« July 2007 | SEO Blog | September 2007 »

August 31, 2007

Friday Recap

My apologies for the lack of Recap last week. I was going to write one, I was…and then I decided that after 4 crazy days of liveblogging and running around in San Jose, going home and getting some sleep would be a good idea. Don’t hate me; hate Susan. What did Susan give you last week? A whole bunch of nothin’.

A ginormous THANKS to our friends at Ask.com (hi, Patrick, Jennifer, Erik & Gary!) who were kind enough to send over some fun goodies for me us. During and post-SES, we have acquired two awesome Ask3D T-shirts, a my-life-is-now-complete Ask.com Messenger bag (!) [So jealous. --Susan], a collection of cute pens and an Ask.com pad. And I mentioned Jim Lanzone said my name during the keynote, right? I’m in Ask heaven.

Thanks again, guys! Now everyone else go try out Ask3D. It’s awesome.

While we’re on the topic of schwag, while I was busy blogging and working really hard last week, apparently everyone else was cruising the exhibition hall for goodies. You can check out my BFF Tamar Weinberg’s holdings over at Techipedia and it looks like Stoney deGeyter and his team did pretty well too.

Ralph Wilson saw a bunch of SEOs standing around and decided to capitalize on the opportunity by sticking a camera and a microphone in their faces. Ralph asked search marketers to go on camera and demonstrate Google’s mating call. The results were hilarious. (If you look closely, you can spot me chatting with some of the BC gang in the background!). Google’s not so scary now, is it? ;)

It appears that many of our favorite search marketers are still in a state of delirium following last week’s big SES show. Joe Whyte crafted a horribly frightening Letterman-esque What if SEOs mated piece, Rhea Drysdale drafted her own SEO Dream Team, and Pat Sexton created a somewhat uncomfortable video illustrating how to open a beer with a lighter. These people need sleep, especially Pat.

The Healthy Living blog tells us that 45 percent of Americans fall asleep on the job, 39 percent are kissing their coworkers and 18 percent of employees are sneaking back into work at night in order to snoop around. Dude, who’s hiring these people?

While we’re talking about weirdo employees, fear not, fellow coffee drinkers. With these simple instructions even the Eyes-Open Sleeper guy can make a decent pot of coffee. Mmm, coffee…

Hitwise reports that the Flavor of Love casting site was among the most visited Web sites within the TV category last week. I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t make me proud to be a woman. Or a human.

Family Hack gives us an effective little trick to help you retrieve that wedding ring you just dropped down your drain. Hurry, if you fish it out quickly the wife won’t know it was missing in the first place and you won’t have to spend tonight on the couch!

This week I learned that sometimes when you need a panda-sized hug, only a panda will do. And look, four totally cute orphaned hedgehogs adopted a brush as a mother. I want to adopt them all!

Also totally cute: Origami Yoda!

What’s not cute is this robotic devil kitten that is so going to come to life at night and eat your children’s little faces. Don’t believe me? Go rent Chucky.

Alan Weisman took a look at what the world would look like without us and well, it makes me feel kind of crappy. Enjoy!

A 17-year-old unlocked the iPhone and traded it in for a Nissan 350z plus three 8GB iPhones. Dude, the kid got a car. A nice car! In other news, 11 more months until my crappy little Chevy Aveo is paid off. I so poor.

I’m not so amused by this but I know Susan will whine cry comment if I don’t mention it, so here goes: Some crazy people constructed the craziest tree house ever (take that Sullivan!). It’s circular, comes with appliances, and should roll down the hill really nicely when it comes detached from whatever is holding it up and kills the small children living inside. [I'm going to comment anyway. I want that tree house.--Susan]

Other fun things I learned this week: Always believe someone when they say their sick, the law of the Reverse Savage, M&M’s come in varying degrees of strength, and the 10 love songs that can end your relationship.

Things I Learned From BoingBoing This Week:

• I don’t have a land line, but I want that blue phone.
• Horns and fingers/toes are better in sets of 6s.
• People can do awesome things with Post-Its. I just use mine for leaving notes. I am so lame.
• Spiders are so gross. Spiders. Gross. Ah!
• Finally, a visual to help you figure out how much foam goes in that yummy cappuccino. That would be your “kap-oo-chee-noh”.
• The Red Sox have the curse of the Bambino to worry about, but the Yankees have the curse of the…squirrel? And which team is more hardcore? [Dodgers! Go Blue!--Susan] - It’s like a tic with you. That’s what I thought.

Have a great Labor Day weekend, everyone!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/31/07 at 4:19 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Ask, Fun Stuff

August 30, 2007

Does Google Hate Search Engine Optimization?

Jill Whalen updated an article she wrote that she wrote on search engine optimization a few years ago and included it in her latest HighRankings newsletter. The article is called The Art of SEO. Overall, it’s a great read and I agree with a lot of what Jill is professing, but there was one statement that Jill makes that tripped me up and threw some clouds into an otherwise totally sunny SoCal day.

In the article, Jill concludes that Google doesn’t like search engine optimization and that Matt and his crew are actually on the hunt for sites with the “telltale signs of SEO” in order to “downgrade” or “zap” them out of the index.

Let me ask you, do you think Google hates search engine optimization and is just tolerating us SEO-types?

I’d really like to think not. I’d like to think that Google (and Yahoo and Microsoft and Ask) think of SEOs as having the same goals in mind that they do. Everyone wants to highlight quality, authoritative sites. They want to reward sites that are benefiting users and help make the search results more relevant. What in that is worthy of being hated?

I’m used to hearing people like Jason Calacanis go into tirades about how all SEOs do is muddy up the results for the average searcher. That we somehow make the results less relevant by applying all that magic and fancy stuff to Web sites in order to trick the engines into ranking them higher. But that’s not what we do.

This quote from Jill caught me off guard.

“If you think that having your keyword phrases “in all the right places for SEO” is a good thing, think again! You’re essentially telling Google, “Hey look…my site has been SEO’d!” To which they reply, “Thanks so much for letting us know… ZAP … see ya later!” Doesn’t matter if your site is the most relevant (in your mind) to the search query. Doesn’t matter that you’ve placed your keyword phrases strategically throughout the site. That’s actually the thing that may become your downfall.”

Jill has far more experience and knowledge in SEO than I do, but I just don’t see how that could be true. If search engine optimization is about creating better sites, sites that are able to effectively communicate what they’re about, then why would Google be against that? Surely, they’re against spamming and keyword stuffing and trying to make a pig look like an eagle, but that’s not what search engine optimization is.

I also feel like if Google hated SEO, we'd know it. Google isn’t just tolerating SEOs; they’re going out of their way to help them and give them access to more information. We’ll always want more information and more data and more transparency, but if you look at what they’ve given us over the years, it’s pretty impressive.

We have great Webmaster tools; we have people like Matt Cutts blogging and dispelling rumors and answering questions; we have official Google blogs to help educate users and webmasters; there are APIs, written guidelines, representatives showing up at search conferences, etc. I don’t think this is a company trying to placate us or appear accepting when they’re not. If Matt Cutts didn’t care about SEOs, he wouldn’t have showed up to the Are Paid Links Evil session and taken the lashing that he did. And you can be damn sure that he went back to Google and shared what he learned with the powers that be there. If Google hates optimization then they’re doing a lousy job of showing it. If they’re downgrading sites that have been optimized, then they’re missing each and every one of our clients. I don’t think Google is that dumb.

Google doesn’t hate search engine optimization. SEOs are making them money. It’s not just organic campaigns search marketers are running, they’re also running paid search campaigns. Campaigns that utilize programs like AdWords, Yahoo! Search Marketing, adCenter and the like.

Or maybe I’m wrong and Google does hate SEO. After all, they seem to hate just about everything else.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/30/07 at 12:20 PM | Comments (18)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

August 29, 2007

How to Bounce Back From a PR Blunder

When it comes to reputation management, the Internet is both friend and foe. On one hand, it will ensure that your embarrassing YouTube video is catapulted into the SERPs quicker than you can slap the person who uploaded it, but on the other, it does also gives you the chance to respond just as quickly.

We’ve been hearing about online reputation management a lot lately. Most notably there was SES San Jose’s Buzz Monitoring session, which saw Chris Sherman, Rob Key, Andy Beal, and Jonathan Ashton center stage talking about how companies no longer own their brands. Your company’s brand is the conversation and the best you can hope to do is monitor it in order to steer that conversation. We heard a lot of great reputation management nuggets on Thursday, but on Friday, the world got to witness a real life example.

Enter Caitlin Upton.

I’m sure by now you know exactly who I’m talking about. Caitlin is Miss Teen South Carolina and the young lady who mangled the Miss Teen USA pageant's question and answer portion so bad that she can became an accidental YouTube phenomenon. If you did miss it, Caitlin was asked why one-fifth of Americans can’t locate the United States on a map. Unfortunately for Caitlin, as soon as the question was asked, someone turned on her Idiot Switch (we all have one) and the poor girl spun into a nonsensical tangent about “U.S. Americans”, “the Iraq”, “South Africa” and began concluding sentences with phrases like “everywhere like such as”. That was Friday.

Let’s be honest, if this was ten years ago, moms would have laughed about the incident over popcorn with their daughters on Friday night and then went to bed. There would have been a blurb about it in Saturday’s paper and then life would have carried on as normal. But this is 2007. In 2007, we have YouTube! And by Saturday morning, young Caitlin Upton was famous.

Since her prime-time television debut, Caitlin has become the butt of every Internet joke out there. There was her YouTube appearance, Tube Maps have been created to help listeners follow along with Caitlin’s nonsense, and an entire Web site was devoted to mocking her. The Internet is a beautiful, beautiful thing.

It’s easy to laugh at Caitlin, but the truth is your brand is just as vulnerable to attack as Caitlin’s was. One day, when you least expect it, someone will turn on your Idiot Switch. You will say or do things you never ever imagined you would, and it will be up to you to decide how you’re going to address it. How are you going to change the conversation and protect your online reputation?

In Cailtin’s case, she decided to alter the conversation by making light of it. She went on the Today Show and was able to not only defend herself (she’s 18 and it was her first time on national television, give her a break), and get another chance at (somewhat) intelligently answering Friday night’s map question. And she did great. This time around she didn’t mention The Iraq once!

What else is Caitlin doing to change the conversation about her? She’s on People.com giving their audience a snarky Geography Pop Quiz where she gets to read her answers off visible cue cards and be cute on command (something she’s probably very familiar with). If I was Caitlin, I’d step back and see how her small press tour is working out for her and what the SERPs are looking like for her name. She’s made light of the situation and now it’s probably time for her to get out of it so people will move on. I wouldn’t want to see her showing up at the Library of Congress’ Geography & Map Reading Room any time soon. [How long did you Google for that one, Lisa? --Susan] Shut up. Not long, actually. I have crazy Googling skills.

But Caitlin is going to be okay. If it was the power of YouTube that threatened to kill her, it may be the power of YouTube that helps save her. A quick Google search for [Caitlin Upton] or [Lauren Caitlin Upton] shows her Today Show interview has the top result, not the embarrassing YouTube video. That’s reputation management.

The truth is everyone makes mistakes. Even your perfect little company or your infallible leader will at some point say or do something royally stupid. Something so dumb that you will want to crawl under your desk and stay there until some girl goes on national television and starts spouting off about “U.S Americans” just to take the attention off of you. But you can’t do that. Your brand is important and you have to protect it.

If that semi-lucid blog post you wrote after last week’s SearchBash offended someone, apologize, and do it privately. Do not enter into any kind of public forum and pen a 1,500 word dissertation on what happened, what you were thinking and why you said what you said. The truth is people don’t really care why you were an idiot; they just want you to acknowledge that you were and to apologize for it. Avoid the temptation to explain your side to anyone who will listen and instead email the hurt party privately and write a genuine apology. Remember that flame wars are bad and that public perception equals truth.

If you didn’t offend anyone but instead just made a royal ass out of yourself, own up to it and make light of it when possible. We’re all human. Playing up your goofs is a good way to show your audience that you don’t take yourself too seriously and that you’re capable of having a good time. Here’s a secret: People like those who can laugh at themselves. I’m not sure why. Maybe it’s because we’ve all tripped going up the stairs at least once in our life. You probably have the scar on your shin to prove it.

The key to reputation management is knowing what is being said about you in the first place. Use Andy Beal’s 26 free tools for buzz monitoring to keep yourself in the conversation. If you don’t know what the conversation is about, you have no way to control it.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/29/07 at 12:40 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Branding

August 28, 2007

Yahoo, The Value of About Pages, Bloglines & Fun Stuff

Yahoo and Jailed Dissidents

Yahoo has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit being brought against them by those two Chinese journalists that they helped jail by turning over their search information to Chinese authorities. The two men have since been sentenced to 10 years in jail in an institution known for abusing its inmates. The wife of one of the jailed men is also alleging that she was forced to endure "severe psychological and emotional suffering" as a result of Yahoo’s actions. How very Western of her.

Though sympathetic, Yahoo is asking for the suit to be dismissed, arguing that it has no merit and does not belong in an American court room:

"This is a lawsuit by citizens of China imprisoned for using the Internet in China to express political views in violation of China law. It is a political case challenging the laws and actions of the Chinese government. It has no place in the American courts”

Truthfully, I’m not sure where I sit on this one. In my perfect little world where ponies graze on sunflowers all day, I want Yahoo to be held accountable. I feel like turning in your users for completing an action you allowed them to take is wrong. At the same time, I can appreciate the difficulty that entities like Google and Yahoo face having to respect local customs. Really, I don’t know where I ultimately sit; the journalism kid in me who was taught to respect anonymity is clashing with the SEO blogger-type who knows it’s not up to the search engines to challenge established laws. I just don’t like the idea of Yahoo giving up private information about its users. I feel like Google would have fought harder.

What do you think? Do you think Yahoo should be held responsible for turning over information that caused two innocent-by-Western-standards journalists to be jailed?

Will Adding Photos On the About Page Increase Conversions?

An interesting question popped up over at LED Digest. Site owner Carol Moore wondered if adding a photo to her site’s About page would help potential clients “trust” her site more and therefore be more inclined to do business with her.

I think it’s worth doing. There are definitely users out there who are still wary of conducting any kind of transaction online. Offering up a picture and showing users that there are actual, real live people behind your Web site will make some feel a whole lot more comfortable doing business you. You may have noticed we started adding some photos to our Authors Page (I know, I look like a psychotic poodle, what do you want me to do about it?).

That reminds me, who thinks Susan should be forced to put up a picture? Anyone? Anyone? [Leave me alone. I'm not photogenic. --Susan]

New Beta Version of Bloglines: Love it or Hate It?

So Bloglines went ahead and debuted a new beta version of their site this week. I’ve been reluctant to say anything so far because while I really love Bloglines and am a loyal, loyal user, I’m still not completely sold on the new format. I like the three reading views (though I’ll probably never use anything but the full view), I like the customizable start page and I love that stories aren’t marked read until you actually read them, but the UI is going to take some getting used to. It just feels different. I spend almost my entire day in Bloglines and suddenly I’m having trouble being able to focus in and read a given post, my subscription numbers are gone, and it’s still not updating fast enough for me.

I’m sure at some point Bloglines will require me to make the switch, but for now I’m sticking with the old version.

Fun Finds

I know Susan will give me crap for mentioning Facebook again (hey, check it out, Susan decided to come to work today!), but change is coming. Be aware. [No, I mean it, this time you really are fired. --Susan] Kbye.

I’m sure my BFF Tamar Weinberg will want me to point out that Digg has prettied up its home page, allowing users to see both news and video on a single page. Ooo.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/28/07 at 4:03 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Blogging, Branding, Fun Stuff, Search Engine Optimization

Standardizing Web Analytics

One of the sessions I was lucky enough to attend while in San Jose last week was Issues in Analytics. This probably comes as no surprise to you, but as a blogger and a member of Bruce Clay’s writing team, I don’t spend too much time straining my eyes looking at numbers or scouring through Web analytics data. And, frankly, this is a very good thing, because should Bruce ever require me to do so, I would most likely have to hurt myself. Numbers are evil.

Despite all the numbers, I have to admit that Thursday’s Web analytics session was super informative and I came away with a lot of lessons learned, one of the biggest being how hard is to calibrate the data search marketers are getting from their analytics products.

Search marketers are running many different analytic tools on their sites in order to compile the most complete picture as to what’s happening. They’re measuring all sorts of events to determine whether or not a certain offline promotion is working, where users are entering their sites, whether a particular product should have its own landing page to increase conversions, what pages are getting the most traffic, etc. This is all great until you dive in and realize that the four different analytics programs they’re using refer to the same thing in four different ways and produce four (sometimes drastically) different numbers.

This isn’t good for search marketers. It’s not good for the campaigns they’re running, for the success of their sites, and really, it’s not good for Web analytics as a whole. As the industry matures, things need to be standardized.

Based on that, I was glad to hear speaker Avinash Kaushik mention during Thursday’s talk that the Web Analytics Association had just released 26 new standard definitions for key terms in an attempt to promote consistency among search marketers, agencies and their analytics teams. Anything that helps search marketers and those unlucky enough to have to deal with search marketers understand one another and speak a common language is a very good thing.

The newly defined terms were broken down into four categories and include:

• Building Block Terms: Page, Page Views, Visits, Unique Visitors, New Visitor, Repeat Visitor, Repeat Visitor & Returning Visitor
• Visit Characterization: Entry Page, Landing Page, Exit Page, Visit Duration, Referrer, Internal Referrer, External Referrer, Search Referrer, Visit Referrer, Original Referrer, Click-through, Click-through Rate/Ratio, Page Views per Visit
• Content Characterization: Page Exit Ratio, Single-Page Visits, Single Page View Visits (Bounces), Bounce Rate
• Conversion Metrics: Event, Conversion

Hopefully now that SEOs, marketers and their agencies are working under a standard set of definitions, the various analytics tools will begin to accept these terms as standard, as well. There’s a real problem when Google Analytics refers to something one way and then for OmniTure or WebTrends call it something else. I don’t care what term they use, but everyone needs to get on the same page. How else are search marketers ever supposed to establish a baseline to work off? What happens when search marketers switch analytics products? They’re supposed to change their vocabulary along with it? No wonder search marketers and marketing agencies can’t understand one another.

Jason Burby, co-chair of the Web Analytics Association’s Standards Committee recently wrote an article over at Clickz about The Importance of Web Analytics Standards and said something that really stuck with me:

Standards help define industry benchmarks and allow people to more easily compare themselves to others, to establish best practices, and to improve site performance.

I couldn’t agree more. You can view the WAA’s new set of definitions (PDF) on their site.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/28/07 at 3:57 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Analytics

August 27, 2007

Would People Notice If You Disappeared?

The question posed by Copyblogger’s Ryan Imel is: If Your Blog Disappeared, Who Would Miss It?

It really is an excellent question and something that extends to your entire Internet marketing campaign. I mean, think back a few months or a few years or however long it has been since you established your Web presence. You launched a Web site because you believed you offered some kind of product or service that people needed and you wanted to help them find it. You created a site from scratch, wrote content for it and tried your best to form a community and connect with users. Now that it’s established, ask yourself, would anyone notice if you suddenly disappeared? Would they care or would they just head over to one of your competitors’ sites? Are you filling the void you set out to fill?

I’m sure this is just my narcissism kicking in, but I actually wonder about this a lot. I wonder if I got in a car accident on my way up to SES San Jose and couldn’t blog if anyone would notice there was coverage missing. If we took a week off from blogging with no explanation would our readers notice our absence? Would readers care if Bruce up and fired me one day or would they just head over to one of the other ten million SEO blogs they read daily?*

I think it’s good to give yourself a reality check every once in awhile. To ask yourself if your site or your blog is as unique and valuable to users as you think it is. What is it that keeps users coming back to your site? Or perhaps, what is it that’s driving them away?

Personally, I can think of number of blogs or Web sites that I would be heartbroken over if they disappeared. I mean, seriously, if Heather B. Armstrong ever stopped updating me on the activities of Chuck and Leta…well, I think I might lose all reason for living. There are absolutely sites that are part of my online community. Sites that if they disappeared I wouldn’t just be able to replace them. These sites are unique in that I’ve already formed an attachment to them. Try to take them away from me and I swear to God I will throw a computer monitor at your head.

