Google's link spam policies and link attributes

0:00 Google's link spam policies

Every year, businesses lose rankings and budgets to link tactics that someone promised were safe. Private networks. Paid guest posts. Niche edits. Parasite pages on big news sites. In this lecture you'll learn exactly what Google's spam policies say about links, the three related policies that catch link builders out, and how to qualify links with sponsored, ugc and nofollow, so you can tell a client in one sentence whether a tactic is safe.

0:32 Why it matters

Why does this matter so much? Two reasons. First, Google's systems, including SpamBrain, are designed to neutralise spammy links. So money spent on them is often simply wasted. Second, patterns of manipulation can lead to a manual action, and that can hurt a whole site. For an agency, recommending violating tactics is also a reputational and contractual risk. Knowing the policies is not optional. It's professional hygiene.

1:01 The definition

Here's the definition. Google describes link spam as creating links to or from a site primarily to manipulate rankings. Notice the word primarily. It's about intent and effect. Think of it like sports doping. Training hard, eating well and hiring a great coach are fine. Taking a banned substance to fake performance is not. Links earned by being useful are training. Links bought to fake popularity are doping.

1:31 Google's link spam examples

So what's on the list? Buying or selling links that pass ranking credit, including swapping goods or free products for links. Excessive link exchanges. Automated link creation. Requiring a link in terms of service or a contract without letting the owner qualify it. Advertorials and text ads that pass credit. Guest posts with optimised anchor text. Low quality directory and bookmark links. Keyword rich links hidden in widgets. Widely distributed footer links. And forum comments with optimised links.

2:05 Not banned: guest posts, directories, partnerships, sponsorships, ads

And here's what's not banned, which people forget. Guest posting itself. Directories. Partnerships. Sponsorships. Advertising. The issue is links placed primarily to manipulate rankings and not qualified properly. Now, three related policies. Site reputation abuse: third party pages hosted on a reputable site to exploit its ranking signals, even with the host's involvement. Expired domain abuse: buying an old domain for its reputation and filling it with low value content. And scaled content abuse: mass producing pages, with AI or people, mainly to rank.

2:42 Recent updates (2026)

Two recent updates to know. In May twenty twenty-six, Google clarified that attempts to manipulate generative AI answers in Search, AI Overviews and AI Mode, fall under the same spam policies. And in August twenty twenty-six, Google changed how site reputation abuse is enforced inside the European Economic Area. Outside the EEA, a manual action affects the violating section. Inside it, Google may separate that section so it ranks on its own merits. The policy still applies everywhere.

3:16 Link attributes (hints since 2020)

Now, link attributes. Rel sponsored is for ads, sponsorships, paid placements and affiliate links. Rel ugc is for user generated content like comments and forum posts. Rel nofollow is for anything you don't want to vouch for, and it's still acceptable for paid links. Since twenty twenty, Google treats all three as hints. It may use them or ignore them for ranking, and may use them for crawling and indexing decisions. You can combine them, for example ugc and nofollow together.

3:51 Example 1 (simple)

Worked example one, simple. A skincare brand sends free products to twenty beauty bloggers, and several link back in their reviews. Is that link spam? It can be, if the links pass ranking credit. Sending free products in exchange for a link is on Google's list. The fix is easy. The links should be sponsored or nofollow, and the bloggers must disclose the relationship to readers under advertising rules like the FTC in the US or the ASA in the UK.

4:26 Example 2 (illustrative)

Worked example two, realistic and illustrative. Priya is the new marketing lead at a UK fintech startup. She inherits a vendor contract: forty niche edits a month, links inserted into old articles on unrelated blogs, exact match anchors, paid monthly. The vendor says it's undetectable. What should she do? First, recognise the pattern. These are paid links that pass credit, with optimised anchors. That's link spam by definition.

4:56 Priya's plan

Here's her plan. She pauses the contract and documents why, in writing, with the policy wording. She audits existing placements and flags the worst for removal or, if they're extensive, a disavow. She redirects the budget to a data study on how UK freelancers manage tax, plus expert commentary from the company's head of compliance. The result, over the following months, is fewer links, but links from publications customers actually read. And the site is no longer carrying the risk.

5:31 Everyday scenarios

Let's also run through a quick table of everyday scenarios, because this is what clients actually ask. A guest post on an industry site? Fine if it's genuinely useful and you're not stuffing keyword anchors. Many publications nofollow contributor links, and that's okay. An affiliate programme? Mark affiliate links sponsored. A partner page listing your suppliers? Fine if it helps users, but avoid reciprocal swaps at scale. A press release through a distribution service? Those links should be nofollow. The value is exposure, not ranking credit. And a client asking you to buy niche edits? Explain the policy risk in writing and propose earned alternatives.

6:17 Watch me do it: audit outbound link attributes

Watch me do it. A client runs a sponsorship page and a partners page, and I'm going to check whether their outbound links are qualified properly. First, I copy the Python script from the lesson into a file and change two things: the list of pages to check, and the site's own hostname. Next, I run it. It fetches each page, parses every link, and prints any external link that has neither sponsored nor nofollow. On the sponsors page, it prints four unqualified links. Those are paid relationships, so each one needs rel sponsored. On the partners page it prints two links to genuine technology partners with an integration. Those aren't paid, so they can stay as normal links, and I note why. Then, for a bigger site, I switch to Screaming Frog. I crawl the site, export all outlinks, and filter external links on the sponsor template where the rel column is empty. Finally, I write a one paragraph note for the developer: which template, which attribute, and a before and after code example. The whole check takes twenty minutes, and it removes one of the easiest link spam risks a site can carry: selling or swapping links without qualifying them.

7:45 Common mistakes

Common mistakes. Believing nofollow links are worthless. They drive traffic, awareness, and they're hints. Paying for guest posts that are really just undisclosed paid links. Ignoring advertising disclosure law when gifting products. And trusting the undetectable argument. Even if something appears to work for a while, Google can devalue those links at any time, and the client carries the risk, not the vendor.

8:12 Recap

Recap. Link spam means links created primarily to manipulate rankings: bought, swapped, automated or embedded at scale. Paid links, sponsorships and affiliate links need rel sponsored or nofollow. Site reputation abuse, expired domain abuse and scaled content abuse catch link builders too, and the policies now cover attempts to manipulate AI answers. Try this now. List every link activity your team or vendor runs, and mark each one: fine, needs sponsored, or stop.