Beware of statcounter

Statcounter, as some of you may know, is a free real-time analytical tool for websites. I turned off my JavaScript today and realised that the crafty buggers had a <noscript> link that appeared whenever somebody had JavaScript turned off. Since search crawlers ignore JavaScript, this link to "Wordpress Stats" would no doubt be indexed. That wasn't my main issue. My main issue was that the anchor text was just a simple . (dot), meaning it's practically invisible to the naked eye. Google penalises sites that have these kind of links, right? If so, my site has been suffering because of these A##holes.

RedCardinal

waynewex wrote: »

My main issue was that the anchor text was just a simple . (dot), meaning it's practically invisible to the naked eye. Google penalises sites that have these kind of links, right? If so, my site has been suffering because of these A##holes.

Wrong. Google may penalise sites that use deceptive practices, but in a case like this Google is more likely to penalise Stat Counter (or at least have a whisper in their ear).

If your site is suffering it's far more likely due to your own actions than this <noscript>. The <noscript> actually contains a beacon used when JS is not available or turned off, so it has a very practical use. Yes, they do abuse this with a keyword-rich link, but check out other stats vendors who also do this (not to mention SSL vendors).

tomED

waynewex wrote: »

Statcounter, as some of you may know, is a free real-time analytical tool for websites. I turned off my JavaScript today and realised that the crafty buggers had a <noscript> link that appeared whenever somebody had JavaScript turned off. Since search crawlers ignore JavaScript, this link to "Wordpress Stats" would no doubt be indexed. That wasn't my main issue. My main issue was that the anchor text was just a simple . (dot), meaning it's practically invisible to the naked eye. Google penalises sites that have these kind of links, right? If so, my site has been suffering because of these A##holes.

When they're providing such a great service for FREE, I think it's only fair that they get a backlink in return.

I doubt your website has been suffering because of this. Have used this script on many sites in the past that are performing well in the SERPs

StatCounterJen

Hi Wayne,

I work with StatCounter and I’m very sorry to hear of your concerns. Please allow me to offer some explanations.

waynewex wrote: »

I turned off my JavaScript today and realised that the crafty buggers had a <noscript> link that appeared whenever somebody had JavaScript turned off.

The noscript part of our code allows us to track visitors to your site who have javascript disabled. Without this portion of the code being included, all the non-javascript visitors to your site would be missed.

waynewex wrote: »

My main issue was that the anchor text was just a simple . (dot), meaning it's practically invisible to the naked eye.

The small image you refer to is part of the code that is required to track stats on your site. When the image is loaded, information about your visitor is sent to StatCounter and processed into your account. There is nothing untoward about this – that’s just how the code works.

waynewex wrote: »

If so, my site has been suffering because of these A##holes.

StatCounter does not negatively impact on your site at all. In our view, abuse of links involves links between pages put there for reasons other than merit; in the case of the free StatCounter service, we offer you the ability to track stats on your site at no cost and with no ad or logo on your site at all. If people are happy with our service, they install our code and link to our site thus pushing us up the search engines. If people are unhappy, they remove our code and we move down the SERPS. There is no attempt at deception here and this is, in our view, the way Search Engines should work! Sites that people are happy with move up the ranks, sites people are unhappy with move down.

We have always included a link to our site in the code that we generate and have never attempted to mislead anyone about this in any way. We absolutely do not promote any third party site via these links as such behaviour would indeed constitute unacceptable behaviour.

At StatCounter, we work hard to provide the best service we can. We believe in being open and honest and make all decisions with our members firmly in mind. I do hope I have addressed your concerns. If you have any further queries, please don’t hesitate to contact us directly.

RedCardinal

StatCounterJen wrote: »

In our view, abuse of links involves links between pages put there for reasons other than merit; in the case of the free StatCounter service, we offer you the ability to track stats on your site at no cost and with no ad or logo on your site at all. If people are happy with our service, they install our code and link to our site thus pushing us up the search engines. If people are unhappy, they remove our code and we move down the SERPS. There is no attempt at deception here and this is, in our view, the way Search Engines should work! Sites that people are happy with move up the ranks, sites people are unhappy with move down.

I don't work for Google, but I'm pretty sure that your comment could be used against you in the imposition of any penalty. Google clearly states that attempts to manipulate results is against TOS. You're basically admitting that you include the targeted anchor text to improve your rankings. Bad move IMO.

Do it - Yes.
Admit it - No.

StatCounterJen

Hi Richard,

Nice to make contact via Boards.

Thanks for your concern but I’m afraid I don’t agree with your assessment of my post; if you look again you will see I made no mention of anchor text. Further, I made an observation (of a generally accepted concept) rather than any kind of admission and this was simply in the midst of my trying to reassure Wayne re his concerns. Finally, with regard to your suggestion re the “do it – yes, admit it – no” strategy; that does not fit with our business at all – we strive to operate openly and honestly and therefore could not subscribe to such a motto.

Richard – I posted here with the aim of reassuring someone who was upset with StatCounter. I am not any kind of authority on links, SERPS, SEO – instead I look after customer service and support. I didn’t intend to engage in debate on a subject that I’m not sufficiently qualified to discuss on a professional level – I do hope, however, that I have adequately explained our position on the issues you raised albeit in layman’s rather than expert terms – thanks for your understanding!

Anyway - last time we were in touch was via email when I responded to your request for Global Stats information... On that note, have you come across our Global Stats site? We launched it mid 2009 – it’s a useful resource.

Wayne - If there is any way that I can encourage you to reconsider your opinion about StatCounter, please do let me know.

Tom – Many thanks for your kind words about the service we offer.

none

StatCounterJen wrote: »

we offer you the ability to track stats on your site at no cost and with no ad or logo on your site at all

Just curious if we have any alternative with the above features? I'm actually a big fan of Statcounter but what happens if they suddenly pull the plug? It's always good to have a choice.