My normal morning routine is to go through my emails, see whether any comments were posted since the computer was shut down the night before, and delete the spam. I expect to receive a bunch of spam comments overnight, typically with names more common in Bangalore than New Jersey.
The spam industry has flourished, due to the bizarrely mistaken belief that someone who leaves a completely nonsensical comment on a blawg will likely get a few people clicking on their name to get to their website offering male enhancement drugs, plumbing services in Des Moines or a DUI lawyer in Orange County.
This morning, however, something relatively new and different happened, worth a few minutes to write this post and put it out there for others. There were more than a hundred spam posts. This, in itself, is neither new or even a record. One day I had more than 500. But today’s were different. Sure, there were the typical crap comments, but only a few. The bulk were, well, special.
The comments received had two rather extraordinary characteristics. First, each comment included a name that corresponded to the email (invariably a gmail or similar account). Names are typically part of the advertisement, with something like “Montana Sheep Farmer” and an email of “shakirpunjab @ bangaloreseospecialists.com.” Not this time. The names and emails matched.
The second characteristic was that the comment was substantive. They would reflect a meaningful reaction to the post, using proper grammar and, in many instances, insightful. Sure, some were crappy, as one would expect, but many were awfully good. Whoever was doing this was putting an enormous amount of effort into it. This was a far better class of spam than I had ever see before.
And it just keeps coming. As I’ve been attempting to post this morning, new spam comments just keep rolling in every few minutes. They continue as I write this post.
While I have no choice but to delete and block them all, I have to admire the diligence employed. They still offer nothing of value to the marketer, unless you’ve come here with a yearning desire to find sleep aids (as if my posts weren’t sufficient), but they show a persistence and degree of effort that surpasses all prior efforts.
How long this will last, and whether I will get the free ten minutes needed to write a real post, I don’t know. But welcome to the newest breed of spam, and the latest threat to a substantive blawgosphere fighting the tide of internet marketing.
Update: I received an email letting me know that the spate of spam that started today is because SJ was “included this month on a backlink packet sold by a woman named Angela,” and that I should anticipate the spam to keep flowing for a while. I assume that this “Angela” refers to , who is in the business of selling backlinks to improve SEO page rank.
For those who feel that they are entitled to spam the internet for their own self-promotion, do you wonder why those of us who actually provide the content might not think it’s no big deal? Going forward, any lawyer links that are used in these spam comments will be outed with extreme prejudice. Needless to say, I do not find this waste of my time funny.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m not sure what sort of framework your blog is built on, but is it possible you need to update?
That has nothing to do with the problem, Moishe. Nor do I want this to go off on a tangent about blogging programs.
Yes, I heard about that Angela Edwards too. She sells the packets on monthly subscription and writes a lot about the packets trying to justify that it is not spam. These packets are being promoted in a number of forums since last one year. Strange enough that she still ranks No 2 in Google for her site and her sale is still successful. Though, I will class Angela’s packets definitely to be spam, I am wondering why so far she has neither been blocked, nor penalized by google not any action taken against her.
Ed. Note: This is what I’m talking about. Have you ever seen such top notch spam? I deleted the URL, making it worthless to the spammer, but reading the content of the comment just blows me away. Never have I seen so much effort go into backlinking, even to the point of slamming the person running the show as a way to keep the comment from deletion while trying to sneak in the backlink. Absolutely unbelievable effort. And yet, not a single URL will get through, no matter how good the comments or how hard they try. It ain’t happening.
Just to correct you on one thing: The spammers don’t post with “the bizarrely mistaken belief that someone who leaves a completely nonsensical comment on a blawg will likely get a few people clicking on their name to get to their website offering male enhancement drugs, plumbing services in Des Moines or a DUI lawyer in Orange County.”
The presence of the backlink is designed to improve their website’s ranking on Google, not to get people to click on it.
In my opinion, Google has created an environment that promotes “spamming” because one of it’s main criteria in ranking a site is the number of links to it. The more links, the better the ranking.
