I wrote this article in 2005, when the colour of your hat was more important than the colour of your iPhone; we've moved on since then, assearch engines (mostly Google), have undermined most of the spammers' tricks of those far-off days.
These days, spammers are mostly 10-cents-an-hour guys (and gals) using dodgy software to place futile link-spam in social settings. Most serious webmasters have learned that it's the better website that wins. Indeed, this whole site exists to help those who have been damaged by those outdated SEO tricks.
So rather than delete the article, I simply suggest you read it for entertainment. Don't worry about your hat ....
White
Hats, Black Hearts and Search Engines
The
terms "White Hat" and "Black Heart" continue to cause controversy
and mirth in SEO circles, and you'll find little agreement on what they actually
mean.
That's possibly a shame, as the SEO industry is extremely polarized,
and site owners should be able to make an informed choice about their SEO's approach
to optimizing their site. |
White Hat | Black Heart |
| My own definition of "White Hat" broadly (but not entirely) reflects
the almost-consensus within "White Hat" Internet forums |
My definition
of "Black Heart" is entirely personal, as I have been unable to find any
measure of consensus among the "Black Heart" community. |
- White Hats take an ethical approach: considering all the
Internet stakeholders, not just the self and the client.
|
- Black Hearts work in the clients' interest, plus protecting and promoting self.
|
- White Hats do not accept
'shades of grey' - SEO is clean and honest. Or not. Black Heart is a term of
convenience for anyone who is not 'White Hat'.
| - Black Hearts insist on grey hats, and deny the existence of Black or White. Very,
very few admit to owning a Black Heart, though many boast of their achievements.
Go figure.
|
- White
Hats make no attempt to deceive search engines; what you see is what you get.
|
- Black Hearts would be prepared, willing and happy to deceive search engines
(and thus search engine users) in client's interest.
|
- White Hats favour honesty
with client about techniques, risks, rewards.
| - Black Hearts may be willing to deceive the client about methods: "results are
all".
|
- White Hats see search engines as friends; you want their help, you
adhere to their guidelines; a simple trade off.
| - Black Hearts see search engines as the enemy; deceit is the name of the game, SEs
are constantly looking to expose trickery and penalize guilty sites.
|
- White Hats see on-site measures
as helping visitors, as well as SEs; a better site self-SEOs, plus converts more
customers, and gets repeat visits.
| - Black Hearts emphasize
off-site methods, getting 'bums on seats', with the hope that a percentage
will convert, or at least return by another route.
|
- White Hats emphasize the long term nature of successful SEO;
inexorable progress, without looking over the shoulder.
|
- Black Hearts emphasize rapid results, accept risks, confident of a new
fix, as older tricks are neutralized.
|
- White Hats understand that 'Black Hat' success must harm sites displaced
by spam sites, and therefore is potentially illegal.
|
- Black Hearts boast of income, but do not concede that this is arguably
defrauded from displaced better sites, and deny potential illegality. They
will not even discuss it.
|
- White Hats believe that if 'Black Hats' used their skills and experience
honestly, they'd probably be more successful than constantly rethinking strategy.
|
- Black Hearts believe that 'White Hats' all secretly use 'Black Heart' techniques,
and are all 'holier than thou' hypocrites.
|
- White Hats condemn those who support, conceal, or apologize
for Black Hats, who harm the industry.
| - Black Hearts
believe in the survival of the fittest, and have no time for wimps.
|
- For White Hats, it's all about
intention.
| - For Black Hearts, it's all about technique.
|
Sources:
1. Alan Perkins' article SEO : Sleepwalking Ever Onwards?
2. Numerous
discussions at Best Practices Search Engine Forums (and lesser forums)
Published: 04 August 2005
Revised and Updated 24 April 2011
This article may be published elswhere, provided
this footnote is included as is,
with a live link for the source: http://www.sick-site-syndrome.com/articles/
Copyright © 2005 et seq., Andrew Heenan. Comments very welcome. |