Ryan offered up a couple of tips on how bloggers (and site owners) can ensure that people miss them should they ever go missing. I’ll simply summarize them here:

• Target Your Audience
• Be Unique
• Interact with your readers (audience) on a personal level
• Create content that can’t be duplicated

Obviously, all four of those tips are very important to the success of your brand, but I think it’s that third one that’s really going to ensure that your readers notice when you’ve been eaten by a bear. Unless your audience has formed an attachment to your brand, you are completely replaceable. It’s that personal interaction factor that will keep customers coming back and keep them aware of your presence.

Here’s an idea. Fall is right around the corner, right? Start the season off by taking a step back and reexamining the legacy you’ve been creating online. Have you allowed your site or your blog to become replaceable? Have you been engaging and communicating with your audience or are you just talking at them? Are you providing a service that is useful or are you just like everyone else? If you don’t like the answers you’re coming up with, it’s time to follow Ryan’s advice – Re-target your audience, be unique, interact with your audience and create content that can’t be duplicated. Start now.

*Please do not take this as your cue to tell me how wonderful/funny/pretty this blog is. Susan already accused me of using my Is Mixing Humor and Blogging a Bad Idea post as a way to fish for compliments. I promise that is not the purpose of this post. Honest.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/27/07 at 3:39 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Blogging, Branding

Blog Monitoring, Google Australia, Facebook & Fun Finds

Hey, search folk. Here’s a collection of nuggets for you to snack on while I’m still getting caught up on my feeds. I know, it’s Monday and I should be recovered from SES San Jose by now, but I’m not. And this weekend was the annual Bruce Clay, Inc. BBQ (with babies, puppies and jolly jumpers!) so that delayed me even more. And then I spent the rest of the weekend sick.

No, I’m not whining. Stop judging me.

The UK Starts Monitoring Blogs

ResourceShelf had an interesting find last week, pointing out that the UK’s Central Office of Information is going to start monitoring blogs in order to brief government departments on where people sit on current issues. It basically sounds like they’re creating a formal Google Alert system for all those stiff government types.

I like the initial idea, assuming it is used for good (understanding the conversation) and not evil (censoring dissent). It’s vital for officials to be aware of what is being said on blogs and tuned into the conversation in order to better serve those they’re supposed to be speaking on behalf of. You have to wonder why they didn’t start something like this sooner. Have government officials been ignoring the conversation happening online all this time? Surely, this had to have been an issue before? Better late than never, I suppose.

Personalized Ad Program Coming to Facebook

The Wall Street Journal broke the news last week revealing that Facebook will soon feature an ad program that targets ads based on personal preferences (favorite activities, music, religion, family, etc), not just by demographics. In case you’re starting to get a little nervous, the targeting will be done via defined user category groups, not by the individual, so it’s not nearly as scary as you may have feared.

Or, maybe it is.

The article states that Facebook’s long term objective is to perfect the system so that it will be able to “predict what products and services users might be interested in even before they have specifically mentioned an area”. How very Google of them.

Seriously, though, a lot of people are getting freaked out over this, but I personally don’t have a problem with Facebook targeting ads based on information I have voluntarily entered into their system. If they want to look at my user groups, or my blog feeds, or the fact that I am a raging New England Patriots fan in order to better serve me ads, then so be it. If you are freaked out about ad targeting, perhaps you shouldn’t be entering your deepest, darkest secrets into your Facebook profile. Actually, maybe you shouldn’t be using social networks in general. Go sit in your closet. The bad people can’t get you there.

Google and Australia Make Nice…For Now

Don’t get too excited but there’s actually a news story today that mentions Google and Australia and it isn’t about a new lawsuit. Huzzah!

Yes, today’s big Aussie news is that Google Australia has signed a multi-year deal with the Australia media conglomerate News Digital Media to put AdSense contextual advertising and paid search AdWords advertising on the NDM’s host of sites, including The Daily Telegraph, The Herald Sun, The Australian and FoxSports.com.au. Under the deal, Google will also replace Yahoo as the search results provider on NDM Web sites. Well played, Google. Well played.

Fun Finds

This is more an Awesome Find than a Fun Find, but Andy Beal outlined 26 Free Tools for Buzz Monitoring. I recommend you bookmark that post. Andy maybe buy Andy lunch.

Gemme gets us caught up on what’s been happening in China’s world of search over the past month. Definitely worth a read.

If you find yourself overly bored at work today, practice switching off the colors in the Google logo. No, I don’t know why this is interesting but Google Blogoscoped mentioned it and, darn it, I want to be as cool as Phillipp.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/27/07 at 12:13 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Blogging, Branding, Pay Per Click / Online Ads

August 24, 2007

SES San Jose 2007 Coverage Recap

And we’re back!

If you were in town for the show, I hope you had a chance to stop by the booth and say hi to Bruce, Mike and our assortment of fine analysts. And if you weren’t in town, well then, I hope you enjoyed my attempt at being useful and covering a bunch of the sessions. I apologize for only being able to hit 17 of them, but like I’ve said before, as soon as Bruce gets the cloning thing all figured out, we’ll be able to provide full session coverage.

Here’s a list of the sessions we did cover in case you weren’t sitting by your feed reader waiting for it to update. And, of course, when I say these are the sessions “we” covered, I really mean these are the sessions “I” covered. I didn’t see Susan running from session to session carrying a 20lb laptop bag, did you?

No, I didn’t think so.

Day 1
Post Search Ads
Universal & Blended Search
Personalization, User Data & Search
One Billion Searchers

Day 2
Keynote Conversation with Jim Lanzone
Podcast & Audio Search Optimization
Images & Search Engines
Video Search Engine Optimization
Are Paid Links Evil?

Day 3
Keynote Conversation with Marissa Mayer
Search APIs
So You Want To Be A Search Marketer
SEM Pricing Models
The SEO Reputation Problem

Day 4
Analyzing the Analytics Players Issues in Analytics
User Generated Content & Search
Buzz Monitoring

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/24/07 at 10:16 AM | Comments (3)
See more entries in SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007

August 23, 2007

Buzz Monitoring

Chris Sherman is moderating the final session of the conference with speakers Rob Key (Converseon), Andy Beal (Marketing Pilgrim) and Jonathan Ashton (Agency.com).

[The sound in this room is really weird. I’m sitting 4 feet away from Chris Sherman and I can’t hear a word he’s saying. That makes me feel really good.]

Rob Key is up first and starts by sharing some stats:

• 45 percent of adult users have created content online.
• 54 percent of users have watched video online.
• Social media is highly prominent in search engine results.
• 77 percent think blogs are a good way to get information about a company or product.
• MySpace gets more traffic than Google.

The decentralization of content creation and the wide availability of affordable personal publishing technology have allowed consumers to have a substantial say in your brand's reputation.

CGM content, like blogs, continues to rapidly gain visibility within top search engine results. Natural lists themselves are a form of social media.

Universal search blends listings from its news, video, and image portals and includes them in the main index. Search and social media have become fully intertwined. You can’t have one without the other.

You no longer own your brand. Your brand is a conversation.

There are different parts of the conversation - enterprise, mainstream media, and consumer generated content. Unless you're monitoring the buzz, you won't know what's there.

The first step in understanding the conversation is trying to visualize it. There are two kinds of content, content above the waterline and content below the waterline.

What is the conversation below the waterline? Buzz monitoring is conversation mining. You can scour the discussion areas to capture, understand, and report the products, issues, and opinions that consumers share between and among themselves. They can come up with ideas and concepts and companies can now listen in and engage. This includes newsgroups, blogs, podcasts, and social media sites.

The direct, unfiltered, brutally honest nature of much online discussion is a gold dust to big companies that want to spot trends or find out what customers really think of them.

Key Questions:

• How do consumers feel about my brand…right now?
• How many are talking and who’s being impacted?
• What issues are being discussed? Which issues are coming around the corner?
• Who’s talking and where. And are they influential?
• Did my marketing engage resonate or echo with consumers?
• How do we effectively engage in the conversation with a social media strategy?

What are some core business users? Reputation Management, new product launches, marketing effectiveness, customer service, brand management and sales & acquisitions.

Key mining dimensions: WOM incidences, source, sentiment, topic, subtopics, tone, influence, depth of understanding, existing versus “new” voices.

Influence: Who are the most frequent and visible voices in the brand? What are they talking about and what is their sentiment?

Trending over time provides the greatest insights.

What topics are emerging and which are becoming less popular? How are perceptions of new voices? What is your reputation within SERPs for your most popular terms? What is your visibility within the search engine results for the most important issues?

Businesses need a communication strategy that enables them to proactively and ethically engage in the proliferating consumers generated media universe to inform, educate, influence and engage.

Andy Beal is next.

Why should you track? You can get product ideas, looking for keywords, be prepared for scandals, product recalls, client opportunities, etc.

What should you track: Company name, products, customers, stocks, partners, executives, patents, press releases, services, news, etc. You’re effectively going to track your brand.

Track most recent news about your business by using Google News. Google News tracks mainstream media and second and third tier news sites. Not many blogs, though there are some. You can subscribe to the RSS feed. Anytime Google News finds a story about your brand you’ll know about it.

News buzz: Great for tracking what’s hot. Enter your search query and then subscribe to the RSS feed. Make sure your servers can handle the traffic if you hear about yourself being on Digg.

Blog Posts: Use Technorati or Google Blog Search (I personally like Ask’s blog search better than Google’s). Instant updates whenever someone blogs about your company.

Blog Comments: Sometimes the conversation has a bigger impact than the original post. A positive post about your company could have a slew of negative comments. You should know what people are saying.

Blog Conversation: Viral blogging. You blog, then someone else blogs in response to your entry, causing it to spread. Blogpulse.com/conversation

Blog Trends: Get a feel for how popular a certain phrase is. (Blogpulse.com/trends)

Bookmarks: People don’t just bookmark something and save it in their browser. Now they’re using sites like del.icio.us to share it with the entire world. You can subscribe to the RSS feed as well.

Photos: Keep track of people taking photos of your product. Get ideas for PR. Can help you avoid scandal.

Video: Track videos about your company. See what people are saying about you. Give you good ideas for viral videos.

Forum Posts: Keep an eye on the conversations that are happening on message boards. Boardtracker.com

Changing Information: Things like Wikipedia pages. Read the history of the Wiki page for your company or your products to stay abreast of the changes.

Job Listings: See who your competitors are hiring and what they’re looking for. Steal other people’s job listings if you don’t want to write your own. Oodle.com

SEC Filings: Gives you info on publicly trading companies. Get transcripts of phone calls

Patents: Google Patent Search. If you’re Apple, see if there are any other patents that mention the iPhone. Keep track of what your competirors are looking to build.

Events: See what’s going on in your industry. Are your competitors putting on an event? Who are they inviting? What are they talking about?

New Products: Great way to get an idea of what products people find really interesting.

Search Queries: Google Trends will tell you how popular a certain query is.

Keyword Referrals: searchanalytics.compete.com

Email updates. Google Alerts.

The untrackable: Copernic.com will track a page for you and tell you as soon as it has changed. It's great for monitoring a BBB report or a PR page of your competitors.

You can use services like Yahoo Pipes (pipes.yahoo.com) to set up any kind of tracking that you want.

Jonathan Ashton is next to talk about what you should do when you figure out that complaint sites are ending up in the search results.

How much do you have invested in your brand? Search engines can magnify a single voice. Search is increasingly influential over buying decisions. Brand can’t always control the message. Search + community causes lightning fast communication.

Bad buzz can have a lasting impact. Think of the Ford Pinto.

Consumers have to pay attention to the entire arc of the story. If you didn’t know that the finger in the Wendy’s chili was a hoax, then you may still be afraid to eat there.

Marketing from corporate sources is increasingly less impactful. In this era of social computing, word of mouth, customer reviews, comparison shopping, blogging, tagging and other user generated content carries more weight than Madison Avenue. Abandon the top down perspective on brand management.

There are no two ways about it; Terminix and Orkin are a deadly business. Something is bound to go wrong some of the time.

Powerful impact of consumer comment sites. Social computing thrives on comments and feedback. Brand owners should be aware of what is said on these and other sites. Brands spend big money to monitor the traditional media. Is anyone looking at these sites every day to play defense?

The blog is a soapbox. Consumers who have a problem with a brand now just blog about it. Things in your past live on in the present due to their placement in the SERPs.

Simple solutions:

Pay for more sponsor listings to push complaints below the fold. Just a few pixels could make a huge difference.

Absorb the fact that there are complaints and optimize your Contact Page or Customer Care Center Page. If you know people are complaining about you, get yourself into the conversation. If you’re Orkin, rename your Contact Page, “Comments, Questions and Complaints”. This helps you to rank for the phrase [Orkin Complaints] and gives customers something to interact with.

Get HR involved. Make sure posting titles are optimized and pass link popularity to Monster and CareerBulder.

Maximize PR. Properly optimized press releases and news stories about local events. They all deserve link popularity. Create a Wikipedia page.

Help Accidental Tourists. So many other pages end up in SERPs – send them link popularity to help them help you. If you’re Orkin, help Jeff Orkin rank higher to push your bad pages lower in the SERPs. (That’s awesome!)

You can’t put the genie back in the bottle but you can do things deliberately to help reduce the impact of negative buzz.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/23/07 at 2:43 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Branding, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Social Media

User Generated Content & Search

Rebecca Lieb is moderating this morning’s User Generated Content & Search session with speakers Andrew Goodman (Page Zero Media), Matt McGee (Marchex) and Lee Odden (TopRank Online Marketing).

Up first is Lee Odden.

First some stats: 51 percent of all consumers engage in User Generated Content (UGC), with 71 percent of the “millenials” (18-25) using it.

Why should you take advantage of UGC? Because consumers trust it. Sixty-six percent of 2,000 IT pros surveyed say they trust UGC over traditional sources. Product reviews increase retail conversion, rates and satisfaction. It’s a great way to create search engine optimization-friendly site content.

There are various forms of UGC being produced by end users, as opposed to traditional media producers. There are information resource sites like Wikipeida, Mahalo, etc. There are review sites, forums, blogs, media sharing, news comments, etc.

Pros of using UGC: It’s trusted, contributors are loyal, more content for search engines, more information sources for users, critical feedback about products/services, etc.

Cons of UGC: Oversight and moderation, spam, false and outdated info, who owns the content, structure can be challenging, negation information about your brand, etc.

UGC search engine optimization = CMS search engine optimization

Make sure the URLs are crawlable, no session ids, less than 3 parameters, don’t hide the links, the typical SEO stuff.

Site architecture. Pre-define keyword rich categories, topics and tags. Logical structure and cross linking, bread crumb navigation.

Template optimization. Focus on dynamic content as the majority of on-page text. Dynamically inserted title tags, Meta description, image alt text, anchor text links.

Create Incentives. People like contests. User submitted articles, photos, videos, applications. Crowd sourcing – task community with generating ideas, content for a particular goal/purpose that benefits the community at large. Reward super users with perks, status, access, etc.

UGC creates community and benefits search visibility.

Next up is my favorite Matt of search, Matt McGee.

Why should you use user reviews?

It’s good for marketing. Users add content, often using key natural language search terms. You gain unique content on boilerplate pages or you can create new pages targeting “review” searches. May help you capture long tail queries.

It’s good for business. Reviews help to educate customers which may lead to fewer returns. Fewer returns means more saved money (Petco reported 20 percent fewer returns on items with reviews). Reviews educate the retailer by showing them what’s popular and what’s not. Reviews lead to more sales. Matt says NetShops saw a 36 percent sales increase with reviews.

Overcoming Fears of Users

What if they say bad things about our product? Matt says that 85 percent of the reviews on Yelp are positive. And according to BazaarVoice, 80 percent of all reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

Shoppers want the good and the bad. Negative reviews answer the question: “Can I live with the product’s faults?” Negative reviews create trust. The reality is no product/service is perfect for everyone.

What if they’re not really my customers? Not considered a big problem, but be prepared. Be able to track IPs of reviewers & ban if certain users get out of hand.

Three ideas:

• Require account & login to submit reviews (I understand why Matt suggests this but do realize that requiring people to log in is going to discourage them from participating in the conversation. I heart Matt McGee but it took me months to comment on his blog because he requires commenters to log in. Eventually, I gave in, but that was only because I really, really like Matt.)
• Manual processing of submitted reviews
• “Was this review helpful?” - let users rate other reviews

Matt offered some best practices for implementing user reviews.

• Post a Policy
• Make sure reviews can be crawled
• Allow shoppers to sort by rating
• 41% sales increase (PETCO)
• Create a “Top Rated Products” category
• 59% higher conversion rate (Bass Pro Shops)
• Promote!

You can get review software from Bazaarvoice, Powerreviews, Amazon.com, iNods and Expo. Or, of course, you can design it in-house.

Andrew Goodman is next.

UGC 1.0 + $ + Crowdsourcing savvy = UGC 2.0

First generation UGC Examples:

Open Directory Project: Army of volunteer editors categorize content. Supposedly overcomes the scalability problem of directories. Directories fell out of favor. Issues with quality control.

Trip Advisor: Users helping each other to avoid bad travel experiences, find good ones, etc.

Now, everybody’s doing it – YouTube, Yelp, PlentyofFish.com, NowPublic, Digg, Squidoo, Mahalo (sort of).

Unique advantages of UGS:

• Search engine strategy. Really, this perfectly dovetails with that search engines want to index and rank well. Don’t compete with search engines but feed them. UGC is often just what searchers are looking for. Marginal cost of creating more content is close to $0.
• Search engine tactics. Smart tacticians will architect site properly. Content is popular, topical, PR benefit.
• Solves long tail weaknesses of editorial driven media.
• Fills a need for community and contribution among target user base.

Ask yourself if you have a search engine strategy? Are you competing with Google? Are you using search tactics? Do users have any incentive to contribute en masse? Are there any major drawbacks that will sink you?

Andrew finishes up with information about and critiques of some of the leading UGC sites.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/23/07 at 12:02 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Branding, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Social Media

Issues In Analytics

Final day!

Alex Bennert (Beyond Link) is moderating this morning’s analytics session with speakers Eric Enge (Stone Temple Consulting), John Marshall (Market Motive), Avinash Kaushik (Occam’s Razor Blog) and Jonah Stein (Alchemist Media).

Alex reveals she has changed the name of the panel. It’s no longer Analyzing the Analytics Partners. Now it is Issues in Analytics. Sweet, that’s way easier to spell!

First up is John Marshall. He’s going to walk us through the anatomy of a click. He says he’s going to give us enough technical information to show us why the data we get from our tools never matches the real number of clicks. He’s also probably going to give us enough technical information to completely confuse me, but that’s okay. Whose idea is it to always put the technical session on the last day? Someone needs to rethink this.

Okay, first a few assumptions John is making about the people in this room: He assumes everyone is using PPC ads with tracking parameters, that they have a functional Web site, that they’re using modern Web analytics tools, and that at some point they’ll need to understand why the numbers don’t match.

John is not going to cover breakage in ROI, cookies and cookie deletion, or anything behind the single, solitary, lone first click – the click that gets users into the site.

Walking through the single click: You click on an ad. That click is then sent to Google so that they can record it; it’s not immediately sent to the destination URL. The server then responds to the browser and redirects to the destination URL of the site. This gives you a 1 percent error right there because the browsers would drop the redirect.

Next, the browser executes the redirect. There’s a DNS lookup because you probably haven’t been to the site before.

Some sites redirect to hide tracking URLs in order to make it look pretty to users. When you do that the browsers responds by giving users just the home page. This may work if you’re using Apache, but he doesn’t recommend it. If you’re using IE6 or JavaScript you just broke your ability to track because the URL that appears in the address bar is the thing they’re tracking against. If you strip off the query string, you get nothing. Don’t do that.

Browser request landing page. At this point the log file based solution probably has a 5 percent error because this act will sometimes be cached.

Now the browser renders the landing page. It grabs all the elements, including the JavaScript. You’ll probably fail on JavaScript about 10 percent of the time because the JavaScript has so many roundtrips it has to do across the Internet that, if any one of those fails, you’ll lose the data.

John says the reason the tracking never matches is complex. Basically the more moving parts you have, the higher the number of errors you’ll get. Don’t worry about your numbers not matching up. Logs and JavaScript are equally inaccurate. Logs are better for catching click fraud. Largest contribute to error is implementation of JavaScript. Watch for redirection. It’s not always a good thing.

Eric Enge is up next.

Eric starts by posing a hypothetical:

Company A gets $1,000/day in PPC revenue. They want to use analytics to find the best converting keywords and prune poor converting words. The analytics package reports $800 in PPC revenue. Can they trust the data?

Company A is buying Company B, who says they have 50k uniques a day. Company A earns $.25 uniques and projects they’ll earn 12.5K a day from the acquisition. The acquisition closes and A puts their analytics on B sites. A’s packages shows only 40K a day.

