achieved the following: Monthly unique visitors: 1 million Monthly unique visits: 1.7 million Monthly page views: 3.4 million SEO budget: $0 Their marketing team consisted of just two people and one full-time writer. They had no dedicated SEO team or consultants. Their title tags and URL structure were abysmal. Yet, for around 20 keywords I tracked, they consistently ranked in the top 5, often securing positions 1-3.

In a nutshell: Google strives to provide valid and relevant search results that reflect real-world user expectations, and they’ll continue refining their system to achieve this. Links aren’t cutting it, so they’re adapting. Offline signals are reliable, difficult to manipulate, and obtainable, making them likely candidates for future algorithm integration. To maintain visibility in Google’s search results, SEOs need to prioritize marketing fundamentals. Brands have either learned (or acquired the expertise) from SEOs; now, SEOs need to reciprocate and master the principles of solid brand marketing. Online-only brands, particularly small businesses operating in competitive niches, will face the toughest challenges. In such cases, I would advise focusing less on Google and more on identifying where your target audience congregates online, the other websites they frequent, and the brands they trust. Invest heavily in co-marketing and advertising initiatives, just as you would in the offline world. Michelle Robbins is the Vice President of Technology for Search Engine Land’s parent company, Third Door Media.

Julie Joyce

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

While I believe links may lose some of their weight, I don’t anticipate a catastrophic scenario. Given that links are fundamental to navigating the web, I can’t envision a successful search engine completely disregarding their importance. Unless someone rebuilds Google from the ground up, which I don’t see happening anytime soon (though I’m sure someone will attempt it), I can’t imagine a world without links in search. And honestly, the thought of a linkless web, where I’d have to find new things to spam, makes me shudder.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Hopefully, user interaction would be paramount. Metrics like time spent on a page, number of pages visited on a site, social engagement with a site’s content, number of legitimate comments, and so on could all come into play.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

SEOs need to start thinking more like human beings and less like profit-driven machines. While marketing aims to generate revenue, abandoning a human-centric approach leads to shortcuts that ultimately harm everyone in the industry. Julie Joyce is the owner of Link Fish Media, the co-founder of SEO Chicks, and a regular link contributor to Search Engine Land and Search Engine Watch.

Rand Fishkin

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be?

Compared to other elements in Google’s algorithmic toolbox, I’d argue that yes, links have been steadily declining in importance for almost a decade. However, I don’t foresee a future in the next decade where links are completely removed from ranking factors. They provide valuable context to search engines, and as search engines become more adept at filtering out non-editorial links, the usefulness of link measurement will persist.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Likely a combination of factors already present in the index, such as user and usage data, search history, personalization, content and context analysis, semantic analysis, and brand signals. Social signals could also hold significant weight, but Google has opted to downplay their importance (at least direct social signals) due to competitive concerns.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

If your link building strategies haven’t considered whether a search engineer would deem a particular link valuable, you’re likely in for a rude awakening at some point. The most effective way to stay ahead of future algorithm shifts is to create things (content, branding, products, services, features, etc.) that naturally attract the types of links search engines value. Rand Fishkin is the Founder of Moz.

Glenn Gabe

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I firmly believe links will gradually decrease in importance, especially as technology advances and search engines gain access to even more data. Imagine a future with Google Glass-like technology embedded in contact lenses, Android-powered cars, and eventually, chips implanted in our brains capable of retrieving information in milliseconds. If this sounds far-fetched, consider that Google’s AI expert Ray Kurzweil recently predicted that by 2029, robots will be smarter than humans. Just think about the ranking factors in such a world! But that’s 2029, not the next 3-5 years.

For now, links are far from dead. I still believe a strong link profile is a valuable asset that Google and Bing consider when determining rankings. Google’s internal tests of “linkless” rankings support this notion. As Matt Cutts explained, their experiment yielded poor-quality results. While this highlights Google’s interest in factors beyond links, it also demonstrates the complexity of accurately replicating those signals. Ultimately, a historical analysis of a website’s link profile still provides valuable insights into its popularity and relevance for specific queries (taking into account volume, quality, relevance, temporal factors, etc.). While link manipulation has been rampant over the years, Google’s aggressive crackdown on unnatural links with Penguin demonstrates their commitment to combating spam. Therefore, I predict links will remain important for the next 2-3 years. However, a combination of factors could significantly diminish their power over time, which is already happening to some extent, leading to your next question.

Thought experiment: If Google PageRank did work without links, what metrics would replace it?

