On this page I outline methods some webmasters use in their quest to trick search engines into finding their site more relevant than it really is - or even to include it in search results to which they have no relevance at all.

I don't advocate or condone using any of these tricks. Any trick that dilutes the quality of search results is bad for the entire internet community. Searchers get frustrated, truly relevant sites get overlooked, search engines continue to tighten up, and the job of webmaster gets more and more complicated. Every loophole exploited by crafty webmasters eventually results in some form of fix by the search engines. Those fixes are often as disruptive as were the tricks themselves.

You really don't need to trick the search engines. On my previous page on search engines I introduce the idea that the search engines just want to be your friend. On the page that follows this one, I address how to work with search engines without resorting to shortsighted games many webmasters play.

That "game" gets played out in a number of ways. Search engines are forced to put alot of resources into countering any techniques that result in the quality of search results being diluted. Every new trick gets new countermeasures by the search engines - it is the internet's arms race.

One of the early tricks was commonly known as "tiny text". Extensive lists of tiny text would be included on the page. The idea was to include words likely to be searched, even if those words had nothing to do with the page's content. Sometimes the webmaster's included the same word hundreds of times believing search engines algorithms would rank them higher in any search that used that particular word. The next evolution of the tiny text technique was to make the list of unrelated words invisible. The color of the text would be specified to match the page background. Part of the idea was that it would take visitors longer to realize they had been duped, and much less likely to complain. Of course most search engine algorithms now attempt to filter out such methods - using tiny text or invisible text is like giving your page a death wish.

Most of the tricks currently in vogue involve "gateway pages" and abuses of the meta tags.

Many webmasters are so absorbed in their goal of higher search engine placement that they see nothing wrong with using gateway pages. The idea is to create a basic page who's only purpose is have optimal performance on a particular search engine. The page scores well on the search engine and the visitor then clicks through to the real content page from the gateway page - a page that presumably wouldn't have placed as high in the search results. The gateway page has no real content - its sole purpose is to capture higher search positioning for a particular search engine. Webmasters employing this technique each create and submit dozens, if not hundreds, of gateway pages. For each search engine dozens of gateway pages can be created - one optimized for each relevant keyword ( potential search word ). Typically each gateway page contains a few paragraphs of carefully constructed text featuring the "correct" placement and frequency of keyword usage. The technique adds to the number of the pages the search engines must index and dilutes the quality of search results.

Because creating optimized gateway pages is hard work, most webmasters employing them focus on creating the most minimal pages possible that will score well for a particular engine. It is hard work because it is necessary to have a very high level of understanding of what each search engine prefers and ranks most favorably - and you might have to create and submit hundreds of pages. Achieving the required level of understanding you need to be successful with this technique is well beyond the analytical prowess of any individual. The professional webmasters who play this game recognize the need for the services of a product like WebPosition Gold. It is software that involves an extensive knowledge base that is regularly updated to help webmasters understand the cryptic intricacies of search engine algorithms.

As a reaction to gateway pages, search engines have found a way to fight back. Many are starting to give preference to longer pages ( most gateway pages are inherently brief because the webmaster has to create so many of them - they aren't "real" content pages ). Whilst this might lessen the impact of gateway pages skewing search results, it has a much more substantial effect on webmasters in general. Preference by search engine algorithms for longer pages disadvantages a great many good quality pages - ones that happen to be short on words. For instance, graphically oriented sites could be disadvantaged by such a systemic preference. Every "reaction" by the engines to webmaster attempts to "trick" them, has potential implications on the whole content/page creating community.

Any meta tag abuse by shortsighted webmasters threatens the quality of search results - and threatens the greater content creation community. If you don't know, meta tags are special html tags allowing a page to contain information about the page itself. The most common meta tags are the title, keywords, and the description. Title tags get displayed by browsers as the window title. Description meta tags are not usually displayed by browsers except if the user chooses to "view source" - which displays all the html as a text file. The keywords meta tag is directed specifically at search engines. It allows the page creator to identify a list of potential search words and phrases that relate to the content of the page. I suppose it originally came about because it was recognized that identifying keywords would assist a search engine in rating the relevancy of pages to search queries. This is particularly important for pages that are graphically oriented since they are difficult for a search engine to rate - search engines are technologically unable to analyze graphic files for content.

Many meta tag abuses are based on the classic con known as the bait & switch. Some webmasters write cleverly worded meta tags that are "bait": deceptively worded meta tags to lure unsuspecting visitors. The "switch" happens when the visitor is redirected to another page - often having little resemblance to what they saw in the search engine. The abuse can be ridiculous. My wife was searching for "ovarian cancer" - a bait & switch took her to a porn site! You may have experienced similar abuses. The technique used is as follows: Basically it is similar in concept to the gateway pages discussed above except the redirecting pages have no content! The webmaster develops and submit to the search engines html documents that when accessed use a javascript to automatically redirect browsers to another page. Using this method dozens if not hundreds of effectively invisible pages can be redirected to a single page. Each invisible page can be designed to address a different search query thereby extending the reach of the content page well beyond its normal limits.

This bait & switch technique could severely compromise the quality of search engine results. Most major search engines have responded to the threat by filtering out pages that use redirects. While their response might help eliminate a serious abuse it also impacts on legitimate uses of redirects.

Not all bait & switch meta tricks involve redirects. One variation is to include things like a competitor's name or trademarks in one's meta tags with the intent of diverting searchers from what they are really looking for - the competitor! If you do this you could find yourself in court for trademark violation. Also remember the entire world wide web is being archived for the historical record - any sneaky tricks you do are being recorded and could come back to haunt you. Some search engines welcome snitches to come forward and point out pages that incorporate obvious abuses. They then drop the pages from their database without explanation.

When meta tag content accurately reflects page content, meta-based search systems have the potential to work well. In reality, the basic requirement that webmasters must write suitably accurate meta tags has not been fully adopted by the webmaster community. There continues to be a minority who seem to think it is ineffective to have their meta tags accurately describe their page content. They intentionally try to be vague - as if they think someone will follow the link out of curiosity. Likewise some webmasters just can't resist using heavy promotional wording ( like "this is the greatest page in the world" ) that says nothing of substance about the page.

By failing to accurately describe their pages they damage the potential of the search engines to direct highly targeted traffic to their sites. Relatively widespread abuse of meta tags puts pressure on the search engines to lessen their importance or even to ignore them. These reactions are bad news for the entire content creation community. Typically when a search engine lessens its reliance on meta tags it uses the page's first paragraph as an alternative to the description tag. Whereas the meta tags afforded the webmaster a high degree of control over how a page was described, first paragraphs are inherently constrained. It may not be appropriate to your pages to have the first paragraph of each be description of the page's content. ( Imagine how screwed up literature would be if it were necessary to put the kind of info found on the book jacket, into the opening paragraphs of each chapter ). Meta tags really are the best way for webmasters to provide info suited to the search engine need for keywords and a description. Support the continued existence of meta tags by striving to always create meta tags that accurately describe page content. This will help the engines that use them to provide more relevant search results than those that don't - that will encourage all engines to use meta tags.

I'm happy to report that you don't need "tricks" to get traffic from the search engines. They can bring you highly targeted, motivated visitors. Your search engine success doesn't require you to sell your soul to the devil and join the email spammer in the gutter. Instead of focusing on search engine tricks, try and understand what the engines are trying to achieve.

On the following page I explain how you can work with search engines without resorting to tricks ...

PS - I hope you already visited my previous page. It is an introduction to search engine positioning.

Oh and if you know of other search engine tricks I should include on this page, I hope you'll and tell me about them.