Hackers are selling fake 'Likes' on FB, Instragram
-
An interesting article on how to get social media buzz:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/16/fake-instagram-likes_n_3769247.html
-
Checking the news today. The gentlemen apparently did received the $500.
-
Nice! Thank you David for the share.
-
Wow. Look at how much negative PR this created. Much more than $500. I'm sure they get plenty of emails on vulnerabilities, but each one should be looked at. If not, look at what happens...
-
Yeah. I believe it was Ian Lurie @ Portent who said "FB needs to hire this guy"
-
If I was the boss at FB... this guy would have been paid - more than $500 - and given a hot line to the chief of security.
-
Can you believe the security head telling the guy he won't get paid?
It seems the security engineer shouldn't be paid.
-
Here's a fun Facebook hacker story http://rt.com/news/facebook-post-exploit-hacker-zuckerberg-621/#.UhJPVHjA3Q8.twitter
-
Not quite Hacking but despicable all the same.
See this video clip from the UK investigation programme 'Dispatches' - 'Click farms': how some businesses manipulate social media - Channel 4 Dispatches video trailer. I'm not sure if you can see the programme outside the UK but you should get the general idea from this 'Guardian' posting.
People bent on fraud and shortest route to quick gains will try anything Christopher
http://www.theguardian.com/media/video/2013/aug/02/click-farms-social-media-video
David
-
Not really sure of the question here. This has been around awhile. Like all these schemes they really do not add any long term value. Talk to newt Ginigritch ;). http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/aug/04/newt-gingrich-twitter
-
No idea.
Incentivizing social is easier than incentivizing backlinks and there's a quite a bit of gray area in acquiring backlinks.
-
Is there a way Google can detect hacked social buzz vs those who pay FB to boost a post?
Best,
Christopher -
I hope Google is reading and adjusting social algo indicators accordingly.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
How good/bad the exit intent pop-ups? What is Google's perspective?
Hi all, We have launched the exit intent pop-ups on our website where a pop-up will appear when the visitor is about to leave the website. This will trigger when the mouse is moved to the top window section; as an attempt by the visitor to close the window. We see a slight ranking drop post this pop-up launch. As the pop-up is appearing just before someone leaves the website; does this making Google to see as if the user left because of the pop-up and penalizing us? What is your thoughts and suggestions on this? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz1 -
I would like opinions on Brian Dean's training courses and his advice -- is it useful?
I would like opinions on Brian Dean's training courses and his advice -- has anyone used it successfully? Is it worth the cost? And useful?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | marketingdepartment.ch1 -
Infinite Scrolling on Publisher Sites - is VentureBeat's implementation really SEO-friendly?
I've just begun a new project auditing the site of a news publisher. In order to increase pageviews and thus increase advertising revenue, at some point in the past they implemented something so that as many as 5 different articles load per article page. All articles are loaded at the same time and from looking in Google's cache and the errors flagged up in Search Console, Google treats it as one big mass of content, not separate pages. Another thing to note is that when a user scrolls down, the URL does in fact change when you get to the next article. My initial thought was to remove this functionality and just load one article per page. However I happened to notice that VentureBeat.com uses something similar. They use infinite scrolling so that the other articles on the page (in a 'feed' style) only load when a user scrolls to the bottom of the first article. I checked Google's cached versions of the pages and it seems that Google also only reads the first article which seems like an ideal solution. This obviously has the benefit of additionally speeding up loading time of the page too. My question is, is VentureBeat's implementation actually that SEO-friendly or not. VentureBeat have 'sort of' followed Google's guidelines with regards to how to implement infinite scrolling https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/02/infinite-scroll-search-friendly.html by using prev and next tags for pagination https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en. However isn't the point of pagination to list multiple pages in a series (i.e. page 2, page 3, page 4 etc.) rather than just other related articles? Here's an example - http://venturebeat.com/2016/11/11/facebooks-cto-explains-social-networks-10-year-mission-global-connectivity-ai-vr/ Would be interesting to know if someone has dealt with this first-hand or just has an opinion. Thanks in advance! Daniel
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Daniel_Morgan1 -
OSE report doesn't quite reflect the fact for me?
Hope someone could get me some insight if possible. We operate SEO purely on whitehat and for a popular keyword that we have worked hard for years now we ranks 10th. I have compared us with a few competitors who rank better (ranked 1st and 3rd) on OSE and found things confusing. In the following matrix we are way ahead of them in: Domain Authority
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | LauraHT
Page Authority
Just-Discovered
root domain
total links
Social like/Social shares All score of above of our site are substantially higher than the competitors. one of the competitors has only one thing better than us:
Internal Equity-Passing Links plus It shows that both competitors have lots of low quality links as follow -forum signature anchor text links where the account no contribution to the forum
-low authority directories links where many of them are overseas and not industry specific
-links from article sites
-link from sites that are in totally different industries where we only have very a few or no from above I am thinking if the matrix figures from OSE dont count then what else I should be looking at. Any advice? please forgive me if I chose the wrong support question type.0 -
Are directory listings still appropriate in 2013? Aren't they old-style SEO and Penguin-worthy?
We have been reviewing our off-page SEO strategy for clients and as part of that process, we are looking at a number of superb info-graphics on the subject. I see that some of current ones still list "Directories" as being part of their off-page strategy. Aren't these directories mainly there for link-building purposes and provide Users no real benefit? I don't think I've ever seen a directory that I would use, apart for SEO research. Surely Google's Penguin algorithm would see directories in the same way and give them less value, or even penalise websites that use them to try to boost page rank? If I were to list my websites on directories it wouldn't be to share my lovely content with people that use directories to find great sites, it would be to sneakily build page rank. Am I missing the point? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Crumpled_Dog
Scott0 -
Why won't my home page rank for branded terms?
Hello, I've been trying to figure out what factors are causing my home page not to rank for my branded terms. The site is www.lipozene.com and after the late April Google algorithm our rankings have disappeared off the map for the term "lipozene". Different element of the site show up in organic rankings, including our shopping cart (http://shop.lipozene.com) as high as page two. However, the home page is not ranking organically. On Yahoo & Bing we have never dropped out of the number 1 spot. We did engage in some link building activities, however we've removed nearly all of the links that were created by our SEO guy. I did NOT receive any notifications from Google regarding their link policy. If you search for lipozene.com we rank #1. Any thoughts on what we're missing thats causing us to not rank is greatly apprecaited. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | lipoweb0 -
What happened with Hayneedle's rankings?
Hayneedle is an e-commerce company that operates 200 niche sites selling indoor and outdoor home products. They were ranking at the top of the first page for most terms related to their sites (fire pits, fountains, benches, etc.), but all of a sudden at the end of April they lost their rankings, getting dropped to page 4 or lower for tons of their sites (barstools.com, patiofurnitureusa.com, adirondackchairs.com, benches.com, etc.). Does anybody know what caused this? Other than one thread on an SEO forum, we haven't been able to find any discussion about it online. It seems like cross-linking between the sites could have been a problem here, but we'd love to hear thoughts from the experts here on this. Our company is using the same business model of one brand with niche sites and we want to avoid anything like this happening to us.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | outdoorliving0 -
Are there any "legitimate" paid links in Google's eyes?
The news about paid link campaigns is so frequent, that I have to ask the question....does Google allow any paid links? Aside from SEO, paid links can have visibility value. Much like an exit sign on the highway, the paid link says "Get off here"
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | bcmull0