There have been thousands of articles in the past few years discussing "spam" used by search engine optimisation companies and whether or not it is an ethical approach to search engine marketing. In order to address these issues we need to discuss the questionable techniques and whether or not they are intrinsically unethical. In order to tackle the complexities and ambiguities in understanding such marketing methodologies, I shall first define the phrase spam.

Many self acclaimed SEO experts have put definitions forward. The two main definitions are as follows:

• Any alteration or modification that is carried out to a website or web page, solely for the search engines is considered spam
• Anything the search engine says is spam, is spam for that engine

If one is to analyse the first definition a simple conclusion can be drawn. Anyone attempting to engage in work on a website so that it is search engine friendly or designed to rank well in search engines is considered spam. In relation to the latter, it could be said that carrying out any form of search engine optimisation is by definition spam. The same could be said for the second definition also, as search engines have clear standing on processes that are manipulated by SEO's such as link building, reciprocal link building etc and as such are considered "spam".

The use of the terminology such as "spam" is usually used to define whether a particular method implemented by SEO companies or firms "is wrong or unethical" or sometimes refers to methods used that may get a website penalised.

Some have argued that no one method used by SEO's can be considered spam as a technique or method only becomes unethical when used unethically. A good example of this can be where a website appears to be about one topic and then automatically redirects to something different. In addition, a method that can also be considered unethical or "spam" is the usage of hidden text. The simple premise behind this lies in the fact that one thing is being shown to the search engines and another to the end user. This is usually carried out as the text would not make sense or it would affect the layout of the web page design in a detrimental way. Some have argued that there is nothing wrong with this technique as it doesn't attempt to hide anything from the search engines. The fact that that they want it, is not significant. If the search engines have a problem finding it is their problem.

Critics of so called "ethical optimisation" have argued that search engine spam does not hurt anyone. The user gets to see relevant information and the site ranks well in search engines. Here at SEO Bank LTD we strongly condemn such techniques for a number of reasons.

Firstly optimising a site using methods that are frowned upon by search engines can have a detrimental effect on your site and also it can get your site penalised. If the site is already ranking well, and an unethical technique is spotted by search engines, the chances are you website will not only lose rankings but will also get penalised. Its common knowledge that once a website has been penalised, it is very difficult to attain effective search engine placement.

Let make one thing clear, there is nothing intrinsically wrong or unethical about spam techniques implemented. However the crucial factor that needs to be kept in mind is that when so called unscrupulous techniques are used to attain high rankings, then the chances are individuals will focus just on those techniques rather than improving the website to attain high rankings. The search engines have been designed for the pure purpose of bringing up relevant information based around website quality and content. The usage of aggressive spam techniques will undoubtedly favour those that require a quick fix solution to attain rankings rather than the end user experience.

In summation when any form of search engine optimisation is carried out, what must be ensured that you stick loosely within search engine guidelines and parameters. However what makes this difficult is the fact that these guidelines and parameters are not mentioned clearly anywhere and as such adopting methods that may be deemed unethical by one person may be deemed appropriate by another.