What do you do about this? You want to cross check and calibrate. You don’t want to use your analytics package to tell you what your total revenue is. Put a parameter on the URL for PPC visitors. And for the situation above, you want to put your analytics on their site so you know what you’re getting.

Eric walks the audience through a recent analytics report he compiled with the help of SEOmoz. Those Mozzers are everywhere.

Sources of data variance:

• Bad or ambiguous data.


• Some data is thrown out.


• Packages make judgment calls


• Session tracking timeout.


• Industry standard is 30 minutes/ some use 15 minutes


• New search engine visit starts a new session?


• Too many judgment calls.

Sources of error include implementation problems, misunderstanding the terminology (visit URL vs. Entry Page URL), and JavaScript placement. The issue there is the delay before execution – users may move on before the JavaScript has time to execute. 1.4 second delay equals 2-4%. Best practice is still to put your JavaScript at the bottom of page.

Recipe for Success:

1. Accept that analytics comes with errors. The Web is too complex.
2. Know that trend analysis works
3. Eliminate the implementation error
4. Learn the terminology of your vendor
5. Focus on the strengths
6. Pick actionable KPIs
7. Measure errors
8. Cross check and calibrate
9. Use judgment

Jonah Stein is next.

The objective of analytics is to provide a rational basis for decision making so you can maximize the ability to obtain campaign objectives.

The prices range from "zero" to "a lot" and integration, testing and deployment ranges from "hours" to "lots of hours". Analytics packages contain assumptions that affect results. You have to find the right one. You could set up all the packages on your site and compare the results. Of course, this is time consuming and it requires a lot of implementation.

Just knowing what you’re going to compare doesn’t solve the problem. How are you going to compare them? What is the baseline you are comparing against? Visits? Unique Visitors? Page Views? For most people, the only thing they want to compare is conversions.

If you’re going to compare tools make sure they are starting at the same time, otherwise you’ll be looking at different samples. IndexTools and ClickTracks still show sales with no revenue. Google has stopped doing this. ClickTracks only captures revenue for the first transaction in a session.

Auditing Conversions: Make sure you have a unique identifier for each order. Create two tables, one for each tool. Join all the invoices that match. Add all invoices unique to table one. Add all invoices with number two. Voila, you have your number.

PPC conversion auditing. Join tables at the keyword level. Invoice the invoices at the keyword level. (Note: Google analytics will not give you keyword level invoice IDs.)

• Overall results are fairly close.
• Analytics systems need to be tuned and refined to caprture ROI.
• Follow the warning level.
• Analytics vendors do too much.
• Analytics should not be relied on for ROI calculation.

Best way to measure ROI

• AdWords Conversion Track captures the most conversions with a 30 day cookie.
• Capture campaign & Keyword to your own cookie.
• Bring the data into your CRM database.
• Save marketing data at the earliest touch.
• Incentives to determine source at every touch.

All of these tools are excellent ways to bring data into your customer management system.

Avinash Kaushik is up next.

The days of “logging”. The reason people moved away from Web logs was because of the IT guy. Marketers didn’t want to look at stats so we moved to a tag world.

There are other ways to collect data – packet sniffers, for example, are a decent way to collect data but they haven’t caught on because they require a lot of IT involvement.

A lot of people like hybrid forms of collecting data. This is really hard to pull off. It’s hard to put everything together and try to get something that’s readable. On paper, hybrids sound like a good idea but they’re hard to implement.

Current players in Web analytics – Google, WebTrends, Omniture, Coremetrics, Indextools, Webside story, Unica, Microsoft, etc.

Even though we have lots of Web analytics vendors, it’s getting harder to monetize. It’s hard to make money as an analytics provider because of silos. It’s not integrated the way it should be. Most companies approach Web analytics like it is God gift and they don’t have to do anything with the data. They don’t know how to analyze the information they’re getting. It’s causing a challenge in the field.

We’re at the very early stages of Web analytics. The evolution is not yet complete. It’s like a little baby.

Avinash lists the best parts about the many Web analytics programs out there:

• Omniture: One of the big companies in the space. They’re moving beyond clickstream analysis. Automated action “taking”.
• WebTrends: Marketing optimization. Give us your search spend.
• WebSideStory/Visual Sciences: HBX plugin: Custom Excel reports. Visual Science is God’s gift to analysis.
• CoreMetrics: Got retail? Lifetime Individual Visitor Experience.
• IndexTools: Custom reporting, anything by anything. Enterprise for the cost of little.
• ClickTracks: Ease of use. Unleashing the power of segmentation.
• Microsoft: Visual, Free. Demographic Segmentation.
• Google Analytics: Data democracy. Best of breed search analytics.

The Web Analytics Association is now presenting 26 new Web analytics definitions.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/23/07 at 10:57 AM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Analytics, Google, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007

August 22, 2007

The SEO Reputation Problem

Hang in there, folks! Jeffrey K. Rohrs is moderating the last session of Day 3 with speakers Shari Thurow (Omni Marketing Interactive), Kristopher B. Jones (Pepperjam), Jennifer Laycock (Search Engine Guide), Jonathan Hochman (Hochman Consultatns) and Kathleen Fealy, (SEMPO).

[Kristopher Jones originally introduces himself as Jason Calacanis and then as Dave Pasternack. SEOs are funny.]

Shari Thurow is up first.

Shari tells a personal story about the time she was named an MSN Search Champ and someone mentioned her in a blog post and basically called her a spammer. To make things even worse, the blogger in question then wouldn’t let her post on her blog, forcing Shari to explore other avenues to educate people.

Shari says that in the academic community, search engine optimization professionals are often treated as if they have the plague. As a grad student, Shari has read a few SEO articles that contain incorrect info. There is a tremendous need for information professionals, especially librarians, to teach school children how to search well and how to discern from good search results from bad search results.

Shari is excited for the Q&A later.

Kristopher Jones is up next. He doesn’t have a PowerPoint present. All hail, Kristopher. [My hero! --Susan]

Kris says he doesn’t have a PowerPoint because he thinks the crux of this debate lies in question and answers. This is an important issue. There are some really bad actors that are ruining it for those of us that are good. Unfortunately, search engine optimization professionals have a portion of the profession that seems to define the rest. And that fundamental attribution cause illogical conclusions and put business professionals in the position of having to explain themselves. The reality is that Kristopher is a CEO of a full service marketing agency. When a client approaches them about improving their business he recommends an integrated approach to find out where opportunities exist. Be care of that small percentage of SEO professionals who will try and sell you guarantees.

The idea that you’ll get cold-called or that you’ll receive an email that guarantees top placement for the keywords of your choice is ludicrous. There is a global consensus that this is something you should stay away from.

He admits that he’s not in the business of trying to highlight other people’s practices, but he pulls up a query for [guaranteed search engine placement] to look at the companies using these terms anyway.

The most important conversation you have to have with a client as an SEO is one about expectations. If that discussion doesn’t take place, the client will come in with expectations that are unreasonable and that just propagates the idea that SEOs are unreasonable.

Jonathan Hochman is up.

Jonathan goes to eBay and shows people selling Wikipedia home page placement and links. There’s a name for people who sell things that aren’t theirs to sell, they’re called frauds.

Search engine optimization contests = a public nuisance. This hurts the public perception of the optimization industry. Jonathan says that Wikipedia implemented its nofollow policy because of all the search engine optimization contests that were taking place. Then they took away the link juice and the SEO bloggers began crying that they deserve their links. He points to Andy Beal’s post about reducing Wikipedia’s PageRank to zero by nofollow’ing all of their links.

The Internet is a shared resource. There used to be this thing called “netiquette”. We don’t have that anymore. Show good faith by calling out spammers. Get involved with online communities. Walk a mile or two in their boots.

Kathleen Fealy is next.

She comments that she’s seeing a lot of request coming from small business asking for services under $5,000. Small and medium sized businesses do have legs, but they also have concerns.

How do people know if they’re hiring someone qualified? If you’re going to a doctor, you can see the diploma on the wall. Most SEOs got in the business and learned from the ground up. There still aren’t any meaningful degrees or certificates. The Internet is changing so much and so quickly, how do I know if the SEO company I’m hiring keeps up? If I do hire a company, how do I know if they did what they were supposed to do?

How should they fix my site? What do I ask?

Small businesses are victims of malicious intent and scams because they fall for “too good to be true” offers. There’s no such thing as a “free lunch” but businesses often don’t know any better.

A little knowledge can be dangerous. Web designers don’t know how to design for the search engines. Traditional print/PR firms add the service because their clients asked for it and they have experts in Photoshop on staff. Marketing professionals figure how hard can it be – it’s just an extension of their current work, right?

Wrong.

The SEO reputation problem lies in the fact that perceptions = reality.

SEOs need to become evangelists. Explain what needs to be done and why it needs to be done. Write articles. Speak to organizations. Join professional organizations. Continue learning. Don’t forget about ethics. Educate businesses.

Jennifer Laycock is up.

Social Media from the user perspective: It connects people of similar interests and allows them to form a community.

From the marketing perspective, people look at social media as the one stop marketing extravaganza. Marketers have seen the power of social media but they’ve neglected the social. We’ve become the insurance agent at the class reunion. We don’t care about people; we just want to sell them something.

Jennifer talks about her connection with Bento Yum. Jennifer is a fan of the product and launched a blog as a sort of hobby blog. She partnered with SAHM, and created a lot of great informational content. She engaged without trying to sell.

A competitor spotted the series and “outed” her as a marketer and said it was just a scam. It didn’t matter what she had done, that she was providing information, etc., because someone who was already part of the space, pained this picture of Jennifer as a spammer, that was the perception so people believed it.

How do we stop this? Let's hear your ideas in the comments.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/22/07 at 6:08 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Pay Per Click / Online Ads, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization

SEM Pricing Models

We’re nearly the ending of the day, folks! This time Misty Locke is moderating the session with panelists Rand Fishkin (SEOmoz), Lance Loveday (Closed Loop Marketing), Ken Jurina (Epiar Inc) and Mike Murray (Fathom SEO). Misty is very excited. She’s making us clap for all the speaker introductions. I think Misty was recently caffeinated.

Up first is Rand Fishkin who asked that I be mean to him. How can you be mean to Rand? He’s got those cute yellow shoes!

Rand starts off listing off the various types of search engine optimization services, things like site auditing reports, standard consulting, keyword research, content creation & copywriting, link building, strategic planning design/reports, viral content creation/promotion, social media marketing, reputation management/control, brand tracking & reporting and webdev/Web design.

Rand lists off some of the different types of pricing models:

• Hourly Consulting: Hourly rates range widely. Rand reveals that three months ago SEOmoz was charging $400 an hour, now they charge $1000 an hour. He also notes later that he won’t do onsite training for less than $8,000 a day.
• Monthly Retainers: You struggle quite a bit to set that a retainer includes how much work exactly and how many people.
• By-the-project Pricing: One set price for the entire project.
• Pay-for-Performance: Rand says that Greg Boser does a good job with this. A lot of the time, you’re getting yourself into a bad situation. You’re trying to do the counting for your client.
• Profit Sharing: You build the product, you do the marketing and then you say you’re taking 5 percent of the net.

And, of course, there are hybrid models that intermix all of the models above.

A look at some sample contracts from SEOmoz:

Travel industry Website: The company needed keyword targeting, link building, measuring/ROI calculation systems. The project was basically consulting. Rand charged $24,000.

Large, Media Web Property: Company needed search engine optimization training and search strategy consulting. There was on site meeting/training and ongoing consultation by phone and email. They charged $25,000. It was $10,000 down, $10,000 upon training, $5,000 the following month.

Classifieds Website: They needed a search engine optimization audit of 2 Web sites, recommendations for link building and on-page strategies. It was done via remote consultation. Cost $16,000 for 40 days.

Personal Reputation Management: Needed two listings pushed to page 3+ results. It was done via remote link building and optimization. Cost $20,000.

Rand talks a bit about the consulting business model/scalability and rattles off some equations that I think are self explanatory:

Clients = hours= people
More clients = more income = more people.
High Costs + High demand for people = Hard to Scale

Services = Time/Contract
Products = One Time Investment + Continued Return
Services – Scale With People
Products – Scale with marking + Development

Lance Loveday is next.

As a search engine company, you have the following pricing goals. You want to minimize risk, maximize upside, keep your prices rational/justifiable, competitive, in line with client expectations, as well as what works best for the client

Lance notes that he has tried all sorts of different pricing models including flat fee, hourly, cost plus, CPA, percent of spend and the retainer method. The only models he has kept are the flat fee, percent of spend and retainer (rare).

Lance says he charges a fixed cost for set up ($7k+) that includes discovery, keyword themes, strategy, campaign structure, writing ads, keyword research, and tracking and campaign setup. The fee is determined by scale of campaign, news vs. existing client, international, geo-targeting, the PITA (pain in the ass) factor, size of the client, and estimated time.

On the management fee side, they go primarily with percentage of spend, using a tiered model.

In terms of some general guidelines, Lance says your setup fee will usually equal 2-3x what the monthly management fee is. The number of keywords is less important than the number of campaigns/ad groups. He charges additional one-time fees for major campaign expansions/reworking. Ad hoc consulting on Landing Pages, Analytics and other online marketing best practices is included – Design & Configuration is extra.

Ken Jurina is up.

Ken says the big question everyone wants to know is how much you should charge for your search engine marketing work? Answer: The way that is going to make you the most amount of profit and deliver the highest value for your idea client. Ken is a genius.

Four Industry Pricing Models

1. Retainer-based (2K-50K month)
1. Monthly feeds
2. Search and Peck
2. Pay for performance
1. Delta difference
2. Skin in the game, commission structure
3. Fee for service model ($2500 to $1+ million)
1. Project based with finite scope
4. Hourly consultation

Know thyself and get niched. Ask yourself what are your strengths and weaknesses? Do a SWOT analysis. Choose your service offering – organic search engine optimization or PPC or both? Are you established in SEM? This will affect how much you are able to charge.

Importance of Customer Profiting: Find the right bowl of porridge. Not every prospect is your ideal client. You’re a magnet, some clients are wool.

Small companies = low pricing, high volume, quick sale.
Big companies = high price, low volume, long sale cycle. (Note: as prices to up, pettiness goes down.)

Midsize clients are just right. Owner or C-level executive approval. Pricing is reasonable to their budget.

Ken’s company (Epiar) does 90 percent fee-for-service, 7 percent pay-for-performance and 3 percent customized services. Stick to your profitable business model. Don’t compromise yourself for your clients.

Not every client's needs are the same. There are different levels of services available, including site audits, Web analytics, monthly maintenance plans, hourly consultation, etc.

Epiar’s initial pricing model was fixed. This caused some sticker shock to occur. No opportunity for clients to taste the goods before buying. But pricing models change over time. Phases and variable pricing. Clients comprehend cost/phase and accept the price.

Location, location, location. Pricing based on what market can bear geographically. Outside the major markets premium pricing can be a hard sell. More difficult to justify high pricing for no good reason. In Canada people think he works for beer.

Have proper detailed proposals. Make sure the client signs it. That’s why it’s there.

Mike Murray is up next.

Beware of bizarre price factors. Some people will promise you the world. Below are some actual lines found in contracts:

• 20 placements, 8 engines
• Refund admin fee
• 900 directions – no SPAM
• 10 top 10 ranking… one or more popular top 10 search engines
• If cow jumps over the moon…

I have a feeling that last one wasn’t real.

Pricing Options: Hourly
Pros: Only pay when you need help, rates based on availability, expertise.
Cons: Experts may be overbooked. Short term approach may not account for iterative process. May be expensive.

Pricing Options: Custom Fit Model
Pro: Tailored to clients specific needs, comprehensive.
Cons: Could be expensive, practitioner-centric, hard to be consistent as a SEM company grows.

Pricing Options: Performance based Model
Pro: Only pay for what you get, may generate significant revenue, could work with established brands.
Con: Could be neglected if not producing revenue, focus on leads may not ensure quality, issues involving trust, tracking and pricing.

Pricing Options: Retainer
Pros: Ability to plan resources, continuous process improvement, easier to measure iterative proactive effort, allows for relationship development, mutual trust.
Cons: Longer duration could involve larger client investment. If quality of work is an issue contract continues.

Pricing models should be easy accessible for small and mid-sized business; time tested; comprehensive; easy to train consistently; accommodate teams with diverse skill sets; simple, short, easy to understand and scalable.

Mike outlines a few of the pricing models his company uses:

Search Engine Optimization Model: Annual with monthly payments based on the number of keywords and pages. Clients can add extra keywords or extra pages. They post updates to move program along, which is convenient for the client. Follow strict process. Long-term fits ongoing optimization. $800 to $1,800 monthly plus options.

Online Public Relations Model: Annual but with monthly payments. Hourly focus provides campaign direction. Vast offerings (links, guides, news releases). Campaigns crafter quarterly, measured. Follow strict process. Long-term reflects sound plan.

Pay Per Click Model: Three month commitment in monthly payments. Management fee and 5% percent of media spend reflects efficiencies, limits investment.

Conditions: Mike admits they used to have a money back guarantee if clients weren’t satisfied within the first 6 months. It doesn’t necessarily drive more sales from serious prospect. They also tried a right-to-cancel model. They didn’t like it because it creates a premature focus on rankings and traffic. You can’t demonstrate the full program merits in a short period.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/22/07 at 5:17 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Analytics, Branding, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization

So You Want To Be A Search Marketer!

Speed talker Misty Locke is moderating this session with panelists Dan Perry (Cars.com), Pradeep Chopra (OMLogic), Jessica Bowman (Business.com), David Wallace (SearchRank) and Michael Gray (Atlas Web Service and giant troublemaker).

Up first is Pradeep Chopra.

The Internet has changed the way business is done today by creating a level playing field that is independent of time, distance and capital. The result is that being online is not a choice. You have to be there to survive. Search engine marketing is considered the best option and is growing at an incredible place. Today is the best time to be an SEM professional.

Why a career in SEM? Being online gives you flexibility. The skills you gain are portable and local. Search engine optimization is listed as one of the four cutting edge jobs. Innovation and adventure. You don’t need a professional degree and salaries are attractive (so are the bloggers!).

To be a search marketer you need to be really effective in your communication. You must be passionate about the Internet. You need to know how to network and you need to be a quick learner.

Some differentiators between search engine optimization and pay per click is that in optimization you need to be a lot more technical. For PPC you need to be more creative and analytical.

What lies in the future? Emerging areas include Web 2.0, rich media advertising, behavioral advertising, and conversions. The hot verticals are retail, travel, finance, education, social networking and search engine marketing.

To be successful in search marketing you must use it in everything you do, even finding a new job. Participate in continuous learning and take on a leadership role.

Dan Perry is next and he’s going to talk about interviews.

Preparation: “By failing to prepare you, you are preparing to fail” – Ben Franklin.

When you go in for an interview, expect to meet with at least three people. The first person you’ll meet is the HR person. They’re trying to find out one key thing – Did you lie on your resume. Heh. Your prospective boss wants to know if you can do the job. The boss’s boss wants to know if you’ll fit in. Basically, do you have the personality to not drive people crazy? Based on this, I don’t know how Susan was ever hired. [Same reason you were, I faked being pleasant for an hour. --Susan]

Expect to be asked the following questions:

• Where do you want to be in five years?
• What are your strengths and weaknesses?
• Biggest accomplishment/failure?
• What’s the best decision you’ve ever made?
• How would a friend/coworker describe you?

Dan recommends going over these questions with a spouse or a boyfriend or girlfriend. I guess single people don’t deserve jobs.

Never bring up money, says Dan, because you don’t want people to think you’re only in it for the money and not for the experience/job/learning process. Don’t say you have offers elsewhere. Don’t ask for more vacation (drat). Know your number and stick to it. Consider the entire package (insurance options, relocation details, 401k match).

Interview process: Always have a question. Be specific. Ask your employer the one thing they do better than their competitor. Be prepared to compromise.

David Wallace is up next.

Today we have many ways to learn about search marketing. There are free resources (blogs, forums), eBooks, online courses, conferences and seminars. The best thing to do is take that knowledge and apply it to an actual site.

Establish a site to learn from. Choose your niche. Something that interests you but not highly competitive. Something that may help you establish your business. Secure a domain. Establish a Web site.

After all that, apply a search marketing strategy. Conduct keyword research, apply organic search techniques, set up paid search campaign, and track your progress.

Whether working for an agency or establishing your own SEM firm, it is important to network not only with partners but also with other search marketers.

