SEO practices that put client websites at risk | Lilliam Purge

SEO practices that put client websites at risk

This is one of those topics where I think the industry still does itself no favours. Risky SEO practices are often framed as shortcuts, growth hacks, or aggressive strategies, when in reality they are simply decisions that trade short term appearance for long term damage. I have seen client websites lose years of trust because of decisions that were made quietly, often without the client ever being told what was happening behind the scenes.

From experience, most businesses do not knowingly agree to risky SEO. They agree to growth, visibility, and better enquiries. The risk creeps in when agencies fail to explain how certain tactics work, what the downsides are, and where the line is between sustainable optimisation and manipulation. In my opinion, transparency and restraint are the real markers of professional SEO.

Why SEO risk is often underestimated

SEO risk is easy to underestimate because the consequences are rarely immediate. A tactic can appear to work for months or even years before it triggers a penalty, a visibility drop, or a long recovery process. By the time the damage shows up, the agency may be gone and the client is left trying to reverse decisions they did not fully understand.

I think this delayed feedback loop is why risky practices persist. They reward speed over stability and they appeal most when businesses are impatient or under pressure to grow quickly. The reality is that search engines have become far better at identifying manipulation, and the tolerance for shortcuts continues to shrink.

Manipulative link building strategies

In my experience, link building is the single biggest source of SEO risk for client websites. Links still matter, but how they are earned matters far more than it used to.

Practices like buying low quality backlinks in bulk, using private blog networks, or placing links on irrelevant sites purely for SEO value can all put a website at risk. These tactics are often sold under vague labels like authority building or outreach, without explaining where links are actually coming from.

The danger is not always an immediate penalty. Sometimes rankings improve briefly, which reinforces the behaviour. Over time, though, these links become a liability. When algorithms update or manual reviews occur, the site can lose trust rapidly. Cleaning up toxic links is time consuming, expensive, and never guaranteed to fully restore lost authority.

Over optimised anchor text and unnatural signals

Another risky practice I see regularly is aggressive anchor text optimisation. This usually shows up as repeated use of exact match keywords in backlinks or internal links in ways that do not reflect natural language.

From experience, this is often done in an attempt to force rankings for specific terms. The problem is that search engines look for patterns, not individual links. When anchor text becomes too uniform or too commercial, it sends a clear signal of manipulation.

This kind of over optimisation can quietly suppress performance rather than trigger a visible penalty, which makes it harder for clients to diagnose. Rankings stagnate or fluctuate without obvious cause, and trust erodes slowly rather than dramatically.

Thin content created at scale

Content is another area where risk is often disguised as efficiency. Producing large volumes of thin, repetitive, or lightly reworded content may increase page count, but it also increases risk.

I have reviewed sites with hundreds of pages targeting slight keyword variations that offer no meaningful difference in value. These pages are often created programmatically or outsourced cheaply, with little thought given to user intent.

Search engines are increasingly good at recognising when content exists primarily to rank rather than to help. In my opinion, thin content does not just fail to perform, it can actively drag down the perceived quality of the entire site. Once that happens, even strong pages can struggle.

Duplicate and spun content

Closely related to thin content is the use of duplicated or spun content. This includes reusing the same service pages across multiple locations with minimal changes, or republishing content across multiple sites with small wording tweaks.

From experience, this is often justified as scale or coverage. The reality is that it creates confusion for search engines and weakens trust signals. When multiple pages compete for the same intent without offering unique value, none of them tend to perform well long term.

In some cases, this approach can also create internal competition where a site cannibalises its own rankings. Fixing this later usually involves consolidation, rewriting, and loss of indexed pages, which is disruptive and costly.

Ignoring technical SEO foundations

Not all risky practices are aggressive. Some are passive, and arguably just as damaging. Ignoring technical SEO foundations is a common example.

Things like poor site structure, broken internal links, incorrect indexing controls, or slow performance may not seem risky in the traditional sense, but they undermine everything else being done. I have seen agencies continue building links and content on sites with serious technical issues, effectively pouring effort into a leaking bucket.

From experience, this is risky because it masks real problems. When performance eventually drops, the cause is often buried under layers of unaddressed technical debt.

Unsafe site migrations and structural changes

Site migrations are one of the highest risk moments in SEO, and unfortunately they are often mishandled. Changing domains, URLs, platforms, or site architecture without proper planning can wipe out years of organic visibility overnight.

Risky practices here include incomplete redirect mapping, changing URLs unnecessarily, or launching without proper testing. I have also seen SEO agencies excluded from migration decisions entirely, only to be asked to fix the fallout later.

In my opinion, any SEO provider involved in or aware of a migration has a responsibility to flag risk clearly. Treating migrations as purely design or development tasks is one of the fastest ways to damage a site.

Chasing algorithm loopholes and trends

Another practice that puts client websites at risk is chasing perceived loopholes in algorithms. This might involve exploiting temporary ranking factors, overusing structured data in misleading ways, or jumping on trends without understanding their purpose.

From experience, these tactics often work briefly because they exploit gaps rather than build value. When those gaps close, sites relying on them fall hard.

SEO that is built on understanding users, relevance, and trust adapts naturally over time. SEO built on loopholes eventually collapses under its own weight.

Misuse of AI generated content

AI has made content creation faster, but it has also introduced new risks when used carelessly. Publishing large volumes of AI generated content without editorial oversight, factual checking, or original insight is increasingly risky.

I am not anti AI at all. In fact, I use it extensively. The risk comes when AI is used to replace expertise rather than support it. Content that lacks experience, originality, or accuracy may rank briefly but often fails to sustain visibility.

Search engines are not targeting AI content itself, but they are targeting low quality content regardless of how it is produced. Clients are put at risk when agencies prioritise output over substance.

Lack of consent and understanding

One of the most overlooked risks is simply not telling clients what is being done. I have seen agencies implement high risk tactics without explaining them, assuming the client would not understand or would object.

In my opinion, this is where SEO crosses from poor practice into unethical behaviour. Clients cannot assess risk if they are not informed. They cannot give meaningful consent if tactics are hidden behind vague language.

Transparency is not just good practice, it is a form of risk management.

How risk shows up months later

When risky SEO practices catch up with a site, the symptoms are often confusing. Rankings drop unevenly, traffic declines without clear reason, or visibility never recovers after an update.

Clients are then told the market has changed, competition has increased, or SEO just takes time. Sometimes those explanations are true. Other times they are covering up decisions that should never have been made.

Recovering from risky SEO is always harder than growing sustainably in the first place. That is the uncomfortable truth.

How businesses can protect themselves

From experience, the best protection is asking better questions. Businesses should ask where links come from, how content is created, and what risks exist. A reputable agency will answer clearly and without defensiveness.

It is also important to remember that slow, steady progress is not a failure in SEO. It is often a sign that things are being done properly.

My honest view on SEO risk

In my opinion, SEO practices that put client websites at risk usually stem from one thing, impatience. Whether it is the agency chasing quick wins or the client pushing for unrealistic timelines, risk enters when long term thinking disappears.

Good SEO is not about gaming systems. It is about building sites that deserve to be visible. When that principle guides decisions, risk reduces naturally.