Before Facebook Graph Search launched, I wrote a post titled “BeastRank – 12 Potential Ranking Factors for the Upcoming Facebook Search Engine,” which delves into how social signals could influence search rankings (albeit for Facebook’s purposes). Google, with its own social platform, G+, also has access to a wealth of social data. When combined with other factors, it’s not difficult to imagine Google employing an algorithm that prioritizes engagement over links.

Beyond links, several factors could influence rankings:

• Brand mentions: Mentions across Google’s properties and services (Search, YouTube, Google Plus, Gmail, etc.) carry weight. Brands are trusted by both users and Google.
• AuthorRank: Once officially launched, this metric (or a variation of it) could be significant. The concept of ranking individuals rather than websites is intriguing and could tie rankings to authors rather than the sites hosting their content.
• Social engagement: This encompasses +1s, shares, mentions, participation, and more. This is where something like BeastRank could be impactful. See the aforementioned link for more on the potential of Facebook’s search algorithm.
• Influencer engagement: Connecting the dots between experts, thought leaders, and the content they consume and share could take social engagement to another level.
• Content engagement: Metrics like dwell time, actual bounce rate (categorized by vertical and niche), and downstream traffic could be factored in. Panda already considers some of these, so their prominence could increase.
• Long-term factors: Looking further ahead, as Google Glass, Android-powered cars, and other technologies become ubiquitous, interesting possibilities emerge. Factors like places visited, past experiences, intended destinations, current thoughts, people encountered, time spent at locations, the history of companions, physical condition, mental state, and more could all influence rankings. However, this is venturing further into the future.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

In the short term (2-3 years), a combination of producing outstanding, data-driven content and leveraging social media to connect with target audiences remains a winning formula. Successfully implementing this combination can impact a wide array of ranking factors beyond links, helping companies maintain visibility as links diminish in importance. For instance, it can influence brand mentions, social sharing, influencer engagement, and AuthorRank. Looking ahead, I highly recommend familiarizing yourself with emerging technologies like wearables and automotive technology. Consider how people will share content from their cars, access information from wearables, attribute value in this new landscape, and so on. This exploration could unveil new ranking factors, such as the number of (Android) cars that have bookmarked a particular piece of content. From a content creation standpoint, understanding your target audience’s pain points, their search behavior when seeking solutions, their physical location during these searches, the devices they use, the types of questions they ask (Google Hummingbird), and other relevant factors is crucial. This knowledge can inform the creation of new content formats that might not have made sense before. If executed effectively, all these efforts can positively impact various potential ranking factors. And guess what? One of the byproducts would be more links. So perhaps we’ve come full circle! Glenn Gabe is President of G-Squared Interactive.

Barry Adams

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be?

While I do believe links are losing value over time, I don’t anticipate them disappearing entirely from ranking algorithms. Google appears to be moving toward a system where links have variable weights depending on the specific query. For knowledge graph entities, links might not be as influential in determining the top 10 results. However, for competitive commercial terms, Google might still rely heavily on websites’ link graphs to decide rankings. As a search engine fundamentally built on links, Google is unlikely to abandon the link graph entirely, even if it were technically feasible. Links form the very foundation of the World Wide Web, and disregarding them completely would be unwise for any search engine.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Once Google cracks the code of sentiment analysis (admittedly a complex challenge), I suspect it will fill much of the void left by links in ranking algorithms. Google will likely analyze brand mentions online, assessing whether they’re positive or negative. Ultimately, Google aims to deliver the most relevant and user-friendly results, which means prioritizing websites that provide high-quality services and value. This can be reflected in positive online brand sentiment, making a robust sentiment analysis algorithm the holy grail for Google to potentially replace links.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

For a year or more, the prevailing trend in SEO has been to cultivate a strong online brand presence and leverage it to naturally attract links. Coupled with outreach initiatives that focus on adding value to external websites through engaging content, this approach aligns with Google’s future direction and, consequently, the future of SEO: robust online brands with abundant positive mentions. The emphasis needs to shift from using content solely for link building to building a positive online brand through content, which is a relatively small adjustment that some SEOs have already made. Barry Adams is the chief SEO polemicist at Polemic Digital and Editor at State of Digital.

Alan Bleiweiss

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be?

