![\"Unnatural](\"https:\/\/marketingnewsbox.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/a-complete-guide-to-the-google-penguin-algorithm-update-via-sejournal-taylordanrw.png\")
Screenshot by author, May 2022<\/em><\/span><\/div>\nFor the most part, Google claims to ignore a lot of poor-quality links online, but is still alert and monitoring for unnatural patterns such as link schemes, PBNs, link exchanges, and unnatural outbound linking patterns.<\/p>\n
The Introduction Of Penguin<\/h2>\n
In 2012, Google officially launched the \u201cwebspam algorithm update,\u201d which specifically targeted link spam and manipulative link-building practices.<\/p>\n
The webspam algorithm later became known (officially) as the Penguin algorithm update via a tweet from Matt Cutts, who was then head of the Google webspam team.<\/p>\n
While Google officially named the algorithm Penguin, there is no official word on where this name came from.<\/p>\n
The Panda algorithm<\/a> name came from one of the key engineers involved with it, and it\u2019s more than likely that Penguin originated from a similar source.<\/p>\n One of my favorite Penguin naming theories is that it pays homage to The Penguin, from DC\u2019s Batman.<\/p>\n Minor weather report: We pushed 1st Penguin algo data refresh an hour ago. Affects <0.1% of English searches. Context: http:\/\/t.co\/ztJiMGMi<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) May 26, 2012<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Prior to the Penguin algorithm, link volume played a larger part in determining a webpage\u2019s scoring when crawled, indexed, and analyzed by Google.<\/p>\n This meant when it came to ranking websites by these scores for search results pages, some low-quality websites and pieces of content appeared in more prominent positions in the organic search results than they should have.<\/p>\n Google\u2019s war on low-quality started with the Panda algorithm, and Penguin was an extension and addition to the arsenal to fight this war.<\/p>\n Penguin was Google\u2019s response to the increasing practice of manipulating search results (and rankings) through black hat link building techniques.<\/p>\n Cutts, speaking at the SMX Advanced 2012 conference, said:<\/p>\n We look at it something designed to tackle low-quality content. It started out with Panda, and then we noticed that there was still a lot of spam and Penguin was designed to tackle that.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The algorithm\u2019s objective was to gain greater control over and reduce the effectiveness of, a number of blackhat spamming techniques.<\/p>\n By better understanding and process the types of links websites and webmasters were earning, Penguin worked toward ensuring that natural, authoritative, and relevant links rewarded the websites they pointed to, while manipulative and spammy links were downgraded.<\/p>\n Penguin only deals with a site\u2019s incoming links. Google only looks at the links pointing to the site in question and does not look at the outgoing links at all from that site.<\/p>\n When Penguin first launched in April 2012, it affected more than 3% of search results, according to Google\u2019s own estimations.<\/p>\n Minor weather report: We pushed 1st Penguin algo data refresh an hour ago. Affects <0.1% of English searches. Context: http:\/\/t.co\/ztJiMGMi<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) May 26, 2012<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Penguin 2.0, the fourth update (including the initial launch) to the algorithm was released in May 2013 and affected roughly 2.3% of all queries.<\/p>\n On launch, Penguin was said to have targeted two specific manipulative practices, in particular, these being link schemes and keyword stuffing.<\/p>\n Link schemes are the umbrella term for manipulative link building practices, such as exchanges, paying for links, and other unnatural link practices outlined in Google\u2019s link scheme documentation<\/a>.<\/p>\n Penguin\u2019s initial launch also took aim at keyword stuffing, which has since become associated with the Panda algorithm<\/a> (which is thought of as more of a content and site quality algorithm).<\/p>\n There have been a number of updates and refreshes to the Penguin algorithm since it was launched in 2012, and possibly a number of other tweaks that have gone down in history as unknown algorithm updates.<\/p>\n This wasn\u2019t a change to the algorithm itself, but the first refresh of the data within it.<\/p>\n In this instance, websites that had initially been affected by the launch and had been proactive in clearing up their link profiles saw some recovery, while others who hadn\u2019t been caught by Penguin the first time round saw an impact.<\/p>\n This was another data refresh. It affected queries in the English language, as well as affected international queries.<\/p>\n Weather report: Penguin data refresh coming today. 