Short answer
Yes. Links remain part of Google’s core ranking systems, but Google now judges them by context and intent far more than by count. A relevant, editorial link still counts. Most manipulative links are simply ignored rather than punished. Penalties are reserved for clear patterns, and when they happen, Google tells you.
Every couple of years someone declares that links are dead. Every couple of years Google’s own documentation quietly says otherwise.
What has changed is not whether links matter but which links matter, and what happens to the ones that do not. That difference decides whether a site needs a link cleanup, a reconsideration request or simply better content.
Do backlinks still matter?
Google’s guide to its ranking systems still lists link analysis systems and PageRank among its active systems. Links help Google discover pages, understand what they are about and judge which are most useful.
They are one input among many, though, and they cannot rescue a page that does not answer the search well. How PageRank itself works is covered in what is PageRank, and does Google still use it.
What makes a link count
- It is a real, crawlable link. Google’s link guidance asks for a standard link element with an address; links added by JavaScript count when they use that markup.
- It sits in relevant context. A link from a page about your subject, surrounded by related text, carries meaning.
- It was given, not placed. Editorial links, chosen by someone because your page is useful, are what Google’s systems are built to reward.
- People might actually use it. A link inside an article that readers see is worth more than one buried in a footer or a list of fifty.
- It is not qualified. Links marked nofollow, sponsored or ugc are treated as hints, not as endorsements.
What Google says about anchor text
Google’s link best practices describe good anchor text as descriptive, reasonably concise and relevant to both the page it sits on and the page it points to. They add a useful warning: if it feels like you are forcing keywords into the anchor, it is probably too much.
- Good: “how long Google updates take to roll out”.
- Too vague: “click here” or “this article”.
- Forced: the same exact-match keyword on every link pointing at a page.
For image links, Google uses the image’s alt text as the anchor, which is one more reason to write alt text that describes the image properly.
Counted, ignored or penalised
| Outcome | Typical links | What you see |
|---|---|---|
| Counted | Editorial links in relevant content | Nothing unusual; the link helps over time |
| Ignored | Paid links Google detects, link networks, spammy directories, footer and widget links | Nothing at all; the link simply stops helping |
| Penalised | A clear, deliberate pattern of unnatural links to or from your site | A manual action message in Search Console |
The middle row is the one most people misunderstand. Google has said its systems neutralise unnatural links. A site that relied on them can slide without any message, because value it was counting on quietly stopped counting. That is not a penalty, and it is not fixed by a disavow file.
A worked example: two link profiles
Imagine two competing sites in the same field.
- Site X has around 300 linking domains, mostly guest posts on unrelated blogs with exact-match anchors, plus a few hundred directory listings.
- Site Y has about 40: two industry publications, a supplier, a trade association, a university project and some local news coverage.
A link tool shows Site X far ahead. Once Google neutralises the links it recognises as placed for ranking, much of Site X’s profile simply stops counting, while every one of Site Y’s links still carries meaning.
Site X sees no penalty and no message. It just finds that its link building no longer moves anything, and that a competitor with a fraction of the links ranks above it. That is the most common way link problems show up today.
What Google’s link spam policy lists
Google defines link spam as creating links to or from a site mainly to manipulate rankings. Its examples include:
- Buying or selling links for ranking, including paying with goods, services or free products.
- Excessive link exchanges and partner pages that exist only to cross-link.
- Automated programs that create links.
- Requiring a link in terms of service or contracts without letting the other party qualify it.
- Advertorials and native ads whose links pass ranking credit, and optimised anchors in guest posts or press releases.
- Low-quality directory and bookmark links.
- Links spread across many sites in footers, templates or widgets.
The full set of policies is covered in every Google spam policy explained.
How link spam updates work
Google has run specific updates aimed at links. The July 2021 link spam update targeted links that broke these policies, and the December 2022 link spam update used SpamBrain to detect both sites buying links and sites used to pass them on.
The stated goal was to neutralise the effect of unnatural links, not to punish every site involved. For most sites that means lost value rather than a penalty.
Paid links done properly
Google accepts that buying and selling links is a normal part of advertising and sponsorship. The line is whether the link passes ranking credit.
- Sponsorships and adverts: mark links rel=”sponsored”.
- Affiliate links: qualify them, usually as sponsored.
- Free products for review: disclose the arrangement and qualify any links in the coverage.
- User comments and forum posts: use rel=”ugc” for links people add themselves.
Selling links is a risk too
The policy covers links from your site as much as links to it. Google has a manual action for unnatural links from a site, and the December 2022 update explicitly targeted sites that pass links on.
Selling followed links can also cost you credibility as a linking site, so even legitimate recommendations from your pages may carry less weight. If you accept paid placements, qualify them.
What this means for recovery
- Check Manual Actions first. If there is an unnatural links action, clean up, document the work and file a request, as covered in the reconsideration request guide and link penalty recovery.
- If there is no action and you relied on bought or networked links, assume much of their value has already been neutralised. The way back is earning links that count, not removing ones Google already ignores.
- Be careful with disavow files. Built from tool scores, they often remove links that were helping, as covered in traffic dropped after a disavow file.
- Do not judge links by third-party scores. Google does not use them, as explained in why you can’t check PageRank any more.
Internal links count too
Everything Google says about anchor text applies inside your own site. Internal links help Google find pages, understand what they cover and judge which ones you consider most important.
- Link important pages from your strongest ones, such as the homepage and well-linked guides.
- Use descriptive anchors that tell readers what the next page covers.
- Avoid orphan pages that nothing on the site links to.
Internal links are the only links entirely under your control, which makes them the fastest to improve.
Earning links that count
- Publish things only you can: data, research, tools and first-hand findings. See Google’s original content systems.
- Be useful to the people who write about your field, with clear explanations and quotable expertise.
- Build real relationships with suppliers, partners, associations and local organisations that would naturally mention you.
- Fix what you already have: broken pages that other sites still link to are the cheapest links available.
Where link analysis sits among Google’s other systems is covered in Google’s ranking systems explained.
Not sure whether your links are helping or ignored?
Neutralised links, a manual action and a content problem need completely different responses. Send your Search Console access and within 48 hours I will tell you which one you have.
Get free recovery audit