• Develop business partnerships – traditional ad agencies, Web design firms, etc.
• Network online with search marketers – forums, blogs, social media, etc.
• Network in “real life” with everyone – This can include this conference for example but even things like local business organization or trade shows.

Brand yourself as an expert by writing information-rich articles, participate in forums, participate in social media, and start an informative blog.

Word of caution: In doing all these things, make sure you are being unique. Do not spam forums or blog comments, don’t steal other people’s content or sales copy, don’t come off as a know-it-all, and don’t promise what you can’t deliver.

The world of search engine marketing is fast paced and always changing. Keep on top of this exciting industry by staying active in forums, subscribing to quality blogs, never being afraid to experiment and buying savvy search marketers drinks at SES. Huzzah! Searchbash tonight!

Michael Gray is next at bat to talk about how to avoid shooting yourself in the foot.

Manage client expectations. Like David said earlier, only promise what you can deliver. Set reasonable time/date expectations. Under promise and over deliver.

Set Reasonable Limits. How much time will you be spending on the project? How much time will you be spending on phone calls, email, IM, etc? Avoid the temptation to become the equivalent of an in house SEO.

Avoid conflicts of interest. Disclose any conflicts before you close a deal. Decide if you are going to limit yourself to only one client for a particular area. Avoid competing with your client.

Manage your risks. Don’t let your business depend on one client or just one Web site. Don’t expose your client’s sites to unnecessary risks.

Keep learning and growing. Pick and follow some of your favorite blogs and limit yourself to a handful. Use recap or roundup bloggers. Experiment with your own sites and build your own test labs. If you don’t know where the line is you can’t prevent your clients from crossing it.

Use sub contractors to scale up/down quickly. Use them to compensate for areas aren’t your core. But be careful using sub-contractors for mission critical functions.

Contracts. Know when you need and don’t need a contract. Large companies especially Fortune 500 companies won’t work without a contract. Understand “word for hire” and copyright.

Accounting. Get a good accountant. Learn how to use accounting to your benefit. A good accountant will save you more money than you are paying them each year.

Jessica Bowman is up next. She spends the first few minutes taking a survey of who’s in the room.

Jessica says we’re now all students. Read everything you can to learn about search engine optimization. Read Google Hacks, Jennifer Laycock’s Small Business Guide to SEM, Shari Thurow’s new book, etc. Find the speakers you admire and read their blogs. Attend conferences. Consider training programs.

Most of your training is going to come from hands on experience. Get some side projects going. Find out where your weaknesses are and outsource portions of a project to more advanced search marketers.

Search marketing is constantly changing. You need to keep up with the marketplace, particularly if you are charging for this service. Jessica says Search Engine Watch, Search Engine Land, Search Engine Roundtable and Sphinn are all Must Reads.

Big changes in search marketing do occur. Cloaking was once accepted and now can get you banned. Link exchanges once worked very well and now they aren’t nearly as successful. Link buying was once accepted (Michael snickers) but now Google penalizes you if they know you’re buying. Expect to spend at least 2 hours a day reading and catching up with market.

As you work, systemize and document your process for consistency and productivity. Also, create clear documentation so that you can easily outsource the work to others – like your high school sister who doesn’t know search engine optimization but wants to make $6 an hour. Jessica has documented gathering rankings, keyword data gathering, directory submission, portions of a site audit, etc.

Build industry camaraderie. You need others to talk to about questions challenges and challenges in the SERPs.

Know what you don’t know. Remember the human side of search marketing.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/22/07 at 3:15 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization

Search APIs

There have been a lot of search engine optimization-related session recaps in the past few days, but this time we get a pay per click one. Look excited. Or at least awake.

Anne Kennedy is moderating this morning’s Search APIs session with panelists David Flesh (SEMDirector), Dan Boberg (Yahoo!), Julienne Thompson Hood (Advertising.com) and Jon Diorio (Google).

First up is Jon Diorio to talk about the AdWords API.

The AdWords API enables four main areas of functionality: Account management, campaign management, reporting, and traffic estimation.

By using the AdWords API, users are able to manage more accounts and campaigns faster with fewer people, and can more accurately manage the processes that require frequent and/or massive changes.

Other benefits include being able to automate the regular generation and retrieval of custom reports, automate cumbersome bid management processes, automate complex inventory control processes that pause campaigns, as well as the generation and expansion of keyword lists.

The AdWords API was launched in 2005 and was designed to be a do-it-yourself program. There are plenty of readily available resources like a developer’s guide, developer’s sandbox, AdWords API blog/forum/email notification list, FAQ, sample code and SOAP Toolkits.

They offer 9 different services including campaign service, AdGroup service, Traffic estimation, report service, criterion service, ad service, info service, keyword tool service and one more that I missed. Sorry.

Batches of new information are released every few months. They balance the need for new functions with the overhead of frequent release, meaning they stagger releases so they’re not coming out every week. The goal is to reach feature parity with the Web front-end. Older versions of the API are maintained for four months after the latest version is released. Version “diff” information is available via Release Notes.

The AdWords API utilizes a unit-based system. Each operation performed on an AdWords account consumes a certain number of API units.

While some types of operations may consume a single unit, others may consume more. On a regular basis, each developer will be billed $.25 per thousand API units consumed. Note that some advertisers who develop proprietary applications to promote their own businesses may be eligible for limited free quote allocations.

To get started, head to google.com/apis/adwords. You’ll need a My Client Center login and password.

Next is Dan Boberg from Yahoo.

He starts off talking about the Yahoo Developer Network, which includes a host of services for users to take advantage of. You can find REST-based services, desktop-based environments, RSS feeds, presentation libraries, developer centers, applications gallery and events.

Current YSM API Programs:

Advertiser Program: Supports advertisers in integrating their system with YSM marketplace.

Developer Program: Open access and online support to encourage creation of innovation new applications.

Commercial Program: Enterprise Class support for 3rd parties that have built a business on the Yahoo platform.

New YSM Commercial Program: Completely rebuilt to be robust, reliable and scaleable. It’s designed to meet the needs for developers, agencies, and technologies companies at any stage in their life cycle. There are no fees for API access. It’s an open and transparent program with commercial-grade technical and marketing support and a massively scalable production platform.

Programs goals include innovation, accelerating commercial success and building an ecosystem of mutually beneficial commercial partnerships. The program addresses the specific needs of reliability, scalability and support.

David Flesh is next.

David lists of all the engines that have a claim to APIs, including Ask, Google, LookSmart, Lycos, MSN, Ingenio, Business.com, Yahoo, SortPrice, Miva and others I can’t make out.

The lifecycle of an API is 6-9 months at most. If you want to stay current then you’re looking at a pretty rapid development cycle. If you’re going to adopt an API program, there is a cost involved.

Other challenges:

• Upgrade deadlines to new version are too aggressive. Legacy version support doesn’t late long enough.
• There is no common data schema standard across search engines.
• Organic API data is either non-existent or offers little value to sophisticated SEO/SEM companies.
• Occasional inconsistencies between cost data reported through the APIs and what is billed to the client.
• Challenges to metrics that are reported are not called out in the API, therefore it comes necessary to implement checksums to make sure historical values are consistent from week to week.
• Large clients = large polling efforts = quota usage
• Ability to increase quota limits is cumbersome and reactive.
• Lack of special character support from some APIs strip out meaningful data required by clients.
• Deleted campaigns are not always noted. Matching performance metrics with account structure is difficult.

In terms of documentation and support, it exists but unique needs are slow to be addressed. Inquiries to reps are ignored, passed off.

[All the lights just went off. Heh.

Okay, they’re back on now.]

Roadmap requests: Organic search APIs, increased quota limits, provide percentage of clicks seen at varying average position, provide the number of queries for keyword, more detailed demographic data, improve Sandbox capabilities.

Going forward with APIs in the future we need industry driven and vendor agnostic standards with common metrics. There should be common ontology or schema to present a unified approach to describing the data.

Last but not least is Julienne Thompson Hood.

The API provides access 24/7 to information. Campaigns are managed across multiple engines on a portfolio basis. Manual bidding is generally impossible due to a large number of terms. Frequent bid challenges required because of strong TOD, DOW or season trends. Intelligent bidding is necessary to improve ROI.

Julienne listed some best practices for using APIs including designing a multi-tiered architecture for engine integration systems to allow for scale and introduction of new applications; developing core applications that can translate your data into the appropriate format for each search engine; identifying the most important business needs to help you decide which API feature to take advantage of; writing applications to compile and provide meaningful reports on data elements like cost, bid updates, etc; testing new features before implementation and use sandboxes and monitor backward compatibility. Last but not least, utilize user forums to obtain information and answer questions from peers and engine resources.

Search Engine APIs Tips and Tricks:

• Feature parity among engines
• Yearly release among products
• Development lead team
• Data visibility
• API usage costs

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/22/07 at 12:22 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Google, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Yahoo

SES San Jose Keynote with Marissa Mayer

Welcome to Day 3 of SES. It’s time for Marissa Mayer’s keynote. Let’s do it.

[Okay, bear with me. It’s taking a little while for the Incisive folks to get things set up this morning. I’m just realizing that this is the first session I’m covering with Danny present. I’ve missed the Sullivan banter.

Vanessa Fox is stalking Tamar. She should leave. Vanessa, I mean. Hi, Vanessa.]

Danny starts off asking about Google Universal Search. It was a radical change for Google. He asks what the impact has been like.

Marissa says Google has been really happy with the way Universal Search has turned out. They changed the entire infrastructure of how things worked. The users seem to really like clicking through the new results. They have a long way to go and lots more changes to make.

The idea for Universal Search was to move away from ten blue links and give users richer answers. They want it to feel like an encyclopedia. Like Wikipedia. Today Google is only integrating maps, news, images, video, and books into the results. Eventually, they’ll put blogs and scholar info and some of the other searches in as well.

Danny talks about the attractiveness of the Ask3D feature and asks if Universal needs to be prettier.

Marissa says Google really tries to focus on function before form (zing!). They need to make sure it works really well and then worry about what it looks like. They’ve found that searchers want to be able to get to a result quickly. Ask’s approach takes more time because users have to search for the information on the page (zing!). She thinks a list of ordered results makes more sense for users.

Danny says that it’s been interesting to see how the SERPs are evolving with AJAX. Marissa agrees and says they have a few bells and whistles.

Google Universal Search opens up a new playground for Google. They can go and gather all the results and then decide what to display. It gives them a large degree of freedom in how to order results.

Danny starts talking about the recent changes made to Google Video. Marissa repeats that Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and that they mean that. They realize that not every content creator is using YouTube. It’s Google’s job to be able to find it.

The next topic at hand is Personalized Search. What’s been the update with that?

Marissa looks at the future of search and says there are a number of things that will change. Google itself gets better every single day. In 10-15 years, the search engines will understand more about the users that use them. We’ll see more relevance for users. Personalized search is just in its infancy. It's been one of the biggest advances in search quality and there are still a lot of things they’re experimenting with. There are tens of millions of personalized search users. She comment that it’s fun to see what signals matter.

One signal that seems to really matter in personalized search is previous searches. If you do a search for “travel” and then later do a search for “deals”, Google will give you results for “travel deals”. They want there to be parity in the way they do ads and the way they do organic.

What other things will affect personalized search?

Google is just getting started so it’s hard to know what variables are going to influence relevancy. They’re looking at things like location, address books, etc. They’re asking users to opt in to the signals they use. As they get the data, they’re trying to see what turns the dial the most.

Danny compares Personalized Search to Amazon and how bad “personalized suggestions” can be. You can’t predict what users want in the future.

Marissa says that for those items, Google focuses on the issues of transparency and control. They’ve made search history available so users can look at the information Google has collected about them to see what factors they are using to personalize the results. If you see something (a weird search) that is skewing your results, you can remove it from your history.

Marissa has spent a lot of time talking to people about whether they should mark the personalized results so users know what they’re looking at. She says there’s a spectrum of how much those personalized results are being affected by the profile. She doesn’t think marking the results is the right model as we become more and more sophisticated. They’re looking at marking some of the results but there is a gray area in how far they can go.

Danny asks if there shouldn’t be a button or some way to toggle personalized results on and off. Search marketers would like that.

Marissa’s response to that is that you can sign in and out. Her view is that personalized results will become the default in the future. [Do not want! --Susan] Google wants users using personalized results and doesn’t want them thinking about whether they’re using personalized or not. They should just know these are the right results for them.

Danny starts talking about privacy. Google said they would anonymous log data and now everyone is doing it. Google is anonymizing the search data but then they’re building services that collect data about users. How do you balance that?

Marissa says if you’re not logged in then Google is using the anonymization features. If you are logged in, then you’ve already signed up for a product and agreed to additional privacy policies. This may give Google a longer history for users because you opted into it, but the information is being put into a safer system.

Danny touches on the personalized experience and talks a bit about iGoogle. Google has had a growth in gadgets and at the same time things like Facebook have opened up. How does Google view Facebook? Do you think its hype or do you think the platform is valuable?

Marissa thinks the strength of iGoogle and Facebook apps is that they’re open platforms. It’s not necessarily a walled garden. The power of these programs is that anyone can create a gadget or a FB application. For webmasters, both gadgets and FB apps provide an opportunity to form a deeper connection with users. Some people have pointed out that gadgets and FB platforms are a new kind of advertising. And it’s not just an ad or a small piece of content, you can use them to actually interact with users. Better distribution. It’s a compelling opportunity.

Marissa admits she has profiles on all the social networking sites. Go friend her! I’m kidding. Leave the woman alone.

Danny makes a Jason Calacanis crack. Heh.

Google is often painted as the algorithm purist. That they believe in all algorithm, all the time and they don’t get humans involved. That’s not true. The algorithm is important because it’s the only way to ensure comprehensiveness. But once you have that base of algorithm, you can layer that human input into it. Now Google is starting to look at things like Google Co-op where users are layering results or Google Notebook where users are pulling information themselves. The best answer is to layer both the algorithm and humans together.

Danny talks about the comment feature that was added to Google News. (The LA times did a big editorial about it this weekend.) Where is that going?

Google News has always been a different kind of news site. They’ve been focused on providing clusters because they wanted to provide multiple viewpoints. The founder really wanted people to not only see one story, but to see what everyone else was saying about that topic. Marissa thinks the comments are about adding that and taking it to the next level. News readers become even more informed because not only can they read the published viewpoints, they can also read commentary from the people involved. They thought it would be compelling. (I think it’s retarded.)

Danny switches over to Google Local and asks Marissa about the usability of it.

Danny: Talk about the usability in terms of fun of voyeurism. Do we need street level viewing?

Marissa says street viewing is about finding information faster. If you’re meeting someone for coffee, it’s nice to know what the building looks like before you get there. It helps you get an idea of where you’re going. Yes, when they take these pictures, there are people in the world and there are licenses plates, but that’s not what the feature is about. When they find out that faces are being captured or that there’s something there that shouldn’t be, they take steps to blur it.

Mobile search: People are saying it’s finally going to take off. Google has rolled out the 411 service. Talk about the integration with mobile.

Google is seeing more and more mobile activity. Marissa gives a weather report every week at Google to talk about what’s going on. She says that mobile has seen a big increase this summer as users are switching off computers and logging on via their phones while they’re on the go. She talks about the iPhone and actually fires hers up to show the audience some Google integrated features. She shows how you can do a search for “pizza” and find all the pizza places in San Jose.

Great. Now it’s 10:00am and I want pizza. Thanks, Marissa.

Closing thoughts:

Favorite non-Google product: Facebook.
Most interesting Google products according to Marissa: Book Search, iGoogle, Desktop.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/22/07 at 11:01 AM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Google, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Social Media

August 21, 2007

Are Paid Links Evil?

I’m giggling. I don’t know why. It’s probably the combination of lack of food and because someone was crazy enough to put Michael Gray, Matt Cutts, and Greg Boser on the same panel to discuss buying links. This is going to be so totally good that I can’t even take it!

Seriously though, the entire search community is represented in this audience. I’m talking about Shoemoney, Matt McGee, Neil Patel, Bill Slawski, Dave Wallace, Jim Boykin, Rand Fishkin, Barry Schwartz, Andy Beal, Chris Boggs, Rhea Drysdale, everyone! My heart goes out to Matt Cutts. We’re really all just here to watch him squirm. (Hi, Matt!)

Okay, Jeffrey Rohrs is moderating the session with speakers Michael Gray (Atlas Web Service), Matt Cutts (Google), Todd Malicoat (Stuntdubl), Greg Boser (WebGuerrilla), Todd Friesen (Range Online Media) and Andy Baio (Upcoming & Waxy.org). Have I mentioned that this is going to be good?

Jeffrey starts the session with the following video from Dave at Rentvine:

Heh.

Okay, up first is Matt. He says it’s kind of funny because he tried to put some jokes in the presentation and his wife veto’d them (hee!), so he’s sorry if it’s boring.

Matt says that asking if paid links are evil or not is the wrong question. He says the right question is, “Do paid links that pass PageRank violate search engines’ quality guidelines?” The answer to that is yes.

He adds that the FTC has said that word of mouth marketing is like any other kind of marketing, and if you’re being paid to say something you should disclose that. Adequate disclosure means it is understood by both people and the machines.

How do you disclose a paid link to the search engines?

• Redirect through URL locked by robots.txt
• Redirect through URL t hat does a 302
• JavaScript
• Nofollow the link

Google says you can buy links within search engine guidelines – meaning they can’t pass PR. Google doesn’t care about those links. However, you cannot buy links that pass PageRank.

Examples of PPP links – fundraisers, donate cars, online, credit, super slots, providers, junk yards, online casino, bypass pill, dating advice, USA online poker, etc.

Matt says paid links are like littering – it makes the Web a dirty place. Heh. (If only you could have seen the look on Greg Boser’s face when Matt said that. It summed my thoughts up pretty well. ;) )

Link buying obstacles:

• It can be difficult to buy PPP links
• Buy for a limited time?
• Buy “run of site” links
• Buying links from slopping sellers
• Checking if a link seller cloaks
• Can a competitor spot your paid links?

Google’s approach: Google uses both algorithmic and human detection. They are more than willing to take strong action against PPP links and this is an area Google is focusing on. He talks about Rand’s recent post about paid links and how if you buy them to help you rank that you’re not a white hat.

Next up is Michael Gray. This should be good.

Michael says Matt paid him 100 dollars to wear his Google shirt.

Michael argues that Google is not the government. They have no authority to dictate policy to you. They are a for-profit company. He compares Matt saying Don’t Buy Links to Ronald McDonald saying Don’t Buy A Whopper. Hee!

Google developed an algorithm that is based on links. Now they expect you to change your business model to compensate for their flaws. Google made 1.12 billion profit last quarter. Did you? Google expects you to sacrifice income and profitability to help them make money.

Nofollow was originally developed to combat blog spam, then, three months after it was widely adopted, Google changed the rules. Now it is used for paid advertising. They took advantage of the rules.

What constitutes a paid link? If you link to Google tomorrow about the Google Dance does that count as a paid link?

With a paid link, unless you’re one of the two people involved, you have absolutely no way to know for certain if that was a paid link or not. Paid links work, that’s why Google doesn’t want people using them. They don’t want to have to change their algorithm.

Google’s campaign is about creating fear and uncertainty and doubt. They’re trying to convince you that by buying or selling paid links you are breaking the law or being unethical. Google is not the government. They can not change your ethics. (About three people just said “yet…” Ha, I love this session.)

Google has overstepped its bounds. Google’s mission statement is not to tell you how to build your Web site. It’s not to tell you how to buy or sell ads. It’s not to tell you how to run your business.

Michael is finished and pretty much gets a standing ovation.

Todd Malicoat is up next to give 7 reasons why he is a link libertarian.

1. Semantics: “Paid” is ambiguous. Every link has a relative value and cost.
2. Incentive – blame the algorithm: Google put PR in the toolbar to give site owners a reason to download it. Top rankings are worth money. The algorithm encourages linking
3. Economics: The indifference principle. Efficient market hypothesis. Eventually people will become sick of paying for links and they’ll stop.
4. Transparency and Relevancy: Advertising has never been fully transparent. As a consumer, he likes it. As a marketer, he loves it. As an SEO, it’s not his responsibility. Paid links help with traffic. That’s all he knows and cares about.
5. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt Vs. Transparency
6. Competition is Good: It advances the Web.
7. There IS such a thing as search engines. We can’t design our sites like there are no search engines because there are search engines. If there weren’t search engines, we wouldn’t have to use nofollow to begin with.