0.3% of English queries noticeably affected. Details: http:\/\/t.co\/Esbi2ilX<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Scary Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) October 5, 2012<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n This was a more technically advanced version of the Penguin algorithm and changed how the algorithm impacted search results.<\/p>\n Penguin 2.0 impacted around 2.3% of English queries, as well as other languages proportionately.<\/p>\n This was also the first Penguin update to look deeper than the websites homepage and top-level category pages for evidence of link spam being directed to the website.<\/p>\n The only refresh to Penguin 2.0 (2.1) came on October 4 of the same year. It affected about 1% of queries.<\/p>\n While there was no official explanation from Google, data suggests that the 2.1 data refresh also advanced on how deep Penguin looked into a website and crawled deeper, and conducted further analysis as to whether spammy links were contained.<\/p>\n While this was named as a major update, it was, in fact, another data refresh; allowing those impacted by previous updates to emerge and recover, while many others who had continued to utilize spammy link practices and had escaped the radar of the previous impacts saw an impact.<\/p>\n Googler Pierre Far confirmed this through a post on his Google+ profile and that the update would take a \u201cfew weeks\u201d to roll out fully.<\/p>\n Far also stated that this update affected less than 1% of English search queries.<\/p>\n Almost two years after the 3.0 refresh, the final Penguin algorithm update was launched.<\/p>\n The biggest change with this iteration was that Penguin became a part of the core algorithm.<\/a><\/p>\n When an algorithm transcends to become a part of the core, it doesn\u2019t mean that the algorithm\u2019s functionality has changed or may change dramatically again.<\/p>\n It means that Google\u2019s perception of the algorithm has changed, not the algorithm itself.<\/p>\n Now running concurrently with the core, Penguin evaluates websites and links in real-time. This meant that you can see (reasonably) instant impacts of your link building or remediation work.<\/p>\n The new Penguin also wasn\u2019t closed-fisted in handing out link-based penalties but rather devalued the links themselves. This is a contrast to the previous Penguin iterations, where the negative was punished.<\/p>\n That being said, studies and, from personal experience, algorithmic penalties relating to backlinks still do exist.<\/p>\n Data released by SEO professionals (e.g., Michael Cottam<\/a>), as well as seeing algorithmic downgrades lifted through disavow files after Penguin 4.0, enforce this belief.<\/p>\n Soon after the Penguin algorithm was introduced, webmasters and brands who had used manipulative link building techniques or filled their backlink profiles with copious amounts of low-quality links<\/a> began to see decreases in their organic traffic and rankings.<\/p>\n Not all Penguin downgrades were site-wide \u2013 some were partial and only affected certain keyword groups that had been heavily spammed and over-optimized, such as key products and in some cases even brands.<\/p>\n The impact of Penguin can also pass between domains, so changing domains and redirecting the old one to the new can cause more problems in the long run.<\/p>\n Experiments and research show that using a 301 or 302 redirect won\u2019t remove the effect of Penguin, and in the Google Webmasters Forum<\/a>, John Mueller confirmed that using a meta refresh from one domain to a new domain could also cause complications.<\/p>\n In general, we recommend not using meta-refresh type redirects, as this can cause confusion with users (and search engine crawlers, who might mistake that for an attempted redirect).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The disavow tool has been an asset to SEO practitioners, and this hasn\u2019t changed even now that Penguin exists as part of the core algorithm.<\/p>\n As you would expect, there have been studies and theories published that disavowing links<\/a> doesn\u2019t, in fact, do anything to help with link-based algorithmic downgrades and manual actions, but this has theory has been shot down by Google representatives publicly.<\/p>\n @joshbachynski<\/a> disavows can help for Penguin.<\/p>\n \u2014 Matt Cutts (@mattcutts) June 28, 2013<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n That being said, Google recommends that the disavow tool should only be used as a last resort<\/a> when dealing with link spam, as disavowing a link is a lot easier (and a quicker process in terms of its effect) than submitting reconsideration requests for good links.<\/p>\n A disavow file is a file you submit to Google that tells them to ignore all the links included in the file so that they will not have any impact on your site.<\/p>\n The result is that the negative links will no longer cause negative ranking issues with your site, such as with Penguin.<\/p>\n But, it does also mean that if you erroneously included high-quality links<\/a> in your disavow file, those links will no longer help your ranking.