Most link building by many SEO firms seriously isn't natural but is actually blackhat according to Google. If you are required to purchase it, ask for it, comment for it or insert a link inside your article to gain it, you then are manipulating Google search results and Google terms that as blackhat. You just would like to view the many video's by Matt Cutts to comprehend that if you are doing any of a above, then you are creating links manually and violating Google's TOS.

It simply baffles me the number of SEO experts will quickly denounce Cloaking as unethical or against Google's TOS or even label it as spam which manipulates search results but then daily create artificial, manual or software generated backlinks for clients.

If you are thinking of distributing countless articles with links or posting on blogs/forums to obtain backlinks or using automated backlinking software, isn't that also spamming to control search results results?

There is also a silly mindset that whitehat SEO is free or risk and blackhat is full of risks. Really? What number of whitehat sites, that supposedly conformed to all of Google's TOS, suddenly lose their ranking and their business when Google decides to complete a serious algorithm update? Ha! Where will be the reward for loyalty from Google?

So does blackhat or being unethical really exist anymore? Isn't this really about traffic, conversions and surviving within an ever tightening monopoly created by Google for which we now are left with few other options, unless to line the pockets of Google shareholders.

The controversy on whitehat versus blackhat has become de-emotionalized and fewer religious overtones over the years. When I started off with SEO services back in the nineties, the controversy was all about ethical versus unethical SEO. Lots of hard core reactions then to what was, in the end, merely a technological, and not a theological or moral issue.

Add to that the ever growing domination of Google which marketers are forced to deal with online but it all becomes clear. You would possibly arguably say that online commerce as a whole has matured, as, not surprisingly, has the SEO industry proper.

These days, when we speak with clients they happily consider the options for those who ask them whether or not they like to choose a whitehat or perhaps a blackhat approach. Clients will openly inquire about efficacy, the relative risks involved therefore on. So it's a basically unexcited, hands-on discussion, which is a very good thing as far as we are concerned.

We're experiencing much more openness towards cloaking for SEM strategy when compared to 5 years ago. Generally, corporations aren't as impressed or as easily fooled by the major search enginesí (especially Google's) fear, uncertainty and doubt tactics regarding anything they don't like.

The tortuous debate that blackhat is risky and whitehat is safe is ludicrous to the extreme. There is no guarantee by Google that whitehat SEO will bestow you good rankings. Similar there is no security that if you control good rankings, Google will make certain that you benefit from ranking consistency subsequent to an update.

Ethical or whitehat behavior only makes sense amongst equals. Therefore, as an online company, are you in actuality an equal to Google? No, you're not the odds are stacked firmly against you.