Google's Link Spam Policies: What Counts as a Link Scheme
Google publishes its spam policies for web search as part of Search Essentials, and link spam has its own section. Many site owners have never read it. They hear rules second-hand from agencies, forums and vendors, each with their own spin. Reading the policy yourself takes ten minutes and gives you a much clearer sense of where the risks actually are.
This article explains what the policy covers in plain language. It isn't legal advice and it doesn't replace reading Google's own page, which Google updates from time to time.
The core idea
Google treats links as one of the signals for working out which pages are useful. Link spam, in Google's terms, is any attempt to manipulate rankings by creating links to or from a site primarily for search engines, or by manipulating links in other ways. The policy calls these link schemes.
The key phrase is "primarily for search engines". A link a journalist adds because your data was useful isn't a scheme. A link you paid for, with a keyword anchor you chose, on a site that sells links to anyone, is the textbook example of one.
What Google lists as link spam
Google's policy gives examples. Grouped and paraphrased, they include:
Buying or selling links for ranking purposes. This covers paying money for links or posts containing links, exchanging goods or services for links, and sending someone a free product on the condition that they write about it and include a link.
Excessive link exchanges. "You link to me and I'll link to you" done at scale, or partner pages that exist only to swap links.
Automated link building. Using programs or services to create links to your site.
Requiring links as a condition. For example, a terms of service or contract that requires a followed link back without letting the site owner qualify it.
Text ads and advertorials that pass ranking credit. Paid placements, sponsored articles or native ads with links that aren't marked as sponsored or nofollow.
Keyword-rich links in articles, guest posts and press releases distributed across other sites, particularly at scale.
Low-quality directory or bookmark site links.
Keyword-rich, hidden or low-quality links embedded in widgets that get distributed across many sites.
Widely distributed footer or template links, such as a theme designer's keyword link in every site using that theme.
Optimised links in forum comments or signatures.
For more on how these show up in practice, see link schemes to avoid.
How rel attributes fit in
Google gives site owners a legitimate way to have paid or untrusted links without breaking the policy: qualify them.
rel="sponsored"for paid links, ads, sponsorships and affiliate linksrel="ugc"for user-generated content such as comments and forum postsrel="nofollow"for other links you don't want to vouch for
Google introduced sponsored and ugc in 2019. When a link carries one of these, it isn't expected to pass ranking credit, so it isn't treated as a scheme. Our article on sponsored and UGC attributes explains the details.
This is why a sponsored post on a news site isn't a violation if the link is marked sponsored. It becomes one when the payment happens and the link is left followed.
Where this leaves paid link building
The honest position is simple. Buying followed links to pass ranking credit falls inside Google's definition of link spam. That applies to guest posts paid for on condition of a dofollow link, niche edits, PBN links and bulk link packages alike. Many businesses buy links anyway, and many link sellers exist, but that doesn't change what the policy says.
The practical consequences vary. Google's systems, including SpamBrain, try to identify and neutralise spammy links, meaning the links simply stop counting. In more obvious or larger cases, Google's team can apply a manual action for unnatural links, which can affect part or all of a site's visibility. Selling links can also lead to action against the selling site.
If you choose to buy links, understand that you're accepting risk rather than avoiding it. Reduce that risk by staying with relevant sites that have real audiences, using mostly branded and natural anchors, building at a gradual pace, and keeping lower-quality or bulk links away from your most important commercial pages.
What the policy doesn't prohibit
It's easy to read the policy and conclude every link activity is suspect. It isn't. These are generally fine:
- Asking a site to link to a resource you made because it genuinely helps their readers
- Guest posting to reach an audience, with natural anchors, not done at scale for links
- Getting listed in genuine, relevant directories and local citations
- Sponsoring an event and receiving a link marked sponsored
- Fixing a broken link on someone's page by suggesting your relevant page
- Getting press coverage that includes a link
The line is intent and scale. Outreach that earns editorial links is normal marketing.
Other spam policies that touch links
The link spam section isn't the only relevant one. Google's policies on expired domain abuse, site reputation abuse and scaled content abuse also affect link-building tactics, such as buying expired domains to redirect their links or publishing mass content on third-party sites to rank.
What to do now
Open Google's spam policies page and read the link spam section once, start to finish. Then list every link-building activity you or your agency currently run and mark each one as editorial, qualified with a rel attribute, or followed-and-paid. The last column is where your risk sits, and where you should be most careful with anchors and targets.