Over at Search Engine Journal, editor Loren Baker makes a good point in a short post titled, “SEO Red Flags & SEO Misinformation : Let’s Put an End to It“. The post was a response to an article one of his writers published a two days ago questioning if the use of the “nofollow” tag alerted Google and set off perceived SEO penalties. (note: If used as intended, it most certainly does not.)
The original post “NoFollow: An SEO Red Flag?” got a lot of attention, setting off a lot of comments and receiving 60 Sphinns (or votes) at Sphinn.com. The fundamental flaw with the assertion of the article is that it was, in fact, wrong.
As a good editor will, Loren makes a good catch in his reply. He also opens debate about the number of SEO Myths out there, including the mega-myth that there is an over-SEO penalty Google applies to sites that have obvious hallmarks of search engine optimization.
There are no such penalties, something Google’s Matt Cutts has pointed out on more than one occasion. In response to the original article’s assertion that using nofollow to control the flow of link juice is a gigantic red flag, Matt wrote, “Nope, it’s not. Or at least, not at Google. I wouldn’t know about Yahoo/MSN/Ask, of course. :)”
There are penalties that will always apply to deceptive SEO tactics. When Google and the other major engines see obvious examples of what is called “black hat” SEO techniques, they will react by triggering demotions or delistings. That does not mean there are overarching SEO penalties, it just means that Google, Yahoo, MSN or Ask have the abilities to shut down a site that is cheating or using tactics banned by those search engines.
For the record, and you can quote me on this… There are NO over-arching penalties Google applies to sites that are made better, clearer, easier to navigate or re-written with web-users in mind. Those are the basic things good SEO firms do to achieve strong search engine placements. Good SEOs value the engines as venues much like musicians value halls, bars and arenas. No smart performer damages the venues they work in. SEOs who follow stated guidelines and avoid deceptive practices should never perceive a problem with penalties.
Of all the engines, Google is by far the clearest about what is and is not acceptable behaviour from SEOs. Google Webmaster Central has about a dozen links leading to information about acceptable techniques. In his post today, Loren points out a recently published Google eBook (pdf format) titled, “Making the Most of Your Content : A Publishers Guide to the Web“. Webmasters interested in learning the limits are urged to read these documents before suggesting or assuming where those limits are.
Also for the record, firms complaining about over-arching Google penalties are likely worried about being caught doing something they ought not be doing. Clients should NEVER have to worry about Google penalties. If they do, the SEO has (and likely is) a big problem.
Readers should note Metamend doesn’t spend time complaining about penalties that simply do not exist in our world. We do however complain about myths and misinformation. We have worked hard to build our business and help build the industry. We believe it is in everyone’s best interests for the general public and other sectors in the web marketing industry to have a clear working knowledge of search engine optimization techniques and tools.
Good SEOs make websites better.
Have a question and need quick answers? 