Risks: The invisible nofollow (you think you’re getting PR that you’re not), may incur manual review, may incur penalty.

Rewards: higher traffic, rankings and sales.

Why Todd won’t report paid links:

• My competitors have taught me a whole lot with paid linking
• I doubt much would get done
• I buy links too and it’s okay.

Todd Friesen is next. He says he thinks there’s much more of a middle ground that what is being presented. Obviously, Google has to say it’s bad. And the examples everyone is showing are really egregious. He shows the gambling and casino sites.

Are you going to buy 10 thousand off-topic links? Or are you going to go out and actually researching it? Todd views it as two separate things. You have to go out there and do what you need to do in order to compete in your vertical. You have to be able to compete and sometimes if you follow the rules you can’t do that.

If you’re going to get into link buying, you have to go into it with your eyes open. In the worst case scenario of link buying, you’re flushing your money down the toilet. Google cannot ever come out in good conscience and ban you from buying paid links because they can’t prove it. Only the buyer and the seller know for sure.

If you’re going to do it, be careful. You have to stay in your space and follow the rules governing your vertical.

Greg Boser is next. He admits to sometimes driving in the carpool lane when he’s late because the value of getting to the meeting on time outweighs the ticket.

Greg says if you want to clean up the Web, stop polluting the Web with stupid videos like the RentVine video we just saw. That’s the stuff polluting the Web, not paying for a link on a relevant site.

Site owners should be held accountable for making good editorial decisions. He talks about the Yahoo Directory and how they take your money to “evaluate” your site to see if it’s worthy enough to add to their directory. Is that not a paid link?

He talks about the rumors that Danny’s old blogroll on SEW didn’t pass PR and how Greg thinks that’s basically crap. We trust Danny to select good sites. Those links should have counted. Google should have nothing to do with your personal business. Stop rewarding anchor text the way that you do and it will go away on its own.

Last but not least is Andy Baio. He’s the lamb to the slaughter. Or something.

He agrees with Greg and the two Todds. If you’re reviewing a site and there is editorial judgment than he doesn’t think those are the links that people are worried about. That’s not polluting the Web.

Andy says he has no commercial interest in this issue and he’s here to speak on the behalf of everyday users. Everyone wants the Web to be valuable and easy to use. The only reason he agreed to the panel was because he felt so strongly about the issues. He says that, in many cases, buying links is not acceptable and it should be looked at with the same disdain as other spammy tactics.

Ask yourself, are you making the Web better or are you making it worse? Andy says he has a background in journalism and in journalism school, they teach you the value of being objective.

By buying paid links, you’re trying to trick search engines and alter the results users get when they search for things.

And then when the links finally are detected, they get purged from the index, and people are really upset. Google is not purging these sites because they hate competition to their own ad products. They’re doing it because the sites that are being advertised are not as good. And in extremely competitive categories, they’re not doing enough to beat out their current competition in the SERPs. If the company was better than its competitors, it wouldn’t need paid links to rank higher.

Andy says that we’re currently at the stage where paid links still work. But over time that will backfire. You don’t want to be on that side. Don’t buy links; it will hurt your reputation.

He talks about popups and how they were a novelty back in the day. And the more they got popular, the more it impacted the quality of life online. That’s where we are right now. Paid links seem innocuous. Until everyone understands how it impacts them online, it will still be seen as legitimate, instead of one step away from Viagra ads.

Matt’s rebuttal: He thinks most people understand Google’s response. He compares it to guestbook links. If you want a long term success in search you have to look at the white hat ways to get those editorial types of links.

Greg: To put buying links in the same category as push button marketing is such a skewing of the argument. The idea that I find a blog that matches my demographic and pay to link there, that is so not comment spam. To frame it in that argument is absurd. The other argument that gets thrown out is that it will hurt your brand. How many people changed their impression of BMW when they got caught for spamming? Are we all driving Mercedes now?

It’s not search marketers' problem that there are flaws in the engine’s index. The big brands get special treatment and are able to survive because Google can’t not bring up Wordpress.com if someone does a search for it. However, the little guys get blasted from the engine and are never heard from again. That’s not right.

Greg says he’s all about playing by the rules but he’s not about instilling fear. At some point you just have to roll up your sleeves and compete and that’s the reality of it.

And on that note, bid farewell to day two of SES San Jose.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/21/07 at 6:15 PM | Comments (23)
See more entries in Google, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization

Video Search Optimization

Sapna Satagopan is moderating this afternoon’s panel with speakers Gregory Markel (Infuse Creative, LLC), Jeremy Clem (Performics), Sherwood Stranieri (Catalyst Online) and Stephen Baker (Everyzing). Zing!

Sorry. Blogging responsibly now.

Up first is Sherwood Stranieri.

Sherwood says we’re here to look at online video and its impact on search. Lots of people are looking into and playing with it. Marketers are looking at as a new a channel they can dive into. Video is not only an opportunity; it’s also a responsibility now that video is showing up in the SERPs.

Sherwood presents just one slide of statistics and tells us that us that according to Hitwise, in July 2007, YouTube’s market share exceeded the other 64 video portal sites combined. No wonder Google bought them.

Video is a compelling search engine optimization channel. Video in 2007 is still mostly an entertainment play. Social/viral can transfer value to your search engine optimization efforts through video:

• Digg, etc >> blogs >> thousands of links.
• Those links result in a sugar rush of traffic.
• But those links also contribute to your site’s rankings – and that pus you in front of your target audience.

Thanks to viral, a video Web page can outperform a conventional Webpage in standard search results.

Sherwood presents a series of video strategies for different industries and applications.

Video for Content Providers: From bloggers to television networks, video can be used to bring visitors to your site. Teaser strategy: Upload a few select videos to portals like YouTube; provide links back to related videos on your site.

The goal is to get them back to your Web site to view ads and explore your other content. Video search engine optimization is a key element in establishing “video.yoursite.com” and viral-driven linking helps that. And remember, videos now appear in Google’s Universal Search. Video search engine optimization is now mainstream search engine optimization.

Video for Pharmaceutical Companies: Yes, it’s less fun, but it’s not totally uninteresting (or at least it doesn’t have to be). It’s kind of like the stuff you watch on the Discovery Channel (ooo, low blow!). On-site strategy doesn’t have to dovetail with portal strategy. You can do interviews with patients to make the drugs seem more real and more trustworthy. You can do videos on newsworthy topics like AIDS, flu, outbreaks, fad diets, etc.

Video for E-Commerce: Follow the buzz and promote your hottest products. Showcase anticipated uses – demo high-tech products, build a deck if you sell high power tools, show test drives for cars. Sherwood talks about the infamous iPhone Will It Blend video.

Video for Consumer Packaged Goods: Who wants to see a video about laundry detergent? He doesn’t know either, but some products can create tremendous buzz. Be choosey and get creative. He says so far when videos get famous it’s been by accident – videos like the Diet Coke/Mentos videos. Videos with millions of views start to rival your TV advertising.

Popular videos become a positive and permanent addition to brand equity. The Mentos commercial is still ranking number one in the search engines for its keywords.

As noted above, most of today’s video search “success stories” are happy accidents. Be imaginative and find ways to demonstrate the value of your products in an entertaining way.

Sherwood ends by telling the audience to add him on LinkedIn. Nice.

Next up is Jeremy Clem.

There is a huge opportunity in video. Seventy-five percent of US internet users watched an average of 158 minutes in May. They viewed more than 8.3 billion video streams, 72 percent watched news online and 76 percent helped drive The Viral Chain.

Video consumption is no longer isolated to TV. It now includes video sites and search. Video is on the rise.

Users are watching videos on YouTube (49 percent), MySpace (12 percent), and Google Video (5 percent). But they’re not going directly to the sites to do it. They’re finding them through the engines.

The roadblocks to video are that search is still very dependant on the text from video’s corresponding Web page. There’s a lack of simple and consistent taxonomy for site producers to use. Video technology is unfriendly to search engine crawlers.

Think like the video searcher. When you’re optimizing your video, use the terms users are likely to be searching for. He talks about the Michael Richards and David Hasseloff videos.

If you want videos to rank you have to surround them with HTML. CNBC.com does a nice job of surrounding videos with text content. Include social bookmarking tools that facilitate easier distribution.

Make it easy for crawlers to find your video content by putting your video directly right off your root. Create a video site map with the H1 tag reading “video site map”. Repeat news and video keywords. Provide RSS feeds. Link in the global header. Put a video search on your site. Use primary keywords in text links.

Tag your video files with relevant scenes. Split up your video into multiple scenes and tag those individually. Do you want to site through a 10 minute debate video or do you want to just listen to the question you’re interested in? Probably the latter.

Make video embeddable and imprint your brand logo. It creates brand awareness and visibility. Search marketers should target generic video search terms like “news video” to build online awareness.

Best Practices for video optimization

• Train editors to think like video searchers
• Encode for the ride keywords
• Use keywords in filename
• One video per URL
• Add tagging
• Keep video files in one directly
• Surround video with on page relevant text
• Crosslink to videos using keywords in anchor text
• Create an optimized video site map
• Upload videos to search engines
• Add informative Meta data
• Allow video files to be embedded and include a logo

Gregory Markel is next at bat.

Gregory is super excited about his presentation because he’s going to show us everything. He starts off by showing us a number of stats but flips through so fast that I can’t write them down. I think there was a 7 somewhere. Maybe it was a 70?

Ooh, I got one: 8 percent of males and 66 percent of females watch online video. Video search is influencing regular search results due to Google Universal Search. [8 percent, really? Are you sure you're not missing a 0? --Susan]

Three basic approaches to video optimization types

1. Video Files Metadata Optimization: Talking the source video file and infusing it with your keyword triggers in the Title, Description, and Keywords tags. Make sure your content is feature on its own page with relevant surrounding text and properly embedded link elements.
2. Upload Optimization: Most popular. These type of video search engines required that your upload your video search files. Add a social flair by getting your “friends” to submit or vote for you on the social media sites.
3. RSS Optimization: Submit your video to RSS.

[Gregory talks too fast.]

There’s a startup company called tubemogul.com that is FREE and has put together the first standardized upload system. They’re currently uploading to 9 video search engines and is really a one-stop universal upload shop. They are reporting views, which engines are most popular, comments, and ratings.

Some Tips: Again, keyword-infuse and target all of your video metadata. And also, know that some video search engines are beginning to use search recognition and optical character recognition, therefore, make sure your audio files is targeted and audible!

Okay, Gregory is done. Thank goodness. Someone take away his coffee.

Stephen Baker is up next.

Core online media problem: Search engines have historically had very little to work with in terms of properly discovering and indexing multimedia content.

Audience Reach: Transcripts yields crawler friendly content rich pages. Metadata analysis provides a broader spectrum of relevant terms for optimization. Content behind inbound links and anchor text in more visible to crawlers. Site level optimization is improved with more opportunities for outbound links.

Content Access: EveryZing indexes the full content of Fox Sports Multimedia files and as a result is able to significantly increase the number of keyword results. Greater discovery lends to increased consumption and enhanced monetization opportunities.

From a consumer standpoint, automatic extraction of key terms and concepts for tagging, categorization.

Context Monetization: Tags improve ad targeting. Full text output creates contextual adverting opportunity. Sponsored video inventory.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/21/07 at 5:16 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Branding, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Social Media

Images & Search Engines

Mmm, back from a yummy lunch. Hopefully you guys are still with me. Yeah? Okay, good.

Anne Kennedy is moderating this morning’s afternoon’s Images & Search Engines session with speakers Liana Evans (Commerce360), Chris Smith (Netconcepts), Shari Thurow (Omni Marketing Interactive), Cris Pierry (Yahoo! Search) and James Jeude (Ask.com).

First up is Shari Thurow who adds a disclaimer that she is injured due to a racquetball injury. Okay then.

Shari starts with a search engine optimization review. She says that successful optimization depends on:

• Keyword-rich text. Web pages should contain the words and phrases that your target audience types into the search engines.
• Information architecture and interface. Giving search engines spiders and visitors access to keyword-rich content via information architecture, page layout and URL structure.
• Link development. Number and quality of objective, 3rd party links pointing to a URL.

Because graphic images are made up of bits instead of text the search engines are currently not able to extract keywords out of the images. Therefore, search engines rely on a number of indirect factors to determine the content of a graphic image. They look at primary and secondary text to put the images into context.

• Primary text = Title tags, visible body content, text at the top of a We page, in and around hyperlink links.
• Second Test = Meta-tag content, ALTernative text.

Think about the file names. Files name are rarely used to determine the content of an HTML page because search engine spiders are able to extract text from the actual page. File names are more important for graphic-image optimization than text-file optimization.

In other words:

• Logo.gif is probably a logo image.
• Atm-matchine.jpg is probably an image of an ATM machine.
• Cir1233.gif does not communicate anything. Don’t use it.

Search engines use the text surrounding the image to put it into context and help identify what it is.

Make sure your graphics images are formatted correctly. Name your graphic images in a way that makes sense to your audience. Do not let software (such as Photoshop) name files for you. Use captions or labels to provide contextual clues to images search engines. If you are unable to create captions, make sure the page is optimized for targeted keyword phrase.

Usability counts!

Li Evans is up next to talk about image search as the next frontier for retailers.

Why should you care about image search? Because it’s the fastest growing vertical search, that’s why. Li says that Google’s Universal Search has changed the entire thinking on search engine optimization for images.

Also, searchers and shoppers are visually-oriented. They wanted to “see it” before they “but it”. Let them print out your images and take it with them to the store.

How can image search help you?

• Hot Toys: When users search for images the majority of images showing up in the SERPs are coming from manufacturer sites – sites where users can’t buy from. As a retailer, having your image appear for popular product searchers puts you at an advantage over your competition and leads targeted customers to your site.
• Comparison Shopping Engines: Ensure images match products and keywords. Give descriptions of pictures in feed.
• Niche markets: Image Search provides small retailers with another way to increase traffic, better conversion rates, and puts them in a category with less competition from major retailers.
• Contextual Search Engines: Three out of the four major engines incorporate images in with their regular searches (one box, smart answers, etc).

Universal and blended search has changed the rules. Images are now showing up intermixed with the search results. And they’re timely. Google is already showing images of Hurricane Dean in its results.

Eventually more media and images are going to be blended in with your searches. Results can change rapidly. Make sure images are included and named correctly. Send out images with a press release. Place content around images on your site. Create a site map feed of your images for Google and Yahoo.

Images and Reputation management: Search can form an impression of a brand, product or service by the images they view. What does an image say about you? Are your images representing you the right way? Li uses an example for the RIAA. Check out the third image. Methinks they don’t want that showing up for their name.

What matters when optimizing images? The image name, ALT text, content around the images, etc.

Up next is Chris Smith to talk about sharing images to perform search engine optimization for your Web site.

Chris talks about Flickr, saying it has a high PageRank (PR8), and allows users to customize titles, Tags, H1. Links are also allowed.

Chris says that the design of Flickr is advantageous for search engine optimization because each photo has its own Web page with customizable elements like Title tags, Heading tags, captions, tagging, cross-grouping, comments, sharing, ALT text, optimal linking hierarchies and date taken with page views displayed.

Step one for optimizing images is to have good quality pictures to use. Chris says that photos with good contrast tend to work better. Search marketers should also be broad in experimenting with subject matter for pictures intended to drive traffic and conversions. You never know which image will drive the most traffic and conversions to your site. For example, bed and breakfasts could show furniture & decorative art in addition to details on their rooms. Think creatively.

Chris offers up some tips for optimizing through Flickr:

• Add unique title appropriate to image and use keywords when naming.
• Always tag your image with keywords. Be as specific and descriptive as possible.
• Make photos publicly viewable.
• Consider loose licensing for your pictures – people can use the picture if they link back to your site.
• If the photo is location specific, geotag the picture.
• Create thematic sets.
• Use Flickr to host pix for your blog articles.
• Add links to the description field of your Flickr photo page to related pages on your site.
• Post as many pictures as possible into Flickr – more pictures will result in more traffic, which can result in more conversions.
• If you are photoblogging, add a Digg link at the end of your text.
• Post each picture pages over to del.icio.us.
• If taking many location specific pictures, consider using a camera that has built-in GPS, allowing photos to be automatically geotagged.

True image search is revolving. Google is trying to understand images beyond just looking at Meta tags.

Cris Pierry is up next to say a few words.

The search engines are getting better at understanding images but they’re still doing a poor job. The more you can help them with Meta data and contextual information, the better. Ultimately, you also want to use good quality images. If you produce high quality images that the users want, the search engines will find them.

Participate on social networks. Yahoo is using the popularity of the images on that site to help it rank because it calls attention to it.

You’re going to see more and more multimedia inside the normal Web search.

Up next is James Jeude.

How do users search for images and why? Make yourself Image Search Friendly by doing the following:

• Build images to fit your audience’s expected behavior.
• Don’t expect to appeal to multiple image search scenarios simultaneously but you can do so sequentially and separately.
• If your site is fast-moving (tech advice, consumer news, celebrity gossip), try to get inserted and highly ranked as a News/Blog source in the major aggregators.
• If your site is an organization or hobby site, be sure to have iconic images clearly labeled and attractive enough to get links from others.

If appealing to popular terms:

• Make your site “Web search friendly” as a co-requisite to “image search friendly”.
• Be clear and direct in the popular terms but add qualifiers if possible (Britney Spears Hair, Paris Hilton Jail) to reward the skilled searcher.
• For your OWN brand name, label your logos and images with your brand name to attract home page traffic.

If appealing to rare terms:

• Make your words clearly labeled on or near the image.
• Filename text is really helpful but not mandatory.
• Alt Text is helpful. For example, if you use “Image Cannot Be Displayed” as Alt Text you’ve missed a text-scoring opportunity.
• Example: caption individual images rather than having a title like “Celebrity Party” with images numbered “IMG0029” or “DSC0047”; name the individual images with the participants in text surrounding the image.

If you are geographically anchored, put your product in geo context. Use addresses in surround text, ALT text of a map image, and give other geo locators such as directions that pass through neighboring towns.

• Consider keeping your misspellings and synonyms in the meta tags.
  I recommend not having them in visible text or it will show in Description and make your site look bad. But do use them, if your customers will likely have trouble with proper spelling.
• Use descriptive file names if possible.
• If you embed words in an image, try to also have the words as ALT text (“Sale on JVC Everio!”)
• If using JavaScript to set up slide shows, you may want to consider also having a page with thumbnails and text around every thumb.

Holy information overload! While you go slip into a knowledge coma, I’m going to grab some water and head to the next section. Stay tuned!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/21/07 at 3:27 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization

Podcast & Audio Search Optimization

Okay, fun people, it’s time for this morning’s Podcast & Audio Search Optimization panel with moderator Detlev Johnson and speakers Daron Babin (WebmasterRadio), Amanda Watlington (Searching for Profit) and Rick Klau (Google). You ready?

Detlev starts things off saying that, through the years, audio has been very difficult for the search engines to index and make accessible to users. HTML is simple but trying to decipher what is in an audio file is difficult. There are some speech recognition software programs out there, but even those aren’t very good.

To be fair, he also adds that audio files themselves can be marked up with things the search engines could use to return relevant audio search but for the most part, search marketers have failed to do that. Bad, search marketers, bad. Detlev says that now is the time to start doing that.

First up is Daron Babin.

Is anyone out there listening to podcasts? Daron says you better believe it. They’re listening in droves. There are a lot of people listening. If you’re creating compelling content you’re going to find that people are going to listen. Basically, I think what he’s trying to tell us is that people are listening to podcasts. :)

Before you jump into podcasting, here are some things to consider before you decide if this is a good investment for you:

• Production time – It’s costly. Don’t think it’s not. It’s human manpower.
• Cost of Production
• Equipment (recording, compression)
• Encoding is a pain in the proverbial…
• Analytics – Whose come close?
• Bandwidth

People are listening (I think Daron gets a cookie each time he says that) so make sure the content is compelling. Don’t ramble into a microphone. You need to talk about real specifics. Listeners do not want to know your dietary strengths or weaknesses. They don’t need to know about the dog needing to be neutered. They want to be educated or entertained. Engage listeners but get to the content. That’s why they are there.

Prepare for growth. Think about the expenses you’ll incur when you go popular. Daron recommends securing a sound host or Content Delivery Network and working a deal. He says that without someone who can handle load, distribution will be an issue and there will be unhappy users. Unhappy users aren’t users for long.

You must establish a complete understanding with your host or DND what type of reporting you’ll be able to see.