As Google uncovers more signals to validate or challenge link signals, links will inevitably become less influential within the overall search algorithm. The crucial factor here is the difficulty of accurately assessing the trustworthiness of these alternative signals. Predicting how long it will take Google to wean itself off link signals is anyone’s guess. The biggest hurdle is precisely this challenge of determining trust strength elsewhere.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

The obvious candidates are social media and on-site factors. Social media is a constantly evolving, multifaceted beast. User behavior within social platforms can be gamed in countless ways, much like links have been manipulated over the years. However, gaming on-site factors is already more challenging than manipulating social signals, which is why Google has consistently focused on improving the trustworthiness of on-site signals. This explains why factors like Schema markup, crawl efficiency, page processing considerations, and more recently, refinements to the “above the fold” algorithm, have been integrated into their signal evaluation process. All these elements contribute to Google’s understanding of websites and their quality and relevance… While not a traditional social network, Google+ has already influenced how Google perceives off-site signals by using it to clarify author and publisher trust. Expect this trend to continue with greater emphasis. If Google Fiber achieves widespread adoption across the United States (and eventually globally), I wouldn’t be surprised if they tap into that data stream to understand consumer intent and preferences, similar to how they’re likely leveraging Gmail data. This wouldn’t be limited to paid advertising but also applied to enhancing their understanding of trust signals that can (and to some extent, probably already do) influence organic search results. From there, it’s all about how society behaves digitally. As new digital channels emerge, Google will undoubtedly explore their potential for data extraction.

How – if at all – should SEO’s change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

I consistently emphasize this message in interviews, audits, and client training sessions: Content marketing and link building are tactics, not strategies. They often fall under a broader strategy of “improving SEO.” However, the correct, sustainable, and appropriate strategy is far grander: Brand building. The key question to ask for any channel, method, or opportunity is whether it contributes to genuine, trustworthy brand building. If so, it’s valuable. If it relies on tricks, shortcuts, or attempts to deceive search engines, it’s toxic. Alan Bleiweiss is the owner of Bleiweiss Consulting, a specialized SEO company.

Larry Kim

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be?

The value of links is diminishing, and the era of SEO relying heavily on links is fading. Links are susceptible to manipulation, and superior signals have emerged since Google’s inception.

Thought experiment: If Google search functioned without links (similar to Russia’s Yandex), what metrics could substitute?

Quality Score would be crucial for organic search. Google perceives paid search ads as content and profits only when users click on them, so relevant ads receive higher rankings. Notably, the Quality Score algorithm assesses ad relevance without relying on links!

Internal research suggests Quality Score predominantly hinges on user engagement, particularly the click-through rate of an ad relative to its anticipated rate based on its position. This data is harder to manipulate due to the sheer volume of clicks exceeding links online. Google can differentiate genuine clicks from fake ones using Google Analytics/AdWords/AdSense tracking codes on most websites, coupled with their dominant Chrome market share. They already have anti-click-fraud mechanisms in place, and it’s worth noting that Google acquired click-fraud company Spider.io on Friday.

Furthermore, signals like authorship, social media activity, and browsing history could play a role.

Considering the inevitable evolution of PageRank, how should SEO professionals adapt their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years?

Our investments are focused on:

• Content Quality: Comprehensive, insightful articles featuring original research and unique perspectives.
• Remarketing: Amplify the effectiveness of our content marketing and SEO efforts with remarketing to enhance brand recognition and user engagement metrics like return visitor rate, time spent on site, and conversion rates.
• Social Media: Enhance social engagement metrics.
• Diversification: Explore non-search marketing avenues, such as collaborations, event marketing, contests, and more.

Larry Kim is the Founder and Chief Technology Officer of nexus-security.

Pete Meyers

Is the link’s influence waning over time? Do you anticipate a future where backlinks lose some or all of their significance in ranking algorithms? If so, how distant is this future?

Google is undoubtedly incorporating additional layers, implying that links are becoming less influential. The question is the extent of this decline. Currently, in 2014, the impact is minimal. Links remain fundamental to Google’s engine, and a sudden shift is improbable.

PageRank, while elegant and effective at launch, is unlikely to suffice for modern search engines. Any single ranking factor can be exploited. Google is likely moving towards corroborating signals. Having numerous links without traffic, social engagement, or click-through rates is unusual. Similarly, a large social media following without corresponding engagement across platforms raises red flags. The future lies in analyzing signals holistically. Links will persist, but their effectiveness will depend on other factors.

Thought experiment: If Google search operated without links (as Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace them?

User signals, including Google Analytics data, would be key if data privacy concerns could be addressed. Instead of relying solely on social metrics, analyzing actual website visits would be more insightful. However, this presents a chicken-and-egg dilemma. Using click-through rate and dwell time as primary signals requires pre-existing rankings to measure them. This highlights the importance of corroborating signals.