So you actually “helped” Angela’s site ranking by creating a link to it in your post…
I’m not sure why you consider these people who are contributing to your blog, SPAM? One of the points of having a blog, and having people comment on your blog, is thoughtful discussion about the subject. If they do that, then why would you waste your time to consider them SPAM, if they in fact are leaving thoughtful comments? Does anyone with a web presence (10s of millions of people) that leaves a comment and a link to their website on a blog, now considered SPAM? Even if they do not solicit anything? Somethings not right about that conclusion.
Ed. Note: This is another spamming douchebag trying to sell home loans. I’ve deleted the URL but wanted to leave the comment so you can see the twisted reasoning that self-promoters use to justify themselves.
You are absolutely right. I have a hard time thinking like a spammer, and frankly can’t conceive of doing this for page rank. And I’ve changed the Angela link to a “no follow” link, not that I expect my backlink to matter much, but every little bit helps.
SHG, I don’t really agree with you about the Back linking thing. It is something I do myself for myself. I have often commented on a blog site, and seeing that they allow a website link, I use it.
I have on occasion visited your site, both for the information on the posts,intelligence of the posts, and the comments to them. I had the feeling anything I could contribute would not be beneficial to the topic, but really enjoyed the reading.
But it is your site. So I will not leave my website link.
That’s okay that you don’t agree. It wasn’t up for a vote. And since you didn’t leave your URL, you are welcome to leave whatever comment you want.
The difference is that you aren’t commenting for the purpose of gaining a backlink benefit, and if you were, I wouldn’t allow it. Anyone is welcome to join the conversation, but not to use my pagerank to promote yours. This is a discussion, not a marketing opportunity. And there is no trade off (as another self-promoter asserted) of his good comment for my backlink. Comment because you’ve got something to say, not for the backlink.
Hi SHG – a simple solution to cut down on the spam comments is to convert all your comment links to “no-follow”. The so-called ‘spam’ lists target do-follow sites and blogs – and your site is currently do-follow.
fwiw I do use Angela’s lists to help build backlinks to my sites. I guess that makes me a ‘spammer’, but I believe there’s a right and wrong way to do it. It’s my opinion that a well thought out on-topic comment adds to a site’s content and value – regardless of the original motivation for making the comment. That’s a lot different than posting an off-topic comment telling people to buy diet pills through a link.
I have several sites myself, and post comments based on the above guideline. I don’t mind someone leaving a link if they add to the conversation. If their comment is obviously spam then I trash it.
Of course, it’s your blog, so your rules and I respect that.
Here’s the problem, Rich. This is a law blog, not a marketing blog. I neither seek nor desire the “contributions” of those looking for backlinks. My readers don’t want to read your comments. Most of my readers are lawyers, and none of the spammers who’ve arrived today to “contribute” to my blog have offered anything of value. Value is in ideas, and even though many of the comments are far better quality than the typical spam comments, they offer nothing here.
If I make my comments “no-follow”, then my real readers lose. Should I deny them the link love because a herd of spammers decides that they have the right to gain backlinks from me? You offer nothing. You weren’t invited. You aren’t wanted. And most importantly, it’s not up to you, or any of the other spammers, to decide that your contribution to my blog deserves the benefit of the backlink. So your thoughts on the subject of whether you’re providing me with a service are irrelevant. No one asked what you think. Your idea of a good deal isn’t mine, and you don’t get a vote as to how I run my blog.
As to what you do on your “several sites,” I couldn’t care less. Go back to your sites. Do as you please. But don’t return.
As you deleted my earlier comment I have not added my URL in the vain hope that this post may be allowed. I am not a spammer and I have never heard of this Angela woman. For your interest as this is a law blog, I happened upon it by accident following a tortuous series of links on a law topic. As it happens I am interested, as are many here in the UK, in what we consider to be the gross travesty of justice afforded the “Nat West Three” Giles Darby, David Bermingham and Gary Mulgrew and it was a link regarding these poor people that I followed and ultimately ended up on your site, the route by which I doubt I could now replicate. I made what I thought to be an appropriate and aposite comment on a thread and appended my URL as invited so to do and found my post deleted. I consider this a slight on my character. If you would care to do a search on my URL or even my name you will see that I already have page one google ranking for both and have no need of a link-back from a zero page rank comment page.
