Since when is lying about your education, employment, and professional background acceptable? If you do this with the government, you can go to jail. It's one thing to use a pseudonym for privacy reasons, it's another thing entirely to lie about your employer, lie about your education, and lie about your professional experience to game the system and deceive journalists and readers - all for more traffic and sales.

Now we have people in the comments section defending these characters, pretending dishonesty and lies are now acceptable because it is "good SEO". Are we really that stupid? Or are some of these commenters just sock puppets for those behind this giant scam? As the author noted in the article, there are many websites involved here:
thebestvpn.com
websitesetup.org
hostingfacts.com

Lying to get ahead tarnishes the entire industry, not just this network of scam sites. This is not about SEO, it's about honesty and integrity. Enough is enough.

You have a billion dollar company citing a source that is a painting of a Danish fishmerman, ie citing a clear and obvious lie in an attempt to take down a competitor. It's understandable that people question the intentions of the author(s) here.

You're trying to shift focus away from Mardisalu and his web of lies. There are other sites discussed here, including bestvpn.com (a site that THEbestvpn appears to have copied), but you can see the sources for this article are Mardisalu, "John Mason", "Robert Mening", "John Stevens" and all of the lies and fake credentials that were used by these personas.

TheBestVPN did not copy BestVPN. Have you actually looked at the content?

Totally different. BestVPN is ProPrivacy. Same company, except PP has now diversified into a generalized IT Sec blog that happens to include VPNs. I have no beef with ProPrivacy either. It's a decent site IMHO, but so is TheBestVPN.

I don't understand how people can hate on a site when they clearly are not digesting the content therein before bad-mouthing it. THAT is a real problem on the Internet.

The article is calling into question someone's credentials (who happens to be a real person) by citing the opinions of a painting. The authors of 'TheBestVPN' may use false credentials, but at least we know they are real people. The same cannot be said for Restore Privacy, which is using a completely fabricated persona.

Did you read the article? It’s not about “calling into question someone’s credentials” but rather pointing out an elaborate web of lies spun by Robert Mardisalu and his business partners. It’s clear he lied to the author of this article, as well as other people in the industry, about his academic credentials and professional background. He is a liar and a fraud, and his lies finally caught up with him. It was only a matter of time.
Many people in the security industry use pseudonyms for privacy reasons, and they are honest about it. That is different from blatantly lying to people about academic and professional qualifications in order to score backlinks for SEO. Apparently you still can’t grasp the difference here.

Apparently I can't... when reading VPN reviews (or any other online reviews), I absolutely trust a human being over a painting, regardless of their qualifications and regardless of who they claim to be. One is a person, the other might as well be a robot.

It's a VPN review site Susan, you don't need to use your real identity for a review to be legitimate. Shut the fuck up.

90% of journalism these days is lies and misinformation to push the agenda of their corporations rather than the truth, most affiliate sites are more honest than news site.

But you do need to use your real identity if you are going to approach IT journalists and say you are a cyber security professional worth listening to. Why don't you try shutting the fuck up? Oh, that's right - you're probably the owner of a VPN review site.

Yes I am an affiliate, no I don't have a VPN site. Yes I use created personas when publishing content because I don't want my websites linked together.

It's down to the journalist to research their sources and discover if their sources are credible or not. Most of the time when contacting journalists they are happy to accept your links in return for money, thinking journalists are special is kind of retarded.

I think most people that work for PC Mag probably imagined they would be doing something more interesting and important with their journalism degree instead of writing BS affiliate articles about Sun Basket Meal Delivery:
https://www.pcmag.com/revie...

PC Mag do the exact same shit they are calling out, they are just mad that someone is doing a better job. Media sites like this are losing money monthly in advertising. They are trying to claw back revenue with affiliate reviews (just as this article is attacking). They are doing the exact same shit we as affiliates do, they are just upset because they thought they would be better at it than marketers. Hypocrites.

