Did BigMouthMedia 302 Hijack Themselves Out of Google?

by Patrick Altoft on May 13, 2009

A few bloggers have spotted the fact that BigMouthMedia is notably absent from the search results this week and are calling it a penalty.

It isn’t a penalty (and BMM hasn’t done anything to deserve one) but the issue is certainly interesting, especially when you look at the screenshot below which shows the domain “g-maps.com” when you search for info:bigmouthmedia.com

bigmouthmedia

My first thought was a 302 hijack by a third party but the g-maps.com domain is owned by BMM so it seems like a simple case of a server misconfiguration to me.

Worrying that Google is still vulnerable to this stuff.

Patrick Altoft is Director of Search at Leeds based digital & SEO agency Branded3. Patrick also runs Blogstorm.

You can get our blog posts delivered for free by email every day - simply add your email address to the box below or alternatively grab the RSS feed.

Read some similar posts

{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }

Dave Eaves 13 May 2009 at 3:20 pm

The thing that has made me think it is a penalty is this, if you look at the PageRank of most of their main pages it is PR5, if you look at the SEO services page the PR is wiped out and if you look at the PPC services page the PR is wiped out. Those pages were not like that a week or so ago.

Nick Rinylo 13 May 2009 at 5:40 pm

Hi Dave Eaves, are you sure about that because the Creare Comm /search-engine-optimisation/ page hasn’t got PR either and never has. I am not too sure why google would remove this tho. Its exactly the same for just searching /services.html page.

As for Big mouth if it was a 302 Hijack, i assume they will return to the listings.

Paul Rudman 13 May 2009 at 6:22 pm

I’m not convinced about the 302 theory, as there’s a few issues here:
1) g-maps.com domain home page last cached 26th April, which I believe is before the rankings dropped away (but I can’t confirm as I’m not that obsessed)
2) the redirect from g-maps.com is a 301, at least it is now, again can’t confirm it wasn’t a server misconfiguration a few days ago that they’ve now rectified

With regards to what I’ve read on other posts I’m also not convinced by the “link request” argument either, although I do think it’s maybe a bit naive to push out link requests from your home domain. I think with the increasing use of Spamcop in response to link requests and an aggressive response to Spamcop involvement from hosting companies that Google wouldn’t see the need to directly intervene to stop a practice like this, especially from an agency like Bigmouth that are probably handling millions of pounds worth of accounts via PPC with them.

If you search on ‘Bigmouth Media’ then you do get a single result back – http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/vacancies/, why show this single un-important page on the domain if the whole domain had been wiped from the cache? This suggests to me some form of penalty on the important pages for the important terms including the brand name.

I guess time will tell on this.

Steve P 13 May 2009 at 6:33 pm

Pagerank seems to have gone as well.?

Dave Eaves 13 May 2009 at 6:51 pm
ScottB 13 May 2009 at 8:56 pm

The G-maps domain is an old Global Media domain – so in order to have screwed up the redirects, they would have had to changed it from 301 to 302 at some point in the past month (it’s back at 301 now).

In this case, it is probably just a screw up and not an illicit attempt to spam (like their previous dissapearance from Google in 2006!). The lack of PR in some internal pages is just a knock on effect from the homepage being zapped.

Still, a sloppy screw up to make given what’s riding on those rankings (a veritable treasure trove of leads), but the company is big enough to weather a minor storm like this I would suspect.

James 14 May 2009 at 1:19 pm

@ScottB I sure as hell wouldn’t want to be the person in BMM that made a screw up like that.

Shark SEO 15 May 2009 at 9:10 am

The homepage is ranking properly again now. It looks to me like it was a 302 issue, with g-maps likely being 302′d to http://www.bigmouthmedia.com (and when we all went to see what had happened, they must have already 301′d it over). Just guessing, really.

What’s interesting is to see how Google handled that 302. Live and Yahoo still listed http://www.bigmouthmedia.com, although that could be down to them possibly crawling the site slower.

Ed 15 May 2009 at 9:25 am

Google is still so vulnerable to 302 SERP hijacking. I still don’t understand why don’t they treat 302 redirects the exact same way they treat 301. Just always show the f’ing target URL and put an end to this issue once and forever. Google’s stupidity!

Durward Sobek 15 May 2009 at 11:28 am

Well! It is nice but much technical report.

chimene 19 May 2009 at 12:15 pm

I am pretty sure it was a server misconfiguration but it really costs them a lot.

rami fawaz 30 Oct 2009 at 10:02 pm

yea, im sure it cost them alot of money

Outlet Seller 06 Jan 2010 at 1:23 am

Kinda looks like someone shot his own foot…ouch, so much for hiring qualified employees.

KS 27 Jan 2010 at 10:06 pm

Maybe it was both. Maybe the server config problem led to a penalty? The pr issue suggests a penalty.

Kola 12 Mar 2010 at 3:15 pm

Google is the best search mashine!

Lee Berry 18 Apr 2010 at 1:16 pm

maybe to many links were added in the given period…

Medyumlar 28 May 2010 at 11:25 am

maybe to many links were added in the given period…

SEO 06 Jun 2010 at 2:06 pm

This is something new. I hope you would share why he is penalized or sandboxed in Google.

Digital Marketing 20 Jul 2010 at 4:56 pm

Good story, I had not come across this one before… I know how easy it is from personal experience to misconfigure a server.

Shawn 28 Jul 2010 at 12:27 pm

Really appreciated the way you handle your words.

{ 6 tweetbacks }

21 mignews (MIGNEWS) 13/05/2009 at 2:28 pm

Did BigMouthMedia 302 Hijack Themselves Out of Google?: A few bloggers have spotted the fact that BigMouthMedia .. http://tinyurl.com/pat2xe

22 patrickaltoft (Patrick Altoft) 13/05/2009 at 3:01 pm

Did BigMouthMedia 302 Hijack Themselves Out of Google?: A few bloggers have spotted the fact that BigMouthMedia .. http://tinyurl.com/pat2xe

23 seokratie (Julian Dziki) 13/05/2009 at 3:20 pm

Bigmouthmedia(.com) 302d sich aus dem Index http://bit.ly/CZG1u

24 boris_bergmann (Boris Bergmann) 13/05/2009 at 3:33 pm

SEO & 302 – a special relationship (right @Harith ?) RT: @seokratie: Bigmouthmedia(.com) 302d sich aus dem Index http://bit.ly/CZG1u

25 melaniephung (Melanie Phung) 13/05/2009 at 3:44 pm

302 hijacks alive and well? RT @patrickaltoft: Did BigMouthMedia 302 Hijack Themselves Out of Google?: http://tinyurl.com/pat2xe

26 ashwanibhasin (Ashwani Bhasin) 13/05/2009 at 11:20 pm

Did BigMouthMedia 302 Hijack Themselves Out of Google? http://tinyurl.com/pat2xe

{ 1 trackback }

Did BigMouthMedia 302 Hijack Themselves Out of Google? | UK Web Designer
05.13.09 at 6:01 pm

Leave a Comment (registration is optional)

Registration is free, takes about 5 seconds and is worth doing.

You can use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>