Transcribe everything. It’s the equity in your organic fortuitous display of originality. Originality with passion = downloads.

To optimize content, look at how you write and deploy your text for your media files. Ensure proper on-the-page criteria, as no engine can complain about finding new, original, and very relevant content. Give thought to categories before you create the content. Optimize your ID3 tags.

Get to your numbers. As a podcaster with prospects for investors, advertising dollars and the potential to drive feed revenue, you should make every effort to make sure your analytics is as dead on as possible. He recommends using Feedburner and using their system to quickly go in and optimize your feed and get an idea of your number.
Break up large media files into targeted, small bites.

There are a lot of people exploring podcasting. The people in this room are not on the bleeding edge (drat). If you want to make a dent against any of the big boys, then you have to get out there and think smart now. Optimize for what you’re building.

Next is Amanda Watlington.

Why should marketers podcast?

• Creates direct communication channel with prospects and customers.
• Extends reach through emotional connection with target market.
• Adds new media outlets to extend reach. Podcasts offer marketers audiences unavailable via regulated broadcast radio.
• Use short sponsorships to integrate advertising for broad-based content.
• Facilitates marketing communications.
• Humanize relations with the public.

The negatives of podcasting: Podcasting requires a level of transparency (that’s a negative?). The content is less formal with shorter turnaround than traditional communications. There are less controls and ownership. It requires an ongoing commitment and content development. There’s a loss of control associated with distribution and use.

There is an absolutely compelling reason for search marketers to start podcasting – Universal Search. Google is working podcasts into its main index. Your results in the SERP should lead to a targeted, keyword-rich landing page.

Questions to ask yourself before you begin podcasting:

• Is it going to be a one of or a podshow with multiple episodes?
• What is going to be the name of your show?
• Make sure the show name is not already in use.
• Show name and episodes names.
• Each will need its own Title and Description.
• Carefully write your titles and descriptions for your show and episode before you launch
• To transcribe or just abstract the show contents.
• Develop a keyword list for the show and determine how you will brand it – by the host or the show name.
• Write the audio tag information carefully in advance.
• Get album art ready.
• Review iTunes categories to find the right fit.
• Be prepared to edit the audio tags yourself for each episode.
• Download and test tag editors .
• Build your infrastructure in advance of creating the audio so that you can rapidly mount your show.

ID3 tags are metadata for MP3, 4, WMA, etc. The maximum tag size is 256 megabytes and maximum frame size is 16 megabytes. There are 39 predefined frames including copyright, content type, dates, and content information, and space for files such as pictures. They can also carry lyrics and the complete transcription of text.

The fields that you MUST optimize for are the title, the album (name of your podcast), the artist (not of the host), the year, the track, genre and comments.

When you optimize the sound file give it a unique name. Try using a shortened name + a date or episode number. This is important for users and for directories.

Optimize your Web pages. If you’re pushing it into a blog have a separate feed for your podcast. Be prepared to have a separate page for every episode. Amanda says she looks at them as tickets in the search engine lottery. Make sure the page has subscription information.

Also optimize your landing pages. Use a separate landing page for audio content to limit the possibility of broken links. Include a play for those who want to listen online. Include an abstract. Use basic search engine optimization methodologies.

Create and validate your feeds. Use Podifer, Feedburner, etc. Once created, submit your feeds. Track and monitor submissions. Amanda users a spreadsheet to keep track of where she’s submitted her podcasts.

Promote online audio beyond the search engines.

• In summary, five types
• Optimize the audio file
• Building landing pages
• Build accurate, effective RSS feeds
• Submit and promote broadly
• Watch the space

Last up is Rich Klau.

Rich works with Feedburner, which in case you don’t remember was acquired by Google in June.

The podcast aggregator market is changing quickly. Web-based aggregators are capturing a lot of market share. Social networks are also becoming a place to consume and distribute podcasts. Like Amanda said, Meta data is essential for discovery.

Consumption of podcasts feeds happens over a dizzying array of applications. He looked at just one podcast that runs through Feedburner and the top four services consuming this podcast were iTunes, Google Reader, My Yahoo! and Miro, which make up 75 percent of the audience. The rest of the share is amazingly fragmented. People are using many, many different aggregators. As a marketer you have to know what services users are using to find your content.

Syndication is embedded everywhere. Directories drive a lot of attention to podcasts. Publishers who do podcasts typically have Web sites. Don’t think of them as separate products.

Podcasts on social network: Last week NPR launched a Facebook application that allows users to embed the NPR player onto their FB page. It’s exposing people to podcasts who didn’t know what they were before.

Avoid exposing code and using acronyms. People don’t know what it means and it's scary. Present simple pages that make your content easily digestible. Add iTunes/Meida RSS extensions. If you are using iTunes, read Apple’s technical specifications. It will tell you important things like paying attention to the feed metadata, not abusing keywords (they’ll only pay attention to the first 12), properly categorizing your podcasts and using the iTunes summary tag.

Submit your podcast to all services and directories. Enable “pingshot” to ensure timely content updates. Ping Yaho, iTunes, Odeo, Bloglines, etc. Enable Feedburner’s Awareness API (eh, I don’t know about that last one).

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/21/07 at 12:15 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Google, SEM Events, SEO Tips & Tricks, SES San Jose 2007, Social Media

SES San Jose Keynote with Jim Lanzone

I am surprising alert for today’s second day of Search Engine Strategies San Jose. Perhaps it’s because I’m such a good girl and I went to bed super early last night or maybe it’s because I’m super psyched for this morning’s keynote with Ask.com’s Jim Lanzone. I heart Ask.

[Okay, total star struck moment. Gary Price (!) just introduced me to Jim Lanzone (!), and when I said my name, he recognized it and commented, “Attaboy, Ask.” Dude, I’m famous!]

Okay, now to the real action.

Jim starts off the keynote by alerting us that Danny has started a drinking game. Every time Jim says “3D”, someone has to have a drink. Hee!

I missed Chris’s question in all my giggles (sorry!), but Jim tells us that Ask.com is all about trying to find a balance between art and science. He says when they started Ask3D, they hit on this idea that touched on the three elements of search. They found through their tests of AskX that users seemed like to like this approach. User metrics for engagement and retention soared so they knew they were onto something. Search has always been about the ten blue links and then leaving users for dead. What Ask started to see was the need for original context. Giving users the right thing at the right place at the right time. Give them more content, more options, more tools. The reaction to that has just been phenomenal.

Chris asks if Ask.com is seeing an increase in marketshare. Or if maybe it’s too early to tell.

Jim comments that market share is always something to look at it, especially at an annual basis. He comments though that too much gets put on market share relative to a company’s own growth. He wants to know how Ask itself is growing. He laughs that when Ask first launched 3D, it was touted as their attempt to topple Google or their way to gain market share, it was never portrayed as Ask’s effort to improve search or push the category ahead. Jim says he wants to improve things for users. Ask truly wants to help you get what you’re looking for. Market share will take care of itself.

Aw.

Chris questions Jim about Ask’s partnership with Google. When is it time to look at them as a partner and when is it time to look at them as a competitor?

Ask.com is Google’s largest global partner. They’ve been partners since 2002 and it was controversial then because Ask was the first of Google’s big competitors to choose them over Overture. He says that this year if Ask chooses to renew with Google (or even if they opt to go somewhere else) it’s going to be a multibillion dollar deal. He says that when Ask looks at search they’re not just competing for users. They have their own point of view on search and that creates some co-competition – where they partner on ads and compete on search.

Chris comments that Ask had a near death experience in the dot com bomb. What kind of changes did Ask make?

The first thing Ask did was narrow the focus. They bought a 7 person search engine named Teoma and integrated it into the site. From there, it was all about product. By the time they were sold to IAC, all of their gains had come from product usage.

Chris asks if Jim is worried that Ask is going to become “the IAC search engine”.

Jim doesn’t seem that concerned. He says on the one hand, they prioritize and actually give IAC less favoritism. In fact, AskCity ranks higher on Google. Ask looks at the IAC companies as sources of data.

What kind of approach does Jim take with the leadership within Ask?

They put a lot of emphasis on bringing the right brain and the left brain together. Seventy-five percent of their employees are engineers or technology people of some kind, but they don’t just hire from Stanford (unlike some people). Each project has a lead and the leads come from all different Ask.com teams.

Interesting to note is that most of Ask’s employees still hail from the Edison, NJ offices. Because they’re still sort of in the backwaters, they put a lot of emphasis on the combination of art and science and making sure things really hangs together as a product. They pay a lot of attention to the forum factors.

Chris comments that it seems like this year, we’ve had another outbreak of concern regarding privacy. What Ask has done with AskEraser is one of the most aggressive approaches. How does Ask see the whole privacy issue?

Jim quips that it’s been a slow news summer based on how much publicity AskEraser has received. Jim says (somewhat paraphrased):

Privacy is important for some people, but most people aren’t going to go crazy to make sure that nothing happens. For people for who [privacy] is that important, we’re going to take the whole thing off the table. You tell us you don’t want us to track anything and in a couple of hours all that stuff will be gone. That’s the approach we took. It may be an issue but let’s not get into all the nuances of it. If it’s important to you, let’s just take it off the plate.

Nice.

Chris talks a bit about social media and how people forget that Ask was personalizing things long before anyone else.

Jim comments that just because it’s new to you doesn’t make it new in general. StumbleUpon took what Ask was doing to a whole new level by adding video. He says Ask just got Darwin’d out. This is what the next generation of search is. The first ten years were about creating a giant bookmark list, then it was about finding the needle in the haystack, this is where we are now.

What implications will Ask3D have on search engine optimization?

Jim (again paraphrased):

I think a lot. What surprises me is that 50 percent of usage [for Ask3D] isn’t in the Web results. If we were worried about market share we certainly wouldn’t have done 3D. Our image search channel usage has gone way down because people are finding what they’re looking for on that page. One in 10 searches comes through the Search Suggestion box. It’s changing the way users interact with the page. Some of the emphasis needs to go to the content coming into the page. There’s good news too, of course. We put content where our competitors put ads. There’s more content on that front page. It gives the editorial part a chance to grow.

3D is just the start for Ask. They have things in the works that just take everything further. It’s not just about tweaking the results, they’re thinking about the entire experience. When you start thinking that way it takes you in a new direction.

When would a search advertiser want to go with you and your networking rather than Google? Jim says:

1. Results are placed on the page when the yield would be higher. The ads are placed when they’re likely to make more money.
2. You have direct access to the data. If you combine our Web site and our network and our syndication network you’re probably talking about 10 percent of all the searches in the US. There’s a lot of money to be made in tuning specifically for ask.
3. A new reason to come with our Ask is that our contextual network is seen by 71 mill users.

Contextual is another good advertising solution. I think the people who do it is for the ROI.

Chris: How sophisticated do you think the big brands are with their search marketing? Where are the big players?

Jim says it hasn’t been great. They’re buying a lot of the SEM firms and bringing them in house. He says they still have a lot to learn. The larger ad agencies, specifically, still have a lot to learn about online. It’s not just about search.

Chris: You mentioned AskCity earlier. You’re doing a lot of interesting things in the vertical areas. How do you see these vertical areas as being important separately and also combined into 3D?

Users are still finding images through the main search, not by going into the Image channel. That’s why Ask focuses on verticals, it’s not because they want to compete with verticals, it’s because every day they break out the channels users are searching for and it’s travel or health, etc. It’s more than just ten blue links. They don’t want to leave people for dead.

What kinds of things is Ask going to do with mobile?

Ask wants to bring the Web onto the mobile device. People don’t want to scroll through links. Pages aren’t being customized for mobile. He says that he doesn’t think mobile is all about local. If you want to get someone’s batting average during dinner, you want to do it. They’re focused on bringing the Web to mobile.

Talking about wireless carriers, Jim says it’s easy to understand why they’d like to keep it as a walled garden but that they have to adjust. Ask is a brand that millions of people use and like, can’t we all just get alone? There is a lot Ask can do for them to loyalize the carriers' user base and help them make more money.

What about Ask and personalization?

Jim says Ask is going to be doing a lot more with personalization but that they take a different approach than the other engines. He notes that just because I’ve searched for surf music in the past doesn’t mean that I’m into surf music and that I want to be recommended it all the time. He says there’s a lot on the personalization side that is overblown about how much it can do for you. The sweet spot in enhancing the value of results is in the collective where Ask puts their best first guess out there. Following that they have 50 million users a month who are using those results. They’re really trying to perfect a collective search effect. That’s where the value is going to come from.

Jim says one of things he’s learned is that it is very hard to get people to customize on the Web. It’s hard to get them to read directions (hee!). The number of people who are going to go through all those steps is going to be very small.

Chris reminds Jim that he has a clip to show and with that Jim debuts one of the new Ask commercials. And then he says my name. And I died. I am so totally famous.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/21/07 at 11:54 AM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Ask, Branding, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007

August 20, 2007

One Billion Searchers

Hang in there, folks. It’s the last session of the day. Then we all get naps, and maybe even food. Huzzah for food!

This time my favorite Brit, Mike Grehan, is moderating the One Billion Searchers panel with speakers Stephen Noton (Adverted Internet Advertising Agency) and Bill Hunt (Global Strategies International).

Mike starts things off saying that search is in China. It’s an interesting place because it’s one of the few places where Google isn’t the leader. It’s actually, “Google, who?” China has its own search engine and you can’t overtake the country overnight.

[Seriously, Mike, help a girl out and s-l-o-w d-o-w-n!]

Thankfully, Mike is done (love you, Mike!). Up first is Stephan Noton to talk about understanding users in China.

Searchers in China are very different than users in the States or elsewhere. Twelve of the top 100 China Web sites include numbers. Why? Because there are 13,500 Chinese characters. That means if you were designing a keyboard to have one key per character there would be more than 13,000 keys! Even I don’t want to type on that. Stephan says this is why so many businesses have adopted the number platform. Sounds smart to me,

Stephan shows the audience the (really, really long) Google ad that was issued when Google officially changed its name launched out there. If you want to know what it felt like, stare at the wall for 10 minutes.

The home page for Google China is very different from the one here in the United State in that as soon as you start typing the search box drops down to offer a guided search (search suggestion). Again, this goes back to the fact that there are so many characters. It helps users to find information a lot quicker.

Two products Google is currently testing are:

Popular Searches: Breaks down popular searches by category, allowing users to click to navigate to the search results page. Instead of having to type in [this week’s biggest music performers], Popular Searches would just display “Justin Timberlink”. Yes, Stephan really did call him Justim Timberlink. Heh.

Website Directory: This is a list of Web sites based on categories and services. It’s algorithmic based, which means it isn't just a static list.

Stephan talks about Tom.com, which is one of the top 10 Web sites in China. It has tons and tons of links on the page without a search box above the fold. They know users are coming here as a destination site, not to search.

Stephan identifies Jianfei Zhu (who is in the audience) as the Matt Cutts of China. He monitors all Chinese./Japanese/Korean algorithms for spam. He has a blog at gooblechinawebmaster.com. It’s in Chinese but you can use Google Translate or another service to translate it. Hmm, might be worth it.

Since they use guided search in China, it makes search engine optimization a little easier because search marketers know off the bat what queries searchers are using Also you can use Google China’s Popular Searches function.

He says that the long tail China doesn’t really exist because users don’t do as many searches as we do. They rely more on the guided search.

Next up is Bill Hunt

China is one of these interesting things, says Bill. It’s definitely a market that’s growing like crazy. He’s a little surprised there aren’t more people in this session (me too, actually. There are only like 25-30 people here!).

China is paying attention to search. If you go to a conference the entire first row is bloggers. Yeah, what’s your point, Bill? :)

Bill lists a bunch of the issues he’s faced in China

• It is tough and also an advantage to being a foreigner in China. When you come in to speak, if you have any kind of credentials you’re treated like a rock star. Apparently this applies to known bloggers, as well. Sweet! Being a foreigner you can get away with not knowing the customs, but that ends quickly.
• Budgets are small from local companies.
• Can’t make changes to the site due to WW restrictions.
• Some large (international) companies in China are more sophisticated than their (US) corporate HQ.
• Clients are very particular about their contacts in your company.
• Allowing the client and interactive agency to save face. Things are very much relationship based.

Relationships are everything. They are absolutely critical to success. You have to be introduced to the right people at the right places. Many Westerners underestimate this. It’s about who you know and how well you know them. Who do you work with?

Your employees will make or break a deal in the long run. Most of the advertising out there is branding. It’s not about trying to convert. If you do decide to tap into the Chinese marketing, make sure you’re willing to be flexible and do things their way. Don’t go to dinner and ask the host not to bring anything out with a head still on it. Hee!

The search marketing community in China is growing vapidly, as indicated by the doubling of search conference attendees. Bill has seen a 10x increase in requests for China projects.

Sophistication of Adoption: Blending between scams and more advanced than USA. Bigger companies are in many cases more advanced than their US HQs.

Demand for Information: Traffic to search blogs increasingly significantly
Increase in Chinese centric blogs and content. 1000+ companies offering search services. About 10 to 15 agencies really stand out.

Trends:

• Many agencies offer PPC as search engine optimization.
• SEO is simply Meta tags optimization or black hat.
• PPC is 2 to 3 steps from actual buyers.
• Integrating more advanced techniques.
• Social media optimization is being announced.
• Deep and broad partnerships.

Recommendations for marketers:

• Check the credentials for the people you’re meeting.
• Confirm they are doing the work and they’re not outsourcing them.
• Establish goals and document them in contracts.
• Do periodic checks of the quality of the ads and the effectiveness of campaigns.

Agencies should pick their teams effectively. Offer incentives for employees to maintain loyalty. Build your relationships with the engines and organizations like SEMPO. Pick partners well and do a lot of research on their capabilities and ad networks.

Top Online Activities in China include getting news (93 percent), listening to and downloading music (85 percent), playing online games (84 percent), and using email (69 percent).

Most users are still accessing the Internet via desktops (96 percent), though accessing via mobile is becoming trendy at 27 percent. The growth in mobile search is due to interest in Internet and availability of 3G handsets and connectivity.

Key Observations for Baidu:

• It’s the most popular search engine for lifestyle searches, not for business. Google trumps Baidu in business searches.
• Baidu’s results are overwhelmingly influenced by paid advertising campaigns.
• Baidu has its greatest reach with young lifestyle centric searchers.
• CPM advertising is most popular with Baidu.

What does this mean to the world? New travel opportunities for Chinese have resulted in significant to country information sites. There are a lot of opportunities to market to the Chinese if you do it on their terms and comfort level. Access to information about Chinese companies will be easier to locate. Access to information about China and Olympics.

The key to succeeding in China is relationships, patience, diligence and an open mind.

During the question and answer segment, one of the attendees asked what kinds of things are Chinese users buying online. The truth is most people in China still don’t trust the Internet. eCommerce is still very much in infancy. Online marketing is mostly for branding because people still don’t trust the Internet. Something to keep in mind.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/20/07 at 5:30 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Branding, Google, International, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization

Personalization, User Data & Search

I heard a rumor that there was thing called “lunch” right before this session started but I don’t know anything about that. Lunch is for sissies.

Okay, so the jazzy music has now stopped and Chris Sherman is up moderating this afternoon’s session with speakers Jonathan Mendez (OTTO Digital), Richard Zwicky (Enquisite), Dave Davies (Beanstalk Search Engine Positioning), Gord Hotchkiss (Enquiro), Tim Mayer (Yahoo) and Sepandar Kamvar (Google). Let’s do it.

Up first is Gord Hotchkiss to talk about how personalization can impact the user experience.

What will drive personalization? User volunteered info, search history, Web history, community choices, task context, geo targeting, platform info, origin of search. Basically lots and lots of stuff!

Does personalization work? Gord put together a panel and tracked the clickstream data, personalizing listings 3, 4, and 5. Did it work? The answer is yes. The percent of time spent increased, as did the percentage of fixations and the percentage of clicks. Even if users didn’t click on the personalized results, it drew the eye in and kept them there longer. Personalization works when it’s relevant.

Danny Sullivan once commented that the fear with personalized results was that if the natural results are getting better and better, why would someone want to click on the ads anyway? That didn’t seem to be a problem according to Gord’s research. When users invested in the page, it draws them down the page and makes them want to explore. It forces them to expand their attention over the entire page.

Gord asks the question everyone wants to know – how will personalization affect search engine optimization and search marketing?

In the old world of search engine optimization, SEO strategies were all keyword based. We looked at keywords and how algorithms developed the best sites for those keywords. The whole strategy revolved around key terms

According to Gord, that is going to change. When personalization takes hold the game becomes a lot more user-centered. There are more things determining ranking and they’re all based on users -- things like search history, current tasks, Web history, social patterns, etc.