Newsflash, you are all probably going to lose your jobs when this comes crashing down. Enjoy working at BuzzFeed creating quizzes like "what disney princess are you?". At least go buy a domain and write this shit for yourself. Build yourself a future reviewing products or some shit instead of selling your content to awful websites like PC Mag for pennies on the dollar.

Do you know how many kids grow up wishing they could write for PC Mag? Fucking zero.

Sure, journalists should do more to verify the credibility of their sources. But it’s difficult to find the signal in the noise thanks to all the absolute bullshitters out there.

Why don’t we just let you affiliate marketers run the government? Perform open heart surgery? Take care of our national infrastructure? You’ve all got masters and doctorates in everything. Even if you know fuck all about the subject, you happen to be experts in the field. Let’s just trust the bullshitters with generic names like ‘John Mason’ or ‘Brad Smith’ about things that are actually important to some people... because they happen to be good at link building.

Don’t blame the journalists buddy, blame the affiliates. You’re the ones filling the internet up with absolute shit

ps
I would have LOVED to be a PCMag journalist growing up.

pps
I’d say your somewhere between Snow White and Jasmine on the Disney princess scale

I generally consider reviews to be more trustworthy if someone's willing to put their real name and face in front of them. But I would.

Then did you cite this 'fellow' as a primary source for the article? https://i.imgur.com/NLDxRBy... 🤔

The "primary source" for this article is Mardisalu - and all of his fake personas, degrees, and professional experience.

This is just the tip of the iceberg in the "pay to play" ecosystem of web hosting and vpn reviews.
Michael Kan, if you really want to go deeper, simply reach out to the hosting providers and vpn services that have been given bad (damaging) reviews by Robert Mardisalu and Brad Smith. Ask them about their experience in dealing with Smith and Mardisalu. You will be shocked. Again, this article is just the tip of the iceberg.

Getting a review corrected to remove false and damaging information is basically impossible with these guys, unless you are a big player that can payout via affiliate commissions. That is the business model. I can tell you, I work in the industry. That is how the game is played. This is a "pay to play" ecosystem with the "SEO kings" sitting at the top.

How much did Restore Privacy pay Michael Kan for this piece? whats the going rate? Or does Pcmag own restoreprivacy?

Good grief this article is amateurish, hypocritical, and borderline unethical.

Not only does PC Mag try to rank for the same terms as thebestvpn, but they removed links to his website in hopes that they could reduce his rankings. I didn't read anywhere that it had ANYTHING to do with the quality of his site, only some false pretense of "no qualifications". Please show me the official VPN review tester qualifications LOL.

And then you quote "someone", from Restore Privacy (and link to them.... hmmm not suspicious at all), who is also anonymous. They criticize thebestvpn for being anon, but their whole site is based around people being PRIVATE!! So who runs Restore Privacy?!! LOL you can't make this stuff up folks!

Of course Mardisalu's not going to respond to this trash hit piece on his web site, from a direct competitor at that.

The guys bashing this article must have skin in the game. Or they are too dumb to understand that there is a difference between having a pen name on your own website and fabricating a fake persona to secure coverage in the media and lend authority to what you are saying (even if what you are saying is factually correct).

https://www.cpomagazine.com...
https://www.zdnet.com/artic...
https://www.tomsguide.com/u...

He's all over the place, pretending he's got a masters degree in cyber-security. Maybe he does... but if he doesn't, he's doing a disservice to all the people who actually bothered to get a masters in their chosen field.

He's like the digital version of Frank Abagnale. Everyone kinda respected what he was able to pull off, but at the end of the day... it was still fraud.

I am a reasonably senior member of a well-known VPN provider and can confirm that Robert Mardisalu is not a decent human being. We work with many affiliate partners (TechRadar, VPNMentor, BestVPN.com, etc.). They are all highly professional and a pleasure to work with. However, thebestvpn.com holds their partners to ransom, asking for huge CPAs. If you don't comply, your review score plummets. Whatever it is they are doing to dominate search results means that they can have their way and most of us are left out to dry. The sooner our industry is rid of them, the better

This is the truth. PCMag (or anyone else) can verify this by reaching out to other vpn services that are ranked poorly by Mardisalu and Smith. This is the business model.

