• Register
• Log in

SEO Theory - SEO Theory and Analysis Blog

Algorithm analysis, Web community relationship analysis, SEO practices and techniques, industry news, etc.

• Home
• About SEO Theory
• SEO Glossary

The United States government says links are not endorsements

Posted by Michael Martinez on September 16, 2007 in Link Theory

The United States Census Bureau does not endorse sites it links out to:”…Note: The Census Bureau is not responsible for the content of information located on other web sites linked from this page. No endorsement by the Census Bureau should be implied by an external link from this page….”

The National Space and Aeronautics Admnistration does not imply endorsements through links:”…External link (implies no endorsement by NASA)…”

The Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory does not endorse vendors or products through its links:”…This is a list of WWW links and in the case of (*) general company information. No endorsement of the vendor or product is made or implied….”

The United States Environmental Protection Agency does not endorse external Web sites through its links:”…Below are links to other web sites that may have useful information about Port-related activities. These links are provided for convenience only and no endorsement by EPA is intended. By visiting these non-EPA sites, you leave the domain of EPA and assume the responsibility for any aspect of these sites and for information that you use from these sites. Information contained on these sites can in no way be assumed to replace EPA guidance or policies….”

The United States Department of Agriculture does not endorse other sites through its links“…Information for the database was collected by surveying academia, government agencies, industry, and trade and professional organizations for available food safety educational materials resources. Listings in this database are provided for information sharing purposes only. No endorsement is intended. Listings in the database are self reported and have not been evaluated. We recommend that you ask for a list of previous users so that you can assess whether the listing will meet your needs. Call the contacts listed for more information….”

The Library of Congress says that inclusion or exclusion from lists of Web resources does not constitute endorsement or criticism of Web sites:”…These were introductory programs for law librarians who were new to Internet and the World Wide Web. The items listed were discussed as examples of the types of Web resources available to law librarians, but this was not meant to be a complete or exhaustive guide. (Inclusion/exclusion from the list implies no endorsement or criticism of any source by FLICC, FEDLINK, or LC)….”

The United States Senate does not endorse Web sites or organizations through its outbound links:”…The following external links will take you away from the US Senate web pages for accessibility software tools and information. Neither the Senate nor this Committee makes any endorsement of these sites or their organizations nor takes any responsibility for the content of these independent Internet web sites. They are provided as a starting point for your reference and as a courtesy…”

The United States House of Representatives does not endorse Web sites through its outbound links:”…any external links provided are for informational purposes only and do not constitute an endorsement of any kind….”

The Office of Management and Budget does not endorse even other Federal offices through links:”…Links to other Federal government sites are for information only. The links do not represent an endorsement by the Office of Management and Budget….”

It’s pretty clear that the United States government does not use its Web sites to recommend, endorse, criticize, or otherwise directly influence the perceived authority, reputation, or apparent value of other Web sites.

Furthermore, The Federal Trade Commission has not yet included links to Web documents in its definition of “endorsement” (note: That document may change at any time and could be different if someone follows the link in the future).

Now, I am not an attorney and I’m not about to pretend to be comfortable in the legal sphere. Nor am I endorsing the use of paid links on Web sites for the purpose of manipulating search engine results. However, there are two issues that some parties are attempting to treat as one, thereby hoping to establish a general perception that the two issues are one.

Issue No. 1: Links do NOT constitute endorsements

Just because people wrote in 1998 that Web sites “vote” for each other through their links doesn’t mean that misconception was ever true or ever will be true. In essence, people who didn’t know what they were talking about created a faux standard that contradicted the realities of the Web.

Web sites have ALWAYS linked to other Web sites for the sake of connectivity — that is what the World Wide Web is all about. To be part of the Web you have to link to other Web documents or be linked from other Web documents. Endorsements are an entirely different matter.

Saying that links between Web pages constitute endorsements is equivalent to saying that any two cars sharing the same road endorse each other. Just because two houses are built on the same street such that either house can be reached by walking along the street from the other does not in any way imply that the houses endorse or recommend each other.

Just because two people sit next to each other in a theater or conference room in no way implies that they endorse or recommend each other.

Endorsements, under the Federal Trade Commission’s guidelines, are defined as follows (see link above for definitions):”…(a) The Commission intends to treat endorsements and testimonials identically in the context of its enforcement of the Federal Trade Commission Act and for purposes of this part. The term endorsements is therefore generally used hereinafter to cover both terms and situations.