We’re going to see search engine optimization happen around themes. Long tail optimization will become more important. SEOs will start optimizing around content buckets where understanding user behavior will be vital. User-centric development will finally take hold. Emerging “buzz sites” will be a new search engine optimization tactic.

As we look at personalization, site stickiness will be move up towards the top of the funnel. Site will have to become more research based. We’re going to see content aggregation, and comparison wizards and more mashups.

Gord says that we’re going to see a handful of sites or specific content emerge for each theme. He calls it a “circle of importance”. Think about the search engine optimization industry and look at our incestuous little circle.

We’re also going to see an emergence of clickstream based intelligence tools. Engines will introduce more profiling tools.

What search may look like in 2010?

Gord shows a horribly ugly image as to what search may look like. It’s basically an iGoogle page with search results thrown right on it, complete with sponsored links, heavily personalized organic results, a Google Map, sponsored video and lots of other really ugly things. Let’s hope that never happens.

Up next is Richard Zwicky.

Analytics in personalization allows you to see the forest in the trees. Wow. Deep.

Personalization is when search results are changed based on your preferences, right? But what if you’ve never searched for something before? Whose preferences are shaping your results? Other people. People like Susan. [Not me, I opt out of that nonsense --Susan]

What’s beyond personalization?
-Regionalized results
-Regional Differences
-Search Engine Optimization for the New World Of Search.

Search engines are using regional results to get you the right information. For example, if you’re in Boston and you’re looking for clam chowder recipes, you probably don’t want recipes that include tomatoes so Google will make sure you don’t see them. (Seriously? Do the engines really filter results that way??)

Richard talks a lot how the engines are filtering the results based on regional differences. He explains how a searcher in New York and a searcher in Seattle will get two different set of results for the same query.

Why does it matter? It matters because in most instances search marketers are trying to target them the same way and failing. They don’t understand that you need to optimize for traffic in different areas and build out accordingly. Think about how dynamic language is. You can’t optimize the same nationally, regionally and locally. You have to know your customers and know what they’re typing.

You optimize for this by first researching the market. Know what terms are going to show up in different regions. Consider buying pay per click ads before using the terms in your organic search engine optimization campaign. It’s easier to do A/B testing this way. If you’re doing the work in house, get consultants to help and to keep the knowledge base up.

With personalization and regionalization, optimization campaigns need to become more sophisticated. We need better research tools and better reports.

Next up is Dave Davies to talk about patents. Oh no, my head hurts already. I want to cry. No patents. Please?

Here we go discussing user behavior, personal PageRank, Group data and influencing the search engines. *inhales deeply*

User Behavior – Watching what we do. Engines can “watch” user behavior to assess the value of web pages. They’re looking at the clickthrough. The time users take to return to the engine (how long after they visit your site do they go back to Google?) and the type of query. This will all affect your future search results as well as the results of similar searches.

Personal PageRank – Judging your value. Google will be assigning a value to you as a search user. This value will be used to grade your activities on a Web site. (Come again?) This will affect the rankings of sites based on an individual's activities on that site. Users who are trusted by Google will affect the results to a greater degree than those who are not trusted.

Group Data – Seeing what others see. Membership in common communities, common bookmarks, common search behavior (sites selected and/or behavior on sites once selected). This will affect your future results as well as the results of similar searchers.

Influencing Engines

• The Problems
• Rankings can vary from region to region.
• Rankings can vary from person to person
• Some factors will have little to do with typical search engine optimization.
• The Benefits
• More tailored search results
• The Solutions
• Design for time-on-site and page views, monitor stats and tweak for phrases with low visitor experience levels
• Localize. If you’re after a regional phrase associate yourself with that region through link relationships, Google Maps, content, etc.
• Link out. Associate yourself with authorities and send your vistors out to them rather than back to the engine.
• Attract high PageRank visitors. Sheer numbers and think like a high PageRank searcher.

I just want to make sure you were paying attention – but apparently you get credit for sending users where they can find information and for having important people visit your site. That’s good to know.

Up next is Jonathan Mendez who asks how many people are doing behavioral targeting. Um, okay, not many, apparently.

Jonathan says he’s going to start out with a rant. Huzzah! Yay, Jonathan.

Why is behavioral targeting important to search engine marketers?

• Nothing performs better than targeting to the intentions of users
• SEMs need to step up and get recognized
• CMOs think BT is just display. It’s not.
• Higher search budgets, which equals more brand dollars and bigger salaries (w00t!)
• Everyone wins.

The way to behavioral target is to get parameters passed to you. Here’s the stuff Google is already telling you:

hl = host language
safe = safe search preference
client = browser
rls = results language
g = query
btnG = search interface

Pay per click ads can provide even more parameters. You can set ad groups, ad creative, match types, and parameters based on geotargeting and local. All of this can help you deliver a more personalized experience.

JavaScript tools that deliver rules based on personalized content include Offermatica, Omniture, Kefta, WebTrends, etc.

You want to segment users with very high impact segments because it provides a large data set and even a small lift in conversion rates will have a big impact.

Use data to discover segments and affinities. Decide what would be relevant. Create and Develop. Test and Validate. Then Monitor.

Jonathan ends with a few case studies.

Sepandar Kamvar and Tim Mayer are just here for the Q&A.

Okay, maybe not, they’re both going to say a few words.

Sepandar comments that the biggest impact of search engine optimization is to design and optimize for the user and not just the keyword. It’s a great opportunity for search engine optimization because what you’re doing to draw visitors to your site is the same thing you’re doing to keep them there.

He discusses the importance of building useful gadgets. A lot of personalization works best when your query is underspecified (one word or two word queries). A natural extension of that is trying to give users info without them even having to ask for it. That’s where iGoogle came from. They wanted it to answer the question “what should I be searching for”. A lot of the gadgets are along those lines. It’s really important for sites to have good content designed as gadgets.

As part of a search engine optimization campaign don’t think just about bringing users to the search page, but think about how you can distribute the content that you want out there.

Feeling some pressure from Sepandar, Tim also joins the conversation. :)

Tim says Yahoo is focused on using social data in order to personalize. They want to determine what people like. They’re attacking the subjective space (about 30 percent of the queries). They want to know what doctor should I go to, what restaurant, where can I get cool clothing. It’s about leveraging the power of people.

• Becoming the known expert on the Web and in your particular communities.
• Have something unique, something that no one else on the Web has.
• Have fresh content and promote it virally.
• Promote yourself across different services – del.icio.us, Sphinn, Digg, etc.

[Conference Tip From Lisa: Always sit behind the projector when possible. It acts as a nice little heater.]

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/20/07 at 3:54 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Google, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization, Social Media, Yahoo

Universal & Blended Search

It’s time for this morning’s Universal & Blended Search session. In case you’re confused, “blended search” is what they call Universal Search when it's by anyone but Google. All caught up? Good.

Chris Sherman is moderating the session with Greg Jarboe (SEO-PR), Sherwood Stranieri (Catalyst Online), Bill Slawksi (Commerce360), David Bailey (Google), Erik Collier (Ask.com) and Tim Mayer (Yahoo) speaking.

Greg Jarboe is up first and calls Google Universal Search (GUS) the biggest thing to hit search since the Florida update. This means that even if you are new to the search sphere you’re not at any kind of competitive disadvantage to the old dinosaurs who have been doing this for years and years (like Bruce!).

Greg shows the audience the effect GUS has had on the search results with a few screenshots.

He notes that back on June 29 (aka the day after my birthday) if you did a search for [iphone], you would have noticed that the fourth result in Google was a News Result with an Apple-created YouTube video in the 8th position. Greg polls the audience on whether they thought Apple’s nicely planted YouTube video was intentional and a sign that Apple understands Universal or if it was just a happy accident. Personally, I think it was just a fluke, but then again, I’m bitter.

Since images are appearing in Google results, Greg says that site owners must absolutely start optimizing their images to appear in the engines, especially images for key executives. You don’t want a photo of your CEO and his girlfriend to appear on the front page of a user’s SERP, or at least not until his divorce is final.

More examples of GUS in action:

• A search for [Hillary Clinton] yesterday showed a News result ranked at number 4, with YouTube videos, blog posts and three totally unflattering photos appearing below the fold. Greg blames the unflattering photos on the right wing conspiracy (heh), but then says we can’t quote him on that. Oh well, already did.
• A search for [hurricane dean] shows News results are ranked number one, with a myriad of blog listings at the bottom of the page. He predicts in the next few days we’ll begin seeing images and videos because that’s the stuff users are going to be looking for. Because we like looking at pictures of destroyed stuff.

What does all of this mean? It means that all the rules of search have been rewritten. Universal search changes what appears in the “golden triangle”.

Search remains the number one way journalists obtain additional information for a story. If you’re not optimizing your press releases for search engines, please come to the Bruce Clay Simi Valley headquarters next week so that I may kick you. I promise it won’t be too hard, just enough to leave a mark. Media relations should be focused on the top Google News sources. Google News Report and Newsknife will both tell you which news media optimizes their results better.

Always include a JPG with your news release, as 90 percent of journalists say that visuals are somewhat or very important to them. Even better, an image acts as the eye candy that will catch readers' attention and make them click on your story. This means that even if you’re sitting at position four, your story is far more likely to be read than the story positioned at number one with no photo.

Something else to keep in mind is that though Google doesn’t incorporate video into Google News right now, a recent interview hints that they’re working on it and it probably won’t be too long before we start to see it.

Greg talks a bit about using social mapping tools to help identify the most influential bloggers in your niche (ME!). With millions of bloggers out there, it’s important to pitch your stories to the influential ones. Who cares what the Susan Esparzas think about you anyway?

A few years ago there was a panel at SES that discussed how the vertical creep was being ignored by searchers and search marketers. You can’t afford to do this today. You cannot ignore Universal Search. Google is making specialized and vertical content more visible through Universal Search, and it will act as a huge boom to those who pay attention to news, video, image and blog search. What Universal Search does it take the different verticals (silos) and slides them together. Your company needs to start collaborating.

Up next is Sherwood Stranieri to talk about apples, oranges and Universal Search. Mmm, oranges. (Apparently I am unable to spell “oranges” today. It’s only day one and my brain is already fried. This can’t be good.)

Sherwood notes that Universal Search compiles results from multimedia and news resources in order to create a single search results page for consumers. There are a few variations on the theme. There is the Ask3D approach which divides results into sections (Microsoft and Yahoo do something similar. [Yeah – only theirs sucks]), and then there is Google which stacks everything into a merged list.

Sherwood mimics Greg’s earlier statement and says that blended search changes the game. He even goes as far as to call Google the “game changer” because it’s the format most disruptive to the status quo. [I’m sorry, but since when does “disruptive” equal “game changing”? If anyone is changing the status quo (and for the better) it is Ask.com. Google is barely even implementing Universal Search right now.

Fine, Lisa rant over.]

Sherwood focuses his presentation around Google’s Universal Search and Video.

Previously, video had been spread virally, but now it’s in search so we have to start looking at it. How does GUS compare videos and text-based pages? Do conventional search engine optimization ranking factors come into play (indexability, content, linking)? What about metrics like views or comments? These are all things we have to look at.

[Sidenote: It’s really distracting to me that everyone keeps referring to Google Universal Search as GUS. I’m waiting for this really hip, game-changing guy named Gus to be carried through the door at any second. (Will he be played by Dule Hill? --Susan)]

To determine how Google is ranking video, Sherwood created a test subject out of its client A&E Television. A&E has thousands of video clips across three TV channel sites. Many rank in Google currently, some authorized, some pirated. Putting the pirating issue aside for a moment (arrrrgh), Sherwood and his team looked at how the video content was actually ranking.

He uses the creepy show as his example:

GUS Page 1:
Page 1 shows a healthy mix of videos and conventional Web listings.
Data was collected for page 1 videos, as well as Web page listings on pages 1 and 2
Both search engine optimization-specific and video-specific stats

Sherwood examined the videos that were ranking for the Criss Angel query and examined the traditional search engine optimization ranking factors like PageRank numbers, incoming links, keyword phrases. Everything looking the same regardless of where the video ranked.

From there, he looked at just the video factors, things like the number of views, comments, tags, etc. He determined that the number of views a video gets definitely contributes to its ranking, but that wasn’t the complete picture. Not surprisingly, in order for a video to rank well, it takes the combination of search engine optimization factors AND video factors. It is the mix that determines placement.

It makes sense that it’s not just the number of views that will cause a video to rank high because otherwise the SERP would be clogged with old videos and the new stuff would never get a chance. Also, you have to think that Google can use tools like Google Hot Trends to determine whether a video is hot and therefore deserves to be ranking.

There are a few loose ends.

• Video statistics themselves (Google can read the number of views and comments).
  For Google to be able to add in the video metrics, it needs to be able to recognize the info on the page. Dan Crow from Google Crawl Systems presented information indicating that it can.
  Google has to warm up for the indexing on one of these Video portal sites.
• Bad News: This is why there are only a few portals are in GUS.
• Good News: It is likely video factors are being read into the equation.

Next up is Bill Slawski who I met last night for the first time. Huzzah!

Bill comments that he doesn’t see Universal Search as a revolutionary process, instead he thinks of it more as an evolutional (I’m with Bill). It’s only evident if you’re looking for it.

Bill pulled up a search for [spider] on the four major engines to see what the results looked like. Google and Yahoo had 10 blue links, Microsoft had 10 blue links and some images, Ask.com, of course, totally rocked.

He talks about Google’s Universal Search patent and how it originally suggested that Google would list alternative results in the right hand side where the ads currently are. Obviously, this isn’t the Universal Search we’re seeing now but it was the prototype back then.

Bill again comments that Universal Search is like an evolution. The timeline going something like this:

Infoseeks’ blended search (1995) > Vertical Creeps into Organic Search > OneBox Results and UI Experiments > Universal Search.

From here Bill gets very technical. I tried to follow along but he’s (a) way smarter than me and (b) he talks fast. Here’s what I could pick up:
Log Data is collected and organized as triples (u=user info, q=query info, r=information about repositories). This info varies based on the country, language, time of day, etc. You want to learn how to rank really well in this specific vertical and try to rank for what people are searching for. That's how you get into Universal Search.

He comments that Yahoo also had some old patents that discussed blended search. They talked about using labels to personalize results. It didn't use terms like tagging, user annotations, though.
How does the information get from a Web page to an index? If you want to rank for a definition you want to make sure you include the words “definition” or “glossary” on the top of the page. You want to make sure it’s easy to distinguish one set of definitions from another.

One of the motivations of providing Universal Search is to enhance the user experience and to make it easier for users to find what they’re looking for. It changes search engine optimization a bit. Why should someone come to your Web page if they get the answer straight from the SERP? Bill says chances are if a user finds something interesting, they’ll click through to the rest of your site.

Next we hear from the engines themselves. Each rep gets 5 minutes.

Up first is Dave Bailey from Google. Hey Dave.

He reminds us of Google’s mission statement to organize the world’s info. He thinks Universal Search is just an extension of that mission. Google wants users to have a single search box to rely on and to get results for anything they’d like. Why just one box? Because people have busy lives. I mean, some of us have to cover 16 SES sessions in 3.5 days. Google doesn’t expect you to remember about all of their different verticals.

There are also certain pages out there that are special. He uses the query [arctic butterfly sensor cleaner] as an example. (What? You totally search for that everyday, don’t you?)
There’s a OneBox up a top with product results and then a YouTube video about how to use it lower.

If you search for [origami crane], you see images at the top of the results, plus a MetaCafe video. A search for [Cranston RI] brings up a map from Google Local.

What Google is doing with Universal Search is digging deeper to find relevant results and then using smarter ranking techniques to determine where the media belongs on the page. Does the video belong at the top of the page or does it below lower down?

A query comes in and Google sends it everywhere. Each vertical does it best to determine how they should handle the query. Do we want to include blogs? How are the books results?

What does it mean to search engine optimization?

Dave must be on another planet because he says it will be business as usual. He assures us that things aren’t changing as radically as some SEOs think they are. Web results will always dominate the page and many universal results are just Web results anyway.

However, do think about creating quality content in other forms. Create useful video content, include images, enhance your Google Local listing, upload product listings to Google Product, etc.

Up next is Tim Mayer to show some of things Yahoo has launched recently.

Tim says if you cover up the logo it’s difficult to differentiate one search engine from another (um, it is?). He says Yahoo is moving to a better optimized user experience. It’s about getting the best result from the Web in the number one spot.

Recently launched Yahoo features:

• Music Artists Shortcuts – Go to official page, hear clips, get lyrics, etc. It’s very different from previous years where the purpose of the SERP was to send the users off as quickly as possible. Here, Yahoo is encouraging interaction.
• Movie Shortcut – Show times, Reviews, Trailers, etc
• Hotel Shortcut Inline – Blends the additional content with traditional results courtesy of an expand arrow.
• Consumer Electronics Shortcut: People want to buy a camera but they don’t know which one. Yahoo offers suggestions, most popular brands, most popular products, to help them narrow their search. Clickthrough rate is very high because users are exploring the topic and looking for help.

Next up is Eric Collier from Ask.com. Before he starts, I just want you to know that my toes are frozen. Yes, I’m done whining.

He shows the audience the Ask 3D interface. The point was to highlight the vertical content more because users weren’t taking advantage of it. They also want to get as much above the fold as possible and get users their answers as quickly as possible.

He explains the 3 panels of the new Ask interface:

On the left hand site you have the search box (complete with search suggestions) and the Narrow/Expand your search options. In the middle you have the Smart Answers and organic search results. On the right rail is really where they get into blended search.

Types of content sources include encyclopedia, blogs, television, narrow your search, search suggestions, health, video, music, etc.

How has this changed user behavior?

Ask has seen a huge jump in user satisfaction, a 30 percent drop in users clicking through to the second SERP, 15 percent drop in users sessions with more than one search. Users really are coming and getting what they want in that first page of results.

What should search marketers expect?

• A larger percentage of SERPs with blended results.
• User location will play a larger role in SERPs.
• Expect to see fewer web results in the SERPs (I agree, which is why I didn’t agree with Brian’s assertion that Universal is “business as usual” for search engine optimization).
• Blogs, images and videos will take online reputation into account when ranking.
• Pay attention to other search drivers – Search suggestions, related search, etc.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/20/07 at 3:09 PM | Comments (4)
See more entries in Ask, Google, Live Search, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Search Engine Optimization, Search Engines, Yahoo

Post Search Ads

Morning, kids.

We’re kicking off SES San Jose 2007 at the Post Search Ads session where moderator Misty Locke is trying to keep speakers Kevin Lee (Didit), Dave Carberry (Advertising.com), Michael Benedek (AlmondNet) and Richard Frankel (Yahoo!) in line. This should be fun.

Misty Locke is up and is speaking just as fast this time around as she did in Seattle. She tells a still sleepy audience that we’re here to talk about using search to profile users and engage consumers.

And with that we get right to it. Up first is Kevin Lee from the newly rebranded Didit (The frogs and the hyphen have been killed retired.) Take note.

Kevin starts things off saying that post search ads are designed to tap intent. Searchers have already shared their desires, wants and needs via the search box; however, the engines, publishers and marketers rarely have an opportunity to meet the needs of all three players at the same time. So what do you do?

1. Retarget searchers at the engine level: Yahoo SmartAds, Rightmedia (soon), Googleclick, Microsoft, etc.
2. Retarget your own search visitors (Tacoda, Revenue Science, Didit, Ad.com, Fetchback and Valueclick.)
3. Buy media through networks that specialize in search retargeting based on other sites.

The search engines have the leverage to target ads because they see 100 percent of their users. They have all the data.

Kevin gives the audience a quick heads up about how the various engines handle behavioral advertising. If you read CNET's report from last week, you probably know all this, but here it is anyway:

• Google has stated that it does not currently plan to use post search targeting.
• Yahoo is live in phrase 3 of an evolution (fusion, impulse, SmartAds).
• Microsoft recently acquired adECN.

Assuming there is adequate disclosure post-search-targeting by the engines (that’s a big if), the engines are in the perfect position to help searchers see better targeted ads, which in turn will increase the relevance of other ads as well.

Kevin notes that if you are lucky, your non-brand search keywords get a five percent conversion, which means 95 percent of site visitors who thought enough of your title, description and domain name to visit your site were not ready to move forward.

Several providers, such as Tacoda, Advertising.com, Revenue Science, FetchBack, ValueClick, etc, are now cookie-ing visitors when they arrive in order to retarget those searches on a CPC or CPM basis while searchers continue their non-search activities.