"A VPN site has duped journalists into helping it become one of the biggest platforms for VPN reviews on Google.

How do I know? I was one of the journalists fooled."

You were not fooled. You were paid/bribed by them to write articles with their link in it. Same with all the other journalists and news sites that link to thebestvpn.

Now, a competitor to thebestvpn, likely restoreprivacy, paid you more to publish this article and remove thebestvpn's links.

It's that simple.

I can tell you, that is completely false. Michael is not paid by any technology vendor to publish or alter articles. You can subscribe to whatever incorrect conspiracy theory you want to, but you're wrong.

"He is not paid by any technology vendor [as far as I'm aware]." <-- fixed for you.

Pay for play links are quite common in the SEO space, as authors are frequently bribed without the knowledge of their editors. Old news at this point, but I think you should brush up: https://theoutline.com/post...

What makes you think PC Mag is any exception? There are authors on tech sites with much stronger reputations than PC Mag who, to this day, are selling links in their columns. The fact that you aren't aware of this possibility again just shows your ignorance of what's really happening with this "exposé".

Dogan, these things go through two levels of editing; the reason the links are there in this story are because otherwise we would be accused of not showing our work. Damned if we do, damned if we don't, right? Michael was just frustrated that he was duped by a shady site and tried to set the record straight.

The site "BestVPN" is mentioned but not linked to. Restore Privacy is both mentioned and linked to. Why is that? That question, at the very least, deserves an answer.

That's also pretty black and white - one is linked, one is not - especially given the importance of such links. You think I'm wearing a tinfoil hat, but in the SEO space there are rarely coincidences of this magnitude. Again as I said, there are other very suspect issues here:

1) That TheBestVPN is losing backlinks from other publications in recent weeks is no coincidence. I suggest you use any SEO analysis tool to verify this information yourself (here is one: Ahrefs.com).

2) That the article was listed as "Trending" on PC Mag when it had both 0 comments and 1 comment.

3) That PC Mag is in direct competition with TheBestVPN for the exact keywords mentioned in the article.

4) That the source cited is also a direct competitor, and uses an obvious fake persona.

Further, that fact that Mr. Kan was duped multiple times by an SEO makes it all the more likely that he would be duped again by a competitor posing as "a reader, who said he was a former freelancer at a VPN service who became suspicious about the sudden popularity of TheBestVPN.com" Gimme a break!

It's fine to call people out, but at least be honest about your intentions and sources rather than parade the flag of a white knight.

Newslash... this VPN site uses online marketing strategies like outreach and other forms of offsite SEO to increase their search results. What a shocker!

And why are PC Mag acting like sponsored links or guest post links are some fringe blackhat SEO devious strategy used to game the system. I personally know of companies bigger than PC Mag that use PBNs never mind sponsored posts.

And lets be honest, PC Mag is just an affiliate site that spent a shit load on PR and marketing, to get ahead of the competition... are we led to believe they know so little about online marketing?

This is a scam article, written because they are owned by a corporation that owns rival sites and has quotes from competitors... on a subject that's not normally covered and the article is poorly written with very little content... investigative journalist? Wow, you've searched someone on LinkedIn and found out he's a content writer.... (golf clap).

I avoid this site anyway, I only found it because someone shared this bullshit article on FB

I don’t understand how you can think ‘outreach’ and ‘seo’ are reasonable grounds for LYING about who you are and the qualifications you have!

It’s perfectly acceptable for a marketing expert to enter a new niche. It’s not acceptable for them to lie to hardworking and honest journalists about who they are in order to secure news coverage.

Where are your morals!!??

Maybe he's really good at SEO! https://media3.giphy.com/me...