(b) For purposes of this part, an endorsement means any advertising message (including verbal statements, demonstrations, or depictions of the name, signature, likeness or other identifying personal characteristics of an individual or the name or seal of an organization) which message consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experience of a party other than the sponsoring advertiser. The party whose opinions, beliefs, findings, or experience the message appears to reflect will be called the endorser and may be an individual, group or institution.

(c) For purposes of this part, the term product includes any product, service, company or industry.

(d) For purposes of this part, an expert is an individual, group or institution possessing, as a result of experience, study or training, knowledge of a particular subject, which knowledge is superior to that generally acquired by ordinary individuals….”

They provide examples to explain their definitions. Nowhere do those examples include amateur Web sites that link out to other Web sites for the sake of providing links to other Web sites. Nowhere do those examples include professional Web sites that link out to Web sites associated with other industries. The language of an endorsement, according to the guidelines, must specifically include a recommendation in order to be considered an endorsement.

If you’re not expressing an opinion through a link’s anchor text, you cannot be endorsing a Web site.

Issue No. 2: Search engines oppose the use of paid links
This is a serious matter. Search engines have been subjected to manipulation by Web site operators for as long as there have been popular search engines. A lot of money is made through Web sites that are found through search engines. Businesses and independent Web site operators alike look to the Web to drive monetizable traffic to their sites.

For low-budget internet marketing campaigns, the best means of building traffic is through links listed on other Web sites — and that includes links in search engine results. In fact, every search results page you see from Ask, Googe, Live, and Yahoo! is a bona fide natural Web page. Every link on those pages contributes to visibility and traffic for someone.

So does that mean that search engines endorse the sites they link out to? Well, Google claims that its outbound links do not constitute endorsements:”…18.1 The Services may include hyperlinks to other web sites or content or resources. Google may have no control over any web sites or resources which are provided by companies or persons other than Google.

18.2 You acknowledge and agree that Google is not responsible for the availability of any such external sites or resources, and does not endorse any advertising, products or other materials on or available from such web sites or resources….”

So what is the difference between the issues?
Google would have us believe that from a technological point of view any unimpeded hypertextual link constitutes a “vote” for another Web site, and hence all such unimpeded links must be construed as “endorsements”.

Except Google has legally opted out of committing itself to endorsing any of the Web sites it links to in its search results. That is, Google is trying to have this both ways by claiming that paid links constitute endorsements simply because they are links (whereas the United States government stipulates that endorsements must express an opinion).

So, apparently, only paid links constitute endorsements and should be disclaimed — but if that is the case, then why doesn’t Google acknowledge that all the paid links it sells are endorsements? After all, they are advertisements and Google — being the presently largest search engine — is considered to be “expert” at search.

That would seem to put Google in a very bad position if you posters websites does google endorse them?, would it not? After all, as I type this I see advertisements for two poster sellers but nothing on the page which says that Google doesn’t endorse them. One of the ads claims, “World’s largest poster selection”.

That’s an opinion, is it not?

Do the words “sponsored links” make it clear to the consumer that Google in no way endorses either advertiser who has paid Google to publish what appear to be opinions and recommendations on Google’s Web sites?

This is really not about whether the United States government via the Federal Trade Commission considers links on Web sites to be expressions of opinion (or endorsements). The Federal Trade Commission has not in any way stipulated that links between Web sites must be treated as endorsements.

This is really about whether Google’s opinion on links and how they should be classified (for Google’s convenience) should carry the weight of common law. There may be no legislation or Federal guidelines that back up Google’s position on links (fortunately for them) but they may be hoping to build a groundswell of opinion that could influence common law.

The courts might be persuaded by exclusionary legal briefs to believe wrongly that paid links are expressions of opinion and therefore constitute endorsements.

Now, I cannot give you legal advice and I wouldn’t want to. But it seems to me that most attorneys do a pretty bad job of describing how the Web works to the courts (I have read a fair number of legal decisions and the judges tend to lack any fundamental comprehension of what the technology is doing).

If you want to help ensure that Google cannot designate law through frequent Web site posts, then you may want to link out to as many link disclaimers and Federal Trade Commission documents as you can. One day someone may find themselves in court because of links they put on their Web sites.

The best thing you can do to help everyone is link to as much information (about whether links constitute endorsements or not) as you can find.

Clearly, the United States government doesn’t feel that links are endorsements. As a citizen of the United States I feel strongly that links should never be legally constrained to act as endorsements. That is not why I create links and I’m sure not going to support any legal moves to impose that kind of definition on them.

But what are you going to do?

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this post are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer or any other party.