<\/p>\n You do not need to include any notes in your disavow file unless they are strictly for your reference. It is fine just to include the links and nothing else.<\/p>\n Google does not read any of the notations you have made in your disavow file, as they process it automatically without a human ever reading it.<\/p>\n Some find it useful to add internal notations, such as the date a group of URLs was added to the disavow file or comments about their attempts to reach the webmaster about getting a link removed.<\/p>\n Once you have uploaded your disavow file, Google will send you a confirmation.<\/p>\n But while Google will process it immediately, it will not immediately discount those links. So, you will not instantly recover from submitting the disavow alone.<\/p>\n Google still needs to go out and crawl those individual links you included in the disavow file, but the disavow file itself will not prompt Google to crawl those pages specifically.<\/p>\n Also, there is no way to determine which links have been discounted and which ones have not been, as Google will still include both in your linking report in Google Search Console.<\/p>\n If you have previously submitted a disavow file to Google, they will replace that file with your new one, not add to it.<\/p>\n So, it is important to make sure that if you have previously disavowed links, you still include those links in your new disavow file.<\/p>\n You can always download a copy of the current disavow file in Google Search Console<\/a>.<\/p>\n It is recommended that you choose to disavow links on a domain level instead of disavowing the individual links.<\/p>\n There will be some cases where you will want to disavow individually specific links, such as on a major site that has a mix of quality versus paid links.<\/p>\n But for the majority of links, you can do a domain-based disavow.<\/p>\n Google only needs to crawl one page on that site for that link to be discounted on your site.<\/p>\n Doing domain-based disavows also means that you do not have to worry about those links being indexed as www or non-www, as the domain-based disavow will take this into account.<\/p>\n If you suspect your site has been negatively impacted by Penguin, you need to do a link audit and remove or disavow the low-quality or spammy links.<\/p>\n Google Search Console<\/a> includes a list of backlinks for site owners, but be aware that it also includes links that are already nofollowed.<\/p>\n If the link is nofollowed, it will not have any impact on your site. But keep in mind that the site could remove that nofollow in the future without warning.<\/p>\n There are also many third-party tools<\/a> that will show links to your site, but because some websites block those third-party bots from crawling their site, they will not be able to show you every link pointing to your site.<\/p>\n And while some of the sites blocking these bots are high-quality well-known sites not wanting to waste the bandwidth on those bots, it is also being used by some spammy sites to hide their low-quality links from being reported.<\/p>\n Monitoring backlinks is also an essential task, as sometimes the industry we work in isn\u2019t entirely honest and negative SEO attacks<\/a> can happen. That\u2019s when a competitor buys spammy links and points them to your site.<\/p>\n Many use \u201cnegative SEO\u201d as an excuse when their site gets caught by Google for low-quality links.<\/p>\n However, Google has said they are pretty good about recognizing this when it happens, so it is not something most website owners need to worry about.<\/p>\n This also means that proactively using the disavow feature without a clear sign of an algorithmic penalty or a notification of a manual action is a good idea.<\/p>\n Interestingly, however, a poll conducted by SEJ in September 2017 found that 38% of SEOs never disavow backlinks<\/a>.<\/p>\n Going through a backlink profile, and scrutinizing each linking domain as to whether it\u2019s a link you want or not, is not a light task.<\/p>\n\n
Why Google Penguin Was Needed<\/h2>\n
\n
Initial Launch & Impact<\/h2>\n
\n
Key Google Penguin Updates & Refreshes<\/h2>\n
Google Penguin 1.1: March 26, 2012<\/h3>\n
Google Penguin 1.2: October 5,<\/span> 2012<\/h3>\n
\n
Google Penguin 2.0: May 22,<\/span> 2013<\/h3>\n
Google Penguin 2.1: October 4, 2013<\/h3>\n
Google Penguin 3.0: October 17,<\/span> 2014<\/h3>\n
Google Penguin 4.0: September 23,<\/span> 2016<\/h3>\n
Google Penguin Algorithmic Downgrades<\/h2>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/marketingnewsbox.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/a-complete-guide-to-the-google-penguin-algorithm-update-via-sejournal-taylordanrw-1.png\")
A website impacted by a Penguin penalty, which took 17 months to lift.<\/em><\/span><\/div>\n\n
Google Penguin Recovery<\/h2>\n
\n
What To Include In A Disavow File<\/h3>\n
Disavowing Individual Links vs. Domains<\/h3>\n
Finding Your Backlinks<\/h3>\n
Link Removal Outreach<\/h3>\n
![\"TOS](\"https:\/\/marketingnewsbox.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/a-complete-guide-to-the-google-penguin-algorithm-update-via-sejournal-taylordanrw-2.png\")