Chris Crum

No More DMOZ or Yahoo! Directory for Google?

By: Chris Crum

I wrote about this the other day on WebProNews, but Google is no longer suggesting that you should be listed in relevant directories. In fact, they’ve even removed the suggestion from their webmaster guidelines, as Brian Ussery noticed. The page used to have bullet points for:

– Have other relevant sites link to yours.

– Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.

Those points are now gone in what would appear to be a slap in the face of directories, but SEO folks are the ones really irritated. Google doesn’t appear to see it as a slap in the face so much, but more of simply a non-needed guideline.

Barry Schwartz points to a quote from Google’s John Mueller in a Google Groups thread:

“I wouldn’t necessarily assume that we’re devaluing Yahoo’s links, I just think it’s not one of the things we really need to recommend,” said Mueller. “If people think that a directory is going to bring them lots of visitors (I had a visitor from the DMOZ once), then it’s obviously fine to get listed there. It’s not something that people have to do though :-).”

Mueller also asks for feedback, “What do you think – does it make sense? :-) What else should we change / add / remove?”

Regardless of what guidelines are on the page, a relevant link is a relevant link. There are still directories like our own eBusiness Directory that don’t offer paid links, and keep the listings quality without getting flooded by spammy and irrelevant ones by using a strict human-edited approval process.

There is going to be a lot of outrage over this, but is it really necessary? Perhaps too much focus has been put on directories like DMOZ anyway.

9 Responses to “No More DMOZ or Yahoo! Directory for Google?”

  1. Wacasassa Says:

    I like this.For I have often been told that if your Web Site doesn’t appear in the DMOZ directory,your chances of a high ranking are close to impossible!

    And if a site like this one of mine is mostly of Affiliate Content it is very hard to get DMOZ to add it on their Directory.

    I do feel that this is an over indulgence in control of the WWW searches.I for one praise this move and hope in the future others will as well.

  2. Chris Hibbard Says:

    Kicks my butt.

    Just got a DMOZ listing after years and I have 4 Yahoo directory listings that have just come due. I am still going to renew…this year.

    Should we assume that a paid Yahoo directory listing helps our Yahoo rankings?

    Yahoo directory listings bring me a few dozen visitors a year tops.

  3. Derek Winter Says:

    There should be no listing hierarchy in online or offline (paper ie,phone books etc),directories.

    The whole idea is for the user of a directory to find ALL subscribers to the pages,and if the the directory is accurate should list ALL subscribers.

    An example of a bad directory (book):

    There is in my town a local business directory issued by a well known national company. It is not free.

    Only firms that pay for a listing are listed,meaning a local firm who does not subscribe is not mentioned in the book. Of course Joe Public recognizes the name of this well known national directory,and may buy a copy.

    Unfortunately for Joe the firm he may want to contact is not there so he misses out on information he may need after paying for what he thinks is an accurate directory.

    The latter scenario can and does apply to most,i may even go as far as to say ALL online directories and search engines. This is the commercialisation of the internet at its worst.

    When a popular directory with traffic clout can charge hundreds of dollars to vet a submission,not guaranteeing that it will even be listed,also giving no refund if that is the result. Then therefore it should disqualify itself any claim it may make to be an accurate directory, simply because all of the information it should provide is NOT provided.

    I guess this could sound like a personal gripe. It is not,i have never attempted a submission of my website to any directory requiring payment. It is though,an aspect of the internet that i abhore.

    Being an observer of the net from its beginning and witnessing the growth and dominance of online moguls who now have dictatorial power online over Joe Public as to what he finds and dosnt find,i hold fears of future,more advanced monopolies of the internet.

  4. Shasme Jones Says:

    I’ve tried for over a year to have my website listed on the “Great Wizard of DMOZ” directory, to no avail. My traffic is slowly increasing despite my efforts. I think the directories are overrated, and I chose to lean more towards social networking as my marketing strategy.

  5. Craig Says:

    I’m in favor of less emphasis on directory listings. I talk with people all the time who want to get into hundreds of directories thinking it will allow them to not have to do the work of producing good and updated content on their websites.

    I’m sure this won’t change anyone’s habits but it may be a step in the right direction.

  6. seoweb2 Says:

    I realise that such a tip is not necessarily a ‘basic’ one, but it is a very important one

  7. local business websites Says:

    Do you own a local business? If you do, then your business absolutely must have a website if you\’re hoping to remain competitive in your marketplace. Many business owners don\’t realize this. They think,

  8. Carlita Rolf Says:

    I found an interesting article on EzineArticles for anyone who is thinking about submitting to a directory.

  9. Frank Says:

    Glad to be one of the visitants on this awing web site :D.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.