I think The Best is an offshoot of just Best. As in, they severed their ties from Best and started a new project on their own. Just best is a pretty known name in the industry and regularly hosts awards.

Hi there. My name is Sean McGrath and I'm the Managing Editor of BestVPN.com. I'd like to make it 100% clear that our site has absolutely nothing to do with thebestvpn.com. We never have and we never will. As you say, we've been around for many years. We were one of the first review sites in the VPN space and we pride ourselves on having a team of 'real people' in the UK and Hungary that take great pride in what they do

You can speak to myself or any of the editorial team with the click of a button using our About Us page

It's not my place to comment on the actions of other sites, but if the allegations in this article are true, thebestvpn.com is tarnishing not only our brand (by riding on the coattails of our well known domain) but the industry as a whole.

For the purposes of clarity, thebestvpn.com and bestvpn.com are not associated in any way. If anyone would like further clarification, feel free to contact me personally by visiting the link above

Hey Sean, BestVPN.com is just as guilty as thebestvpn. The Way Back Machine shows you and BestVPN.com are lying
because Pete Z bought Buffered VPN in 2017 and was pumping it on his review site
BestVPN front
page all 2017 and through Jan 2018. There was no statement on
BestVPN saying "Hey BestVPN actually owns BufferedVPN". You even had it
listed as Top
5. Only when the news
broke on Jan 24th 2018 of Pete's ownership of Buffered did
you quickly remove them from the front page and top
5. If no one knew this you would still have Buffered the top ranking VPN
like before. Did Pete get discounted advertisement rates since he owns
Buffered AND BestVPN??? Or did he pay full price??? We really want to
know. So, you are wrong sean, you did not make it public in anyway shape or form.

Sean, you realize your site is probably even worse than TheBestVPN right? Cloudwards and Tom Spark Reviews already outed you guys for buying out BufferedVPN and not disclosing it on your site. You rate it 9.2/10 and you guys own it! How is that legal? None of your site's content has any credibility now.

What a load of PR bull. I can't find it anywhere on your site, and there is no disclaimer in the Buffered VPN Review, I've looked. It's rated 9.2/10, that's pretty much the highest rating on the site, and it looks like you just don't put it into tables because you guys have been caught.

OH WAIT. IN 2017 and all of 2018 YOU DID. Remember this? Did you disclaim it then too?

http://web.archive.org/web/...

Not to mention you rated NordVPN as #1 when it has the lowest rated VPN score on Trustpilot. Either your reviewers don't know what they are doing, or you guys just love that 3 year subscription revenue with a only 30 day refund (if a user goes past 30 days u guys get $100 and it stays that way).

ExpressVPN is also highly rated on your site, and it's $13 a month. Are you freaking kidding me?

Why don't you give some actual good VPNs some spotlight? Oh wait, its because they AREN'T THE MOST EXPENSIVE VPNS ON THE MARKET AND YOU WON'T MAKE AS MUCH MONEY. SCAMMERS!!!!

Why are you taking quotes from "Restore Privacy" which is an obvious competitor doing the exact same thing? They even take bitcoin donations to their website, even though they make a fortune through VPN commisions

The privacy craze is totally bonker, how are we supposed to trust VPN providers with all the crap advertising/sponsoring/etc we are shot at everydays. We are told countless times that VPNs will save you from pirates, hackers, "big brother" and they even push "malware prevention" now.
But VPNs in reality are a signle point of failiure that is based on one thing: TRUST.
Because not only you have the real aspect of security, but you have also the "feeling" of security.
I say "feeling" because you can't really as a single user really check the claims said by a VPN provider by yourself without having to trust someone else.
Not everyone know how to shop a trusted VPN provider and it's very easy to fall for a "lifetime unlimited VPN deals" that are swarming the Internet and the less knowedgeable users will "feel" secure with thoses even if in reality it could be worst than trusting your Internet provider and government.
But if you try to search for a good VPN across all this noise, how can you trust VPN reviews / top list if they are pretty much all sponsorised or have at least affiliated links of some sort?
Since pretty much all VPNs push hard on the annually subscriptions to save money, you need to be sure of making a good choice because if for some reasons you notice midway that the guys you trusted can't be trusted (like about this TheBestVPN) will it change how you feel about your current provider?

