Throughout my relatively short SEO career (I first encountered SEO in September 2018), I’ve heard numerous opinions about what constitutes Gray, Black, and White Hat link building. Some specialists believe that any links you build, rather than those that appear organically, are considered Gray or Black Hat links. Others argue that links created through HARO or listing in local directories are White Hat links. In this article, I want to focus on the aspect of link building because discussing all SEO strategies would result in an extremely long article, and I believe the topic of White and Black Hat link building methods raises the most questions, both from my clients and colleagues.
Let me start by saying that I consider all paid link building, which affects search engine results, to be Gray or Black Hat SEO. I will explain why later in the article, but first, let’s introduce the different concepts for those unfamiliar with the various shades of SEO.
What is Meant by White or Gray/Black Hat Link Building?
Let’s start at the beginning: people often divide SEO into two colors, White and Black, much like Yin and Yang. I’m not sure where the concept of “hats” originated from, but it doesn’t really matter. In general terms, White Hat SEO is considered any type of work that Google or other search engines deem acceptable.
In this article, I will focus only on Google since it holds a near-monopoly for most search queries across age groups. Other search engines have similar algorithms, but we’ll focus on Google.
On the other hand, Black and Gray Hat (I’ll explain the difference between these two later) methods are considered manipulative and unacceptable by search engines. If a search engine, in this case Google, detects that you’re doing something unacceptable, they can impose penalties on your site.
What’s the Difference Between Gray and Black Hat?
Some SEO specialists argue that not all activities that are deemed unacceptable by search engines are equally bad. That’s why they differentiate between Gray and Black Hat SEO. In the context of link building, Black Hat is seen as something that goes beyond unethical practices to outright illegal activities. For example, hacking websites to place links back to your site would be considered Black Hat.
Gray Hat, on the other hand, refers to practices that violate Google’s rules but don’t break any actual laws in your country. An example of this is creating a Private Blog Network (PBN) to build links to your website or buying dofollow links from indexed pages pointing to your site. Before diving into why Google disapproves of such links, I want to clarify something.
The Complexity of Defining Black and White Link Building Strategies
There’s a small issue with these “hat” definitions—they’re not set in stone and are not clearly defined by Google. Sure, Google provides guidelines on how to create content and purchase links without breaking its rules. Google has even introduced the rel=”sponsored” tag, which you’re supposed to use on links when someone pays you for them. But we’ll leave the rules aside for now, as this section isn’t about that.
The main problem is that there’s no universally accepted principle for determining which links fall under which category (White, Black, or Gray). Different SEO specialists interpret these concepts differently, but the important question is, what does Google think? And yes, you’re right—what SEO specialists think doesn’t matter much. At the end of the day, we’re all evaluated by how we perform in the search engine results pages (SERPs), so let’s look at how we should be building links according to Google’s guidance.
How Does Google Want Us to Build Links?
It’s important to distinguish between two types of link building: buying links and adding links naturally, like when you write an article and add a link to external sources to help readers better understand the context.
Note: When you link to an external source to improve the user’s understanding of the topic you’re discussing, such links are called natural links.
Let’s Consider Links We Buy or Sell
Interestingly, some SEO specialists believe that Google prohibits selling links to other sites. This is not true. Google allows the buying and selling of links, provided those links do not influence the transmission of PageRank.
Note: PageRank is an algorithm that helps build search engine results, but explaining it would require a separate article. In short, when you create a dofollow link from Site A to Site B, Site A passes some of its authority to Site B, by “giving” its PageRank to website B. This can help Site B rank better (or worse if Site A has a bad reputation with Google).
Still unclear about what PageRank is? Or have other questions? Feel free to reach out, and I’ll try to answer them.
Simply put, Google does not want you to sell or buy links that influence how organic search rankings are determined. And dofollow links do exactly that. That’s why Google recommends (or more accurately, insists) that when you buy or sell links, they should adhere to one of the following principles:
- The sold link must have the rel=”nofollow” tag. Also, in recent years, Google introduced the rel=”sponsored” tag, which you can also use to label sold links. By adding this tag, you’re clearly signaling to Google that the link is sponsored. The rel=”nofollow” tag, on the other hand, tells Google that you don’t want to associate your site with the linked page. While Google used to recommend the rel=”nofollow” tag for paid links before rel=”sponsored” existed, using either tag is acceptable based on Google’s guidelines.
- The link should be on a page that is closed off from Google’s indexing or should point to a page that’s not indexed by Google.
In other words, if you sell or buy a link, you must ensure it doesn’t influence how either your site or the site you linked to is ranked.
Now Let’s Look at Naturally Built Links
These are links added to complement the content. For example, while writing this article, I might link to Google’s guidelines so that readers interested in learning more can read the original source. This is how Google expects dofollow links to be created naturally. By placing a dofollow link, you’re essentially saying, “Here’s a source that’s credible enough to complement the information I’m providing.” If you’re unsure about the quality of the source, the link should be a nofollow link.
An attentive reader might ask, “Does this mean I can create dofollow links as long as I consider the source to be relevant and authoritative, and it’s not for advertising purposes?” Yes, that’s correct—such links are natural, and Google considers them appropriate.
Can I Reach Out to Publications to Get Links If I’m an Authoritative Source?
Yes, you can build dofollow links this way. If your link is added because you’re relevant and authoritative enough to serve as a source, this is considered proper outreach. You’re reaching out to relevant resources, offering your knowledge or insights, and in return, asking for a link. This type of link is both proper and “natural,” as SEO experts like to say.
Does This Mean Google Will Rank Me Higher If I Build the Right Links?
And here’s where the paradox of this article comes in: often, no. Those who buy dofollow links tend to rank higher, while those trying to earn “natural” links usually see poorer results. This is a hard truth I’ve observed throughout my career. One day, I would love to update this article and say that White Hat link-building strategies outperform others. But for now, the reality is that most successful SEO projects buy links. Explaining why would require another article, but this is the reality of link building.
Conclusion: The Sad Truth About the Hats
We’ve discussed what kinds of links can be built and bought, and the fact that most successful SEO projects lean toward “black” practices while claiming they follow “white” ones. Are there projects that strictly adhere to Google’s guidelines for link building? Yes. Are there projects in the top rankings with dofollow links purchased from sites selling them? Also, yes. Which projects do I see more often in the top 10—those with “unnatural” links or those likely to have natural ones? In my experience, the “unnatural” are more common than the latter.