I doubt that you will allow this, but your actions seem to confirm that which many of us in the U.K. already think, that ‘American Justice’ is an oxymoron.
In the case of your site I can see how only lawyers and such would have anything useful to add to the conversation.
I’m sure your real users appreciate the links, I was simply offering a solution to the quantity of spam you receive as it seems to be frustrating you.
Unfortunately, your spam problem will continue to grow worse. As requested, I won’t return, but as long as search engines use backlinks to determine site quality, and as long as your site is a do-follow PR6, you’re going to get a ton of spam.
As far as the rest of your response:
1. By creating an open blog you’re inviting everyone to participate. That’s the nature of the web. So in a sense I was invited.
2. I get that I’m not wanted and that’s fine.
3. My thoughts may be irrelevant, but the beauty of the web is that we get to put our thoughts out there anyway – relevant or not.
4. Of course I don’t get a vote, just told you how I deal with spam is all.
You seem to take spam very personally. I get it. You’ve taken the time to build a massive website over several years with tons of content and now you feel like spammers are crapping all over it. It sucks. I agree with you. Unfortunately, that’s the nature of the beast.
Anyway, I’m done. Take care.
So you just happened upon this blawg today, and happened to comment on this post (having nothing to do with law), and happened to include your “pest prevention” URL, and now your feelings are hurt? Why would that be? You are free to read anything you want. Comments are at my sufference. They aren’t your right. If you’re legit, you picked a bad day to post your first comment on a post about spam with your pest prevention URL. But then, we both know you’re full of shit.
I run a clean blawg. I’ve never allowed anyone, lawyer or otherwise, to abuse my comments. I surely won’t allow this garbage.
And no, that comments are allowed is not an invitation to use my comments to enhance your backlinks. I’ve deleted more than 20,000 comments in the few years I’ve been doing this. I’m happy to delete more.
If that is your attitude I think it better that we leave it there. You have clearly had a bad day but that does not give you carte blanche to be rude! I bid you good day and wish you well with your battle with the spammers. I also wish you might discover a few manners!
You definitely win as the goofiest commenter of the day. Don’t like me being rude? So go away. Best of luck with the pest prevention biz. Bye.
Your attitude in this matter to a first time visitor to your site simply serves to reinforce the image of Americans which many of us hold here in Britain, rude, arrogant, overbearing and frankly not overly bright! I shall make no further comment on this matter now as I consider it unsporting to hold a battle of wits with an un-armed man.
For a spammer, I like you. This place won’t be the same without you.
SHG,
Good for you, I wouldn’t allow this on my blog either and I am one of Angela’s customers…lol Unfortunately, as previously stated, google and other search engines make back linking a necessary evil – unless you have years to establish a content rich blawg as you have done here. However, for the rest of us who are just trying to make a buck, this is what we are reduced to. I don’t like it either and I admire your stance on defending the blog you have worked so hard to create. Good luck to you..now I’m off to some more back linking…
You mean all along I could have been making a living selling spammers a link to your blog? $5 per month per person, multiplied by the number of SEO gurus who follow me on Twitter. Why, I could quit my day job! I am distraught that I did not know about this sooner.
Don’t blame Google.
“At best, a link spammer might spend hours doing spammy linkdrops which would count for little or nothing because Google is pretty good at devaluing these types of links.”
Our host will permit me a link:
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/11/hard-facts-about-comment-spam.html
I appreciate your honesty. As you can see, some of your brethren have been a little less forthright.
Your eyes must be blurry. Having had the pleasure of reviewing about 20 of the comments today, the grammar was NOT good (see above).
I feel like I’m in the Twilight Zone. Fuck your readers and there “link love!” Make it a no-follow comments section and make them go AWAY!
“I do use Angela’s lists to help build backlinks to my sites. I guess that makes me a ‘spammer’, but I believe there’s a right and wrong way to do it. It’s my opinion that a well thought out on-topic comment adds to a site’s content and value – regardless of the original motivation for making the comment. That’s a lot different than posting an off-topic comment telling people to buy diet pills through a link.”