All true. You have to judge the sites based on the quality of their content and whether or not they appear legit.

How do we know if a site truly conducted DNS leak tests for example, if they claim they did? Even if they post a "screen shot," kids in elementary school can doctor photos and make fake charts now.

Take the aggregate of the content on any site and ask yourself if it makes sense and appears legitimate. Presume it is if the info seems to fit. That is about the best you can do short of running your own detailed tests.

The VPN service providers are no different. How do you know a "no log" site truly keeps no logs? You don't. Even if they have been audited, so what? Maybe they turned off logging before the audit and turned it back on afterwards? Who will know? No one.

It's all about trust, as you say.

Michael Kan is a news writer. He cited this site's research in news articles about security flaws.

Our VPN reviewer is Max Eddy, who has reviewed more than 60 VPNs over the past six years.

And this is pretty active for a comment section of ours. Not that many people comment on PCMag. I'm the comment moderator, I know.

Nice to meet you Sascha. As a moderator for PC Mag, you no doubt have some basic awareness of SEO (I would hope). If you are able to monitor TheBestVPN.com, you'll see that someone is intentionally trying to remove their links, PC Mag aside.

Forgetting the clear and obvious attempt at negative SEO here, the source you cited is both a direct competitor to TheBestVPN and lists a painting of a Danish fisherman as their "VPN expert". Do you not find this even the list bit suspect? Please use a bit of common sense...

**And note: the article was listed as "trending" when it had zero shares and one comment. How is that possible? Genuinely curious.

It seems that one of your (if you represent thebestvpn) competitors has paid this writer to post this article.

it's likely the next step will be that the people behind this post will mail all the sites thebestvpn got links from and show this article to them to get the links removed.

It's unfortunate. You need to be more careful; you really did sloppy work with the author profiles. You used the real images of the people behind the site but fake names. This is very sloppy for an affiliate site network making millions per year.

Not to pick on you, but this is really weird. So much work potentially ruined by such a weird and stupid mistake. You had the best SEO in the industry by far but this mistake is really amateurish.

Hey look, TheBestVPN showed up. I would give you benefit of the doubt, but since your website is so clearly just an affiliate money scheme (not honest unbiased reviews), I don't believe anything you guys say.

Great article
Good on PCMag to unpublish those reviews.

P**s poor article. It seems that PCmag is just annoyed that they're beaten in search results by someone who has a better website than them, The actual qualifications of Mason don't matter at all if he can deliver more useful information than you do. Total nonsense, blame search engines for not ranking you better, not him.

"The actual qualifications of Mason don't matter" - seriously? Perhaps if he was just producing content for his own little blog, using fake personas would be acceptable. But this guy is reaching out to journalists under the pretence of being an expert in his field and apparently outright lying about his qualifications. Would you take medical advice from Mason, the marketing professional or financial advice from Mason, the SEO expert? Of course not!

When I read pieces from well known media outlets, be it the BBC or PCMag, I expect their sources to be beyond reproach. I think it takes real guts for a journalist to put their hands up and say they were played. Kudos to the author and PCMag.

I don't agree that this is PCMag being annoyed.
The issue isn't that 'Mason' isn't necessarily qualified to give VPN reviews.
The issue is that he pretended to be someone who is qualified, while actually being someone that specializes in SEO and advertising.
Therefore, the website as a whole is very suspicious, as its being presented under false pretenses.

True. Not to mention this guy is claiming he worked for IBM when he didn't. Isn't that fraud?

What exactly does one have to do to be "qualified to give VPN reviews"??

Use one. :-)