Given the inevitable algorithm changes, how should SEO professionals adjust their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years?

While numerous specific answers exist, the key takeaway is to diversify tactics and ensure each tactic serves multiple purposes.

For instance, if Site A focuses solely on building links for SEO, while Site B builds links that generate traffic and coincidentally boost SEO, a Google algorithm change discounting these links would severely impact Site A. In contrast, Site B would retain its traffic. Therefore, regardless of ethical considerations or Google’s guidelines, the crucial question is: “Does my SEO strategy contribute to my business growth?” Editorial links not only benefit SEO but also enhance brand visibility and drive traffic, retaining their value even if algorithms shift.

Pete Meyers is a Marketing Scientist at Moz.

Eric Enge

Is the link diminishing in value? Do you envision a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in ranking algorithms? How far off is such a scenario?

On February 3, 2014, I published an article in Search Engine Land titled Google is Not Broken highlighting Google’s continued success. Despite occasional search result flaws, their stock price is soaring, reflecting their near-global monopoly (with exceptions like China, Korea, and Czechoslovakia).

Therefore, I don’t perceive an urgent need for Google to overhaul PageRank or their search results. However, even if such urgency existed, consider the nature of available web signals:

a. Links require website ownership and, once implemented, remain until removed, visible to all. This permanence demands effort and commitment. b. Social shares (or tweets) require minimal effort or commitment. Sharing articles based solely on titles without reading them is common, and these shares disappear quickly from feeds. c. Likes, +1s, and Favorites are even weaker signals. Google can’t access Liked content, only the counter on the webpage. While +1s and Favorites are visible, they demand even less effort and commitment. d. User interaction with content and search results is likely already incorporated by Google to some extent. Duane Forrester confirmed this in a 2011 interview, stating that Bing is using click through rate as a ranking factor, although links remain a stronger ranking factor. e. Content analysis is no longer a primary focus since Google introduced its link-based algorithm in 1998.

Despite persistent claims about Google utilizing social signals, their stance remains unchanged. My extensive research, including Direct Measurement of Google Plus Impact on Rankings and Does Facebook Activity Impact SEO?, supports this.

Note: Google does utilize Google Plus for personalized results, as detailed in in this article.

In conclusion, link-based signals are unlikely to become entirely obsolete until a fundamentally different set of non-web-based signals emerge. However, changes are probable, such as increasing the weight of authoritative sites and diminishing the influence of low-authority ones.

Thought experiment: If PageRank functioned without links (as Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

User interaction with search results would likely be paramount, potentially involving testing content in search engine results pages (SERPs), observing performance, and adjusting accordingly. Duane Forrester described Bing employing a similar strategy.

Social signals could supplement this, heavily skewed towards personalization and endorsements from highly authoritative profiles.

Considering the inevitable algorithm changes, how should SEO professionals adapt their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years?

The key is to adopt a holistic approach. Envision a scenario where search engines cease to exist. What measures would you wish you had taken? Ideally, major industry websites would regularly publish your content, top influencers would share it on social media, and your brand would be widely recognized.

This strategy’s brilliance lies in its universality. To quote my July 2012 interview of Matt Cutts, “By focusing on activities that enhance your reputation, you’re already aligned with the signals we prioritize.”

Isn’t that remarkable? The optimal strategy for search engines aligns perfectly with a world without them!

Eric Enge is the president of Stone Temple Consulting._

Dharmesh Shah

Is the value of links declining over time? Do you anticipate a future where backlinks lose some or all of their significance in ranking algorithms? If so, how distant is this future?

Links are losing some value, but not as drastically as some experts suggest. They still signify endorsement and quality. The difference lies in the abundance of other quality signals, particularly social signals. Tweeting is easier and more prevalent than blogging, creating a more democratic and diverse dataset. While search engines might reduce the weighting of links, eliminating them entirely is unlikely.

Thought experiment: If Google search operated without links (like Yandex), what metrics would replace them?

Social data, including tweets, shares, and follows, seems like a plausible substitute.

Considering the inevitable changes to the PageRank algorithm, how should SEO professionals adapt their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years?

Prioritizing content, user experience, and brand over tactical SEO has always been my recommendation. Long-term SEO success favors those who provide a positive user experience, create valuable content, and address fundamental aspects like crawlability. The algorithm’s constant evolution renders most other strategies as short-term gains.

Remember that search engines aim to identify and rank content that users find valuable. SEO is essentially about optimizing for human happiness.

Dharmesh Shah is Chief Technology Officer and Co-Founder of HubSpot.