Exactly. I CLEARLY tell folks to make pertinent comments and show them to ONLY use the set up that the blog allows and I specify to use their REAL names and not do the “keywords-as-name” thing that really does look spammy. I would be glad to send the website owner my instructions about this.
Google and the other Search Engines have set up this system and “blog commenting for links” has been around since LONG before I ever came into this game.
Yeah, I think putting lists of links to sales sites in the middle of conversations is spammy, but I don’t see how using the blog’s “link set up” exactly the way it’s supposed to be used is “spam”. Is it “spam” SIMPLY because it benefits the commenter’s website? Who makes up the “spam rules” and decides what is and isn’t spam? What about a comment that benefits the website that the comment is on? Is that “spam” if the commenter used the URL set up that the blog allows? If the blog doesn’t want people linking to their sites, it’s easy to remove the URL feature.
I’ve had folks who are in my program find sites like this one that they LOVE and that they continue to participate on; I have brought traffic to many sites. How is that wrong? I LOVE sites about legal stuff, myself, so this blog truly interests me. I know I am not alone.
Did I ask you to increase my traffic? Did I ask you to get me more comments? Did I agree to this “marriage of convenience” as you rationalize it? Yet you feel entitled to sell my blog to your customers and tell me that you’re doing me a favor?
I don’t participate in scams. Even though some (but not all) of your customers leave better comments than the typical spammer, they are spammers nonetheless as they are not actual readers but users, here only to use my pagerank to improve theirs. Not one of them will gain a single backlink here, as I’ve deleted the lot of them, and even in the few instances where I allowed their comment, I deleted their backlink. I will continue to do so. Not one will gain any benefit here.
They are welcome to read anything they want, as much as they want. But they will never be allowed to include a commercial backlink in a comment. No one has before, and no one will in the future. I have never allowed my blog to be used as a haven for scams, and I certainly have no intention of allowing it to happen now. For better or worse, every comment that appears on this blog is real, by someone who chose to read and comment for no other reason than to express themselves. It will remain that way.
You don’t have to see it, feel it, agree with it. You get no vote here. Who decides what’s spam? At this blog, I do.
Wow. A lot of heat on this discussion. Let’s just remember that Spam refers to unwanted emails sent without permission. I think the term has gotten way out of control. SHG – You obviously have the power to police your own blog and decide what sticks and what goes away.
Personally I dont know why people concentrate so much on back links. It’s an SEO thing and all Google has to do is change their way of doing things and POOF. Your hours of backlink slavery are gone, Kaput, history.
I think if people just concentrated of offering value to people, rather than trying to trick the search engines, they would be better off. Just my take. Great blog here by the way.
Agreeing with Jack, I would not allow the spam that is being produced to be allowed on my site, and I, as well, am one of Angela’s customers. I do see people consistently stepping outside of the boundaries Angela has set forth, and not adding any real value to the conversation. This upsets me, for no reason other than people’s ignorance. Most of the time I will skip over these sites completely, and Angela has actually discontinued the addition of ‘comment’ sites in her packets.
I do like a lot of the sites in her packets, and will continue visiting them on a regular basis even after my initial visit, though this one I won’t. Law is not one of my current interests. You have, however, given me something that I myself feel I have added some value to. Well, maybe not to, but it has been a meaningful 30 minutes for me to browse your ‘spam’ posts and take in people’s opinions on the matter. Or what they pretend is their opinion.
It’s obvious from the whirlwind of activity on your blog and in the links shared with us here from across the web that ‘spam’ is not only very controversial, but is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I would consider all of these comments and posts YOU are creating to be spam on your own site. You may not, but what value do they add to SJ? What will your readers gain by reading all of this? I wouldn’t say much. However, move it to a site about spam, where people are there to learn about it and other people’s opinions on it, and it wouldn’t be considered spam. It would add value.
And now, after rambling and making not much sense at all to most people(as I often do) I, as well, am off to find sites I am interested in, in hopes that I can add value, and in turn, the administrators of those sites will deem me necessary to promote with a link. That’s how life works is it not?
