Search engines supply webmasters with guidelines that they can implement in order to rank better. Does that make the search engine itself unethical? No – they provide everyone with the same information, it’s whether you choose to implement it or not.

Now if someone implements strategies in order to “trick” or “game” the system, then yes – that is unethical in my opinion.

I tend to be pretty black and white on the subject and steer clear of anything that could even remotely be looked at as “shady”.

“The difference between a surgeon’s scalpel and a murderer’s knife is one of INTENTION.”

I would also like to suggest that the topic of ethics is swayed by the interpretation of the individual.

For example, if you had a network of sites catering to different individuals and you were marketing a product on each of the sites, some people would “interpret” that as black hat – because you are using your sites to advantageously increase your search engine rankings by having more backlinks. But, from the marketer’s perspective, you could argue that their “intention” was to recommend a good product to their existing customer base.

Sadly, it seems that people scream their interpretation out before checking the intention of the marketer. If they checked the facts first, I think that there would be less finger pointing and more understanding.

Funny that I’m now taking a module that deals with engineering ethical issues.

Just that we call the two utilitarian and deontological instead.

Being overly-cautious about ambiguous issues like this is dangerous and unwise, in my honest opinion.

With everybody else doing it, it’s simply necessary.

It’s like refusing to put up advertisements because it’s an “intrusion” to precious mental real estate.

Might as well fold up our businesses then.

More importantly though, not all black hat is unjustified and how do we determine what black hat is just and in what situation is it just?

Some black hat is just plain unethical.

Some black hat is just a way of overcoming an unfair situation caused by other black hatters.

Still other black hat is punishment to others who commit black hat actions.

So the big question is, how are we to decide what black hat is eithical and what black hat is unethical if we can’t even determine the purpose, intent or agenda of any given black hat technique?

Misato

Digby

Even the teleological and deontological branches can be of little help, sometimes and even most times. Until a wider picture is obtained which can explain everything, we can only judge case by case, calling upon a complex multifaceted matrix of ethical considerations, in order to do justice.

As Dr.Mani would say it, we humans are in a conundrum, very funny. When do rules become clearly immutable and universal, and when do such rules become clearly dogmatic? Do we know exactly when we have crossed over to the other side?

Apart from black vs. white -hat SEO, there are a plethora of other online activities that bear ethical accountabilities. So who’s gonna solve them? Marketers or lawyers? CEO’s or lawmakers? Or individual decisions? Maybe a think-tank NGO for online ethics will become necessary? We’ll see…

My view was that this wasn’t rocket science. You were either right or wrong anytime you said or did anything.

As I got older and more mature, I realized that not everything was clearly black or white. That there is a lot of grey in this thing we call life.

As far as black hat seo, I am not convinced that it is unethical, and this is comming from someone who is far less willing to accept unethical choices than most other people.

For instance, in internet marketing, dishonest and deceptive ad copy seems to be viewd as no big deal and perfectly accptable by a lot of people in this field. It is also mostly a belief that is filled with hypocracy.

You go ask any internet marketer if it is dishonest for a used car salesman to lie about the condition of a vehicle, and like most everyone else, they will say yes.

If you ask them if it is dishonest for a person to lie about their financial status in order to receive welfare, there again, they will say yes.

If you ask them if it is dishonest for an eye witness in a crime to commit purgory in a court hearing, once again, almost all of them would say yes.

However… if you ask an internet marketer if it is dishonest to lie about a product in their ad copy and promotional material, they will tell you that it is not dishonest. It is just marketing. To which I can only think to myself, “Yeah, right! Where in the heck did you learn this load of garbage”?

While I am on this subject, I would also like to point out that I have seen Google itself carry out their own unethical actions also. It’s not just the people who try to get a good ranking in Google.

Case in point: The infamous Google slap that almost every internet marketer has heard about. People that were advertising using adwords that were paying for 50 cent keywords who then found themselves pay $5.oo for the same keywords a week later.

Biting the hand that feeds you is not ethical. Not by a long shot, and that is basically what Google did with their Google slap.

Well, that’s my 2 cents worth on this topic. It is a very internesting question that you have raised here Dr. Mani.

Misato

How ethical is the culture of web-marketing? Spam, $million in minutes in your pajamas, etc. And is that any different from the culture outside the web?

As to SEO within TOS, is it any different from a female putting on some make-up and flattering clothes? If you’re in business, you try to present your product in its most attractive light. High SERP rank obviously puts your product in a more advantageous position.

If you truly believe that your product will benefit your customer (doesn’t have to be life or death), aren’t you obliged to get it in front of as many prospects as possible?

Love to all.