We have a difference in mindset. I don’t concern myself with “adding value,” a concept that only matters if value is what you’re seeking. I post about whatever I want to post about, whether it’s law, blogging or spam. Some of the readers here enjoy my posts in one area and hate my posts in another. Others simply don’t care when I stray from law into another area. Either way, it’s of no consequence for me because this is my blawg and I write whatever I want to write.
Of course, the irony of all this is despite my disdain for “value”, it’s where Angela sends her customers to gain page rank. Go figure.
From urbandictionary (leaving off putting a link in a comment for now)
“Woosh: Used to denote when a comment has gone over someone’s head. Onomatopoetic to the sound of an object moving past you at an accelerated pace.”
This guy. Whoosh.
No, email spam is specifically the abuse of email to send unsolicited bulk email indiscriminately.
More generally spam is just the abuse of electronic messaging systems (including most broadcast media, digital delivery systems) to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately.
Comment spam is a kind of spam.
Unsolicited, yes.
Indiscriminate? I say yes as well. You’re not here for the discussion, you’re here because the site appeared on a list that you bought from a fairly dodgy looking site. You would (and did?) go to any site on that list regardless of what it was about and that’s what indiscriminate means.
I think you went too easy on Angela.
Has she urged people to spam my blog the ways she did yours my headline would have read “Angela Edwards Sucks”
And i’d include in the post all of her sucky clients that spam here.
Because, since I hit the “subscribe to this entry” button when I post, it means I get their spam in my mailbox.
You were way too kind.
I know, I know. I’m too much of a softie. If you’ve been getting the comments that make it through before I can delete them, then you have an idea what I’m dealing with. What is most disturbing is how so many people believe that the internet in general, and this blog in particular, exists to make them a buck. They spam me and tell me that they don’t see a problem.
I hope that the lawyers seeing this begin to grasp the downward spiral caused by marketers and their gimmicks. Is the buck really worth it? My fear is that many will say yes without hesitation.
After your downright rudeness to me a couple of days ago I unsubscribed from your list however I am still getting your emails. Now who is spamming?
Oh my god. That must be horrible, getting all the spam comments that I’ve been forced to delete, one by one, time after time. I feel your pain.
Unfortunately, I have no control over your subscription. I can’t subscribe you. I can’t unsubscribe you. Perhaps my rude American subscription program doesn’t understand your accent. Maybe you should talk to it slowly, nicely, and it will be more compliant. Or maybe you will just have to suffer for your spamming. Beats me.
Such impudence! Such cheek! Is this the way you address fellow barristers in law courts? Judges? Such are your audience, and I think not. Why then must you berate and harang the reading public, those who come to your website, as I did, searching for information on the barbarities of your primitive legal system?
Kindly terminate my subscription, sir, at once, lest I be forced inform potential clients, far and wide, on this shore and abroad, of these iniquities.
You are definitely my favorite spammer. Of course that’s not the way I address fellow barristers. But you, if memory serves, are not a barrister. You, my dear spammer friend, are in pest prevention. Ironic, no? See, I’ve even given you a free banklink here, since you’ve worked so very hard for it.
Yet again, however, I am sad to inform you that I lack the ability to either subscribe you or unsubscribe you. As much as I would like to relieve you of the pain of reading the crap of your fellow spammers, I cannot. But I still feel your pain.
I can’t believe I’m responding to a spammer, but here goes:
Isn’t it actually quite useful to the user having a link inside the comment, blog, or forum? Is there really any other way out there to advertise a website online besides getting your website out there and seen? There has to be alternatives to organic search results and paid advertising….
I’d love some feedback, thanks!
Sure there are alternatives. Why not put up a billboard on your neighbors lawn? I mean, isn’t that what it’s there for? That ought to get you some attention.
How about this idea for getting your site known…write something intelligent that people actually want to read and link to.
If you’re going to slime blogs, at least try to have the style of that Chadwick fellow.
Now I can’t delete his post, and can only delete the backlink and ban him for the future. Please don’t feed the spammers.
You should try reading it from a British perspective, or in fact most American websites for that matter, and what an assault on the ears we have had to endure for the last few years everytime your ex-president attempted to say ‘nuclear’ or ‘aluminium’.