The premise of behavioral targeting is this: Clearly your site or offer didn’t convert the searcher the first time around. What will change things the next time? What will be different?

1. Different offer or price.
2. Different ad creative.
3. Different landing page (is a micro-site appropriate to shake it up?)
4. They are closer to ready to buy.

Another way to buy post-click search traffic is to be one-click-away. If your top keywords have publisher sites as top organic listings, buy media on the sites one-click-away. You can target directly, target through Google’s Site Targeting, Yahoo YPN, through Ad Networks like adBrite or ContextWeb or through link sellers such as Text Link Ads.

One-click-away media buying requires a media buying team and an adserver in the case where graphical media is used. Production costs are prohibitive if you want to truly tune ads. Didit is beta testing an alternative solution with selected clients.

Kevin notes that keywords don’t fully identify searchers as being in your target audience. As all the retargeting tools technologies and services improve and evolve, you will be able to combine the search interest indicator with additional targeting parameters. When will profiles that include search and other behaviors cross from one from of media to another? Sooner than you think, says Kevin. He mentions mobile, video games, IM and IPTV.

Kevin sums up saying there aren’t any other industries where you can search with the same level of precision as you can with online. You can align the interests in order to benefit everyone.

Next up is Michael Benedek to talk about analyzing the post search opportunity.

Michael gains some early sympathy early on noting that when he landed he had a fever of 102 and it is only thanks to Tylenol that he is here today. Aw, plug.

After he’s dug pulling on our heartstrings, Michael gives us a brief history on his company AlmondNet: They’ve been around since 1998; they’re the owner of 4 patents covering post search and the behavioral targeting market; they have 70 plus million aggregated US/UK users segmented into 40 ready-to-target categories; they’re headquartered in NYC.

Michael defines behavioral targeting as the delivery of ads to a person wherever they go based on their observed online behaviors. Online behaviors include things like conducted searches, browsed content, clicked ads, etc. The idea is basically that actions speak louder than demographics. What a consumer does is more important than where they are or who they are. Prior actions are key.

There are several different types of behavioral targeting:

Advertiser re-targeting – Advertisers deliver targeted ads to users who visited their site and left. Works best on high traffic sites.

Inventory Extension – A publisher with its own sales force enables its advertisers to reach its audience on other sites.

Data Sharing – Publishers provide a third-party company with access to its site audience data in return for royalties. The typical publisher or data owner would be a small data owner who doesn’t have a big sales force on its own, but is looking for an incremental revenue stream.

Post Search – Ads are delivered based on purchase-intent data (i.e. recently-conducted searches or recently-red product reviews.)

Why is post search so exciting? It all comes down to consumer behavior. Users spend 5 percent of their time declaring purchase intent on the search engines site. They spend 95 percent of their time browsing ad supported content on other sites. He notes that most searchers complete their purchase-related research two or more weeks before handing over their credit card numbers.

The first step to behavioral targeting is data aggregation. When someone searches for [health insurance], a cookie is placed on their browser to categorize the search. The cookie is then used to identify the user so that targeted ads can be delivered to them. This is enabled either directly or in cooperation with a distribution partner (ad network, large publisher, etc).

According to Michael, behavioral is one of the fastest growing areas of interactive advertising.

What are the benefits?

• Web users see relevant ads while their privacy is marinated.
• SEMs/Agencies and their advertisers reach users who are in purchasing mode on the content sites where they spend the other 95 percent of their online time.
• Data providers earn an incremental revenue stream.
• Media owners and ad networks maximize advertisers ROI & CPMs.

Other benefits to consider: Clicks originating from post-search behaviorally-targeted ads convert 5 to 10 times better than clicks from non targeted ads, and advertisers earned $80 of profit for every $1 invested.

There is no secret sauce involved with behavioral targeting.

Up next is Dave Carberry from Advertising.com.

Dave stands up and immediately asks if Mike’s 102 fever is contagious. Heh. Dave’s my kind of guy.

The advantage of behavioral targeting for advertisers is a targeted message to a group or individual that is more likely to generate an action and higher conversion. It helps generate brand awareness across a channel, improves overall ad spend and conversions, and increases synergy in marketing to the visitor experience.

Dave comments that it is really important to re-engage the customer after the click. Then since we’re talking about cookies he makes the required Oreo joke. Mmm, Oreos.

Behavioral targeting isn’t perfect because there will always be some people who delete cookies (15 to 20 percent of the marketplace), but there are those who do like it. The desired conversion is key, with the searched keyword acting as the behavior. He says there is usually a 14 day window back to retarget. You can set different frequency capping to prevent over exposure.

Anonymously-tracked and non-personally identifiable – Dave’s company isn’t collecting user data. There can be some overlap with geo-targeting or demo-targeting based on audience size. They offer custom messaging from multiple touch points, segmentation of both the users and keyword itself and broad segmentation over a wide retargeting pool.

Tips and Tricks

• 14 day retargeting.
• Additional product branding in messaging = higher potential for conversion.
• Frequency capping limits user overexposure of your brand.

As a fun little note, Misty adds that Dave is also a children’s travel book author. Dude, kids travel? Am I the only one chained to my desk? Sad times. [We let you go to the conference, didn't we? --Susan]

Last but not least is Richard Frankel of Yahoo.

Search is incredibly valuable, but there are also a lot of things that consumers do that are not about search, Yahoo tries to put all that together, says Richard.

According to Richard, 70 percent of users visit Yahoo. Search is a powerful predictor of intent but so are a lot of other things that searchers do. Richard spends some time plugging some of the Yahoo services.

Yahoo has two different behavioral targeting products:

• Yahoo! Engagers: Raise brand awareness, deepen engagement, and build brand preference.
• Yahoo! Shoppers: Drive response from those most active in market & click-to-purchase.

How does Y! behavioral targeting work?

They analyze predictive patterns for ad response in 350+ categories. When consumers are interested in buying different products, they participate in lots of different activities. For example, if you’re buying flowers, you’re in and out of the market very quickly. If you’re buying consumer electronics, it may take 30 days or longer. As marketers, that is obvious. Yahoo has so much data about what consumers are doing that they analyze the patterns to see what consumers are really doing before they make their decision.

Once Yahoo has created its user categories, they build models for Engagers & Shoppers. Each Y! user is then scored for his/her fit with every category and rescored daily. Ads are targeted to users who get the highest relevance score for the categories you choose.

Response prediction is where the industry is going. Says behavioral targeting is getting sophisticated over at Yahoo. It’s the foundation of how Yahoo engages with advertisers.

Richard calls Yahoo SmartAds the next phase of online advertising. If Yahoo can understand user intention well enough to dynamically generate messages targeted to their interests, than conversions will increase. SmartAds are designed to help marketers put the right message in front of consumer. Yahoo does all the generation on the fly. Time sensitive offers.

Yahoo has found that these highly targeted messages have 2 or 3 times the click through rate and 8 or 9 times the conversion rate compared to “traditional” behavioral targeting. Yahoo is trying to advance what the industry can do and connect tight advertising to.

The industry is going in a very exciting direction with a lot of opportunities for marketers. Search is just one part of the story. There are people all over the internet that are not on search pages.

During the Q&A, one of the audience members asked what happens when people change their mind? What if I’m no longer interested in travel?

Richard commented that at Yahoo they realize consumers typically don’t have just one interest at a time. They’re thinking about and shopping for many things. What a consumer is typically going to see a wide range of ads. They’re not just going to see ads for one subject. The goal is to make the experience more relevant and positive than it is now.

In other words, they’re just trying to get the University of Phoenix ad off the page.

Zing!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/20/07 at 11:26 AM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Branding, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007, Yahoo

August 17, 2007

Friday Recap

Happy Friday, happy people.

SES San Jose is just a few days away and I am plenty excited. As if the sessions, the people and the parties weren’t good enough, now WebProNews tells me Jim Lanzone may breakdance during his keynote if someone asks. Danny, are you listening? Someone needs to get on this. Ask.com rocks.

And while we’re talking about SES, what does everyone thinking about adding a 535ft Slip ‘n Slide to either the Google Dance or SearchBash? You’d be for that right? Let’s do it!

But it’s not just time for SES, it’s also time to start booking your travel plans for the holidays (and get those email campaigns going, you search marketer, you). I know it seems early, but the summer is nearly over and the holidays will be here before you know it. Farecast.com has marked Aug 22nd the date travelers should start scoping out prices for their trips. Get moving or you’ll end up paying $900 for your cross-country plane ticket. Or am I the only one who did that last Christmas?

The Google Operating System blog asked What Do You Use Google Docs for? The only use I have for Google Docs is for calorie counting and weight tracking. I’ve always wonder what normal people use it for. Thoughts?

Proof that Barry Schwartz will blog about anything, this week we got a much commented on entry about a dead bird (I still say it’s possible it was only sleeping) and then an entry that begins with, “I just came out of the bathroom!” TMI, Barry, TMI. :)

Speaking of bathrooms (I’m surprised Barry didn’t blog about this), some people apparently spend far too much time in there. Why partake in Toilegami when God invented Facebook? It makes no sense.

Those who know me know that I’m somewhat clumsy. It’s not uncommon for me to notice a new bruise and not remember the athletic stunt that caused it, however, I’m pretty sure even I would notice if one of my legs was missing. That’s the sort of thing a girl tends to remember. Like giving birth.

A totally normal Chinese couple tried to name their baby @. No, I didn’t hit the wrong key. They really do want to name their child after a computer symbol. Why don’t we just beat up the infant and stuff it in a locker now? Let’s just get it out of the way. [I don't know, at least it's easy to spell. --Susan]

Okay, here’s a toughie: You have one dollar. What do you spend it on, a newspaper or a candy bar? Fine, you’re on a diet, but what if it was a really good dark chocolate candy bar? My tummy is growlin’.

This is my most favorite flyer in the history of flyers. And yeah, there’s no way I’d take that down. I wouldn’t even touch it. I’d just run.

Avanoo gives us the Top Ten Things Not To Write In A Love Letter. Gentlemen, please pay attention to number two. As females, we have enough emotional baggage; we don’t need yours. [Also please take note of 3 and 4, ex who compared me to the "pedals of a flower". --Susan] Heh, that hurts.

Along that theme, what does it say about your new marriage when the wedding reception turns out like this? Ouch.

Finally a use for all those cans you have stored in your pantry. The hotdog is my personal favorite. Or maybe the M&Ms. Mmm M&Ms.

Some math for your enjoyment:

• Baby chipmunk + giant peanut = Awesome picture.
• Fish + Bear + Poorly Timed Jump = Lunch [Despair.com says that's what you get for ambition. --Susan]

This week BoingBoing introduced me to all the different kinds of people out there. Here’s a glimpse of some of the types of people I was introduced to:

• People so wealthy they’ll spend over $100,000 on a watch. (Dude, send a kid to college for that.)
• People who develop crushes on red pandas.
• People so dumb they duct tape their head before robbing a liquor store.
• People who never stop playing with their food.
• People who use stale bread as menu holders.
• People who get dumb tattoos.
• People who get cool tattoos.
• People who pay to be eaten by fish.
• People who are so lame they overdose on espresso, wear crocheted helmets, or get bitten by a headless rattlesnake.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/17/07 at 5:23 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Fun Stuff

August 16, 2007

SEO Newsletter, Excessive Link and Jason Calacanis Flakes

The SEO Newsletter is here! Sort of...

Just a quick heads up: We’re having a bit of trouble with our email provider at the moment (it should be fixed very soon), but just so you don’t miss out I wanted to let you know that the latest edition of the SEO Newsletter is now available via the Bruce Clay Web site. Head over to the newsletter page to get a glimpse of this month’s biggest search news, and devour two knowledge-filled search articles written by a couple of my fellow Bruce Clay team members.

Oh yeah, and while you’re on the newsletter page, feel free to subscribe if you haven’t already done so. You don’t want to miss out on the stuff we’re working on for the end of the month newsletter. :)

Google Warns Against Being Obsessive

Google has updated the link schemes portion of their Webmaster guidelines to say that excessive reciprocal links or excessive link exchanging is against their guidelines (emphasis mine). Obviously, the question today is, well, what’s considered “excessive”?

Eh, don’t go there. I don’t think Google has a particular number in mind (the 42 joke getting old, right?), but I don’t think that’s how you should look at it either.

Instead, I say you follow Bob Massa’s advice:

“Don't let your self get sucked into wasting your time judging linking opportunities with a yardstick of whether Google will think it is excessive or not. Approach each reciprocal link deal with a single thought. Will this link exchange bring me enough paying customers that I can justify recommending to my visitors to go to his site instead of staying at mine?

Well said, Bob.

Jason Calacanis Flakes Out of SES

Shoemoney was first to notice that Jason Calacanis’ name has been mysteriously withdrawn from the panels he was supposed to speak on. I’d love to get an answer on exactly what happened. Hopefully, it’s nothing serious (the dog is okay, right?), but at the same I hope he’s not just being a flake. Maybe he just didn’t have anymore insults to throw at the SEOs in attendance? Or maybe he was too embarrassed to talk about Mahalo?

Regardless, I’m totally disappointed. I was very much looking forward to hearing Jason state his case on SEO’s reputation problem. I was hoping after we got finished talking about SEO, we could talk about Jason’s reputation problem. Guess I won’t need to bring the popcorn and tar to this one after all. Lame.

Fun Finds

Skype is dead today. Now all that’s left to do at work is…work. How totally boring.

Search Engine Strategies is quickly approaching and with that Search Engine Roundtable has finally posted their session coverage schedule. They also have the dirt on all the after hours events, so make sure to check that out as well.

Speaking of SES events, it’s worth mentioning that Bruce Clay, Inc. will be co-sponsoring Wednesday night’s SearchBash 2007, so make sure to RSVP and let us know you’ll be coming. We can’t wait to see you!

Oh yeah, and happy birthday to the Compact Disc! Who knew we were born the same year. [Great, I'm younger than MTV but older than the CD. --Susan] Eat a cookie, you’ll feel better.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/16/07 at 3:57 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

UK Gets First Search Marketing Best Practices Charter

Barry Schwartz points us to some interesting news, revealing that the IAB & DMA have launched the first search marketing best practices charter in the UK. In order to comply and to be allowed to display the Best Practice Compliant logo on your Web site, UK search marketing companies must meet four basic requirements:

• They must have at least two employees dedicated to search marketing
  
• They must have search engine accreditation (from Google or Microsoft with more to follow) and have received official search engine optimization (SEO) training as relevant
  
• The company must have been trading for 6 months
  
• The company must be a member of either IAB UK, IAB Europe, DMA or Search Engine Marketing Professionals Organization (SEMPO) or the Association of Business to Business Agencies (ABBA).

According to IAB Search Council chair David White, the charter was created to make it easier for business owners to find a reputable search engine optimization company. We all know how hard that can be.

David comments:

“We created the charter to help clients identify reliable suppliers who know, understand and demonstrate best practice within this fast moving industry. We have further plans for the charter that will include affiliate marketers and detail advanced search engine marketing techniques."

I was particularly impressed by the charter’s second requirement, which states that search marketers must receive “official search engine optimization training”. I’d love to know what classifies as “official” SEO training. With any luck, the IAB and DMA will get together and generate a list of acceptable training classes for search marketers to take. Making training a requirement is a great way to raise the bar for UK search marketers, and I’d hate to see that diminished by substandard SEO training programs.

Obviously, Bruce Clay has its own SEO Code of Ethics, which has now been translated into a slew of different languages. Additionally, we have our Code of Conduct. The two codes are meant to assure our clients that we're working for them to the best our ability but without ever compromising our standards. The idea of keeping ethics in optimization is actually important enough to us that require search marketers to comply with it in order to become an SEOToolSet Certified Analyst. That's why we perform audits on the pages of Certified Analysts regularly. We're happy to train other people in the principles of search engine optimization but we want to know that those people are practicing in a manner that upholds the same values that we profess.

But do we care if all search marketers subscribe to our code of ethics exactly? Of course not. It doesn’t matter to us that you’re complying with our Code, as long as you’re complying with a code and promising that as a leader in this industry you’ll demonstrate ethics and good conduct. That’s what’s important.

And while I’m sure this charter will be revised and strengthened over time, the fact that it’s here today is a positive thing for search marketers everywhere. SEO is growing up and expanding to every corner of the world and it’s time for everyone to start demanding the same level of excellence.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/16/07 at 3:10 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

Ignore Your Audience and Suffer the Consequences

TechCrunch discovered that USAToday’s social network experiment may not be paying off the way they hoped it would. What, you mean that totally unwanted downgrade they released back in March? Well, color me surprised.

In case you don’t remember what happened 6 months ago, TechCrunch helps set the stage:

“Overnight, USAToday went from being an old school news site to something much different. Readers could now create profiles, comment on articles, vote to recommend articles to others (very Digg-like), etc.”

That’s exactly it. Overnight USAToday went from a trusted, traditional media site to a Web 2.0-approved social media site that no one wanted. It was actually impressive in its awfulness.

If you need proof, Michael Arrington throws out some data from Compete that shows the site has seen a 29 percent drop in unique visitors since the redesign. They’re down to about 10 million uniques a day, compared to 14 million before the site sold out. In case math isn't your strong suit, that’s 4 million visitors lost in just 6 months. Clearly, the redesign is not paying off in terms of unique visitors or page views the way USAToday had hoped. Shocking.

Why did USA Today’s redesign fail?

Easy. USAToday completely ignored the needs of its audience in their attempt to make a buck. They kept hearing buzzwords like “social media”, “the Digg effect” and “user generated content” and without considering what was important to the 14 million users who relied on their site everyday, they decided to clutter up their trusted news site with all the bells and whistles standard to social media.

As Rae Hoffman would say: Newsflash USAToday: Your readers never wanted your dumb shiny features. They just wanted the news.

It sounds flip, but it’s true. USAToday was never the “trendy” place to get news or hangout online. By adding all the social elements they were trying to be something they weren’t and alienating longtime readers. The site didn’t seem familiar anymore. It wasn’t home, which is essentially what I commented back in March.

“USAToday may have thought they were making improvements to their site, but what they really did was de-emphasize everything their readers liked about it. They cluttered up the site navigation, took the Dow Jones Average off the front page; got rid of the simple look and feel it once had, and started forcing users to scroll for miles. In essence, they got rid of everything that readers liked about the site and traded it in for user comments, profiles, avatars, voting systems, tagging and other social features. Of course, readers are angry.”

It’s easy to get caught up in the hype, but as a site owner you have to do what is ultimately best for your audience. Not every site will benefit from social media, neither will its audience. It’s your job to make the site better for users. You don’t add social media elements because you want them, you should add them because your users want them, or because your users would benefit from them. That wasn’t the case here.

Even if Comscore’s data isn’t 100 percent accurate and USAToday has only alienated 2 million of its visitors, instead of 4 million, it still doesn’t show growth. It still doesn’t show that USAToday gave its readers something that they wanted, or that they bettered the user experience in any way.

Had USAToday been a small town, community-oriented newspaper where the site editors interact with readers, the redesign may have worked. But that’s not who USAToday is. Hopefully USAToday has learned a very valuable lesson here: Social media is about your users; it’s not about you.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/16/07 at 12:28 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Social Media

August 15, 2007

Schedule for Search Engine Strategies San Jose 2007

It’s about that time, my friends; time to make the long drive up to San Jose for Search Engine Strategies. SES San Jose 2006 was my first-ever search conference so I’m excited to head up and relive it all over again, this time with a little less terror in my eyes.

You’ll be excited to hear that both Bruce and Mike will be making the trip to San Jose this year, and of course, we’ll stuff several members of the BC staff in the trunk as well (the cramped quarters fosters team bonding). If you’re going to be in town for the show, you’ll be able to catch Bruce and Mike both speaking at Thursday’s Organic Listings Forum and Mike will be earning his hefty paycheck (we pay him in Sauvignon Blanc) speaking on the One Billion Searchers (Mike issues a sneak peak on his personal blog), Link Building Basics and SEO Q&A On Links panels. Yowsa.

In order to keep my title of Bruce Clay’s Conference MVP away from Mike, I’ll once again be liveblogging the various sessions. Here’s a look at my schedule so you know what to expect and where to find me.

Day 0: Sunday, August 19, 2007
~ late afternoon/early evening: Arrive in San Jose

Day 1: Monday, August 20, 2007
9:00am-10:30am: Advertising Track – Post Search Ads
11:00am-12:30pm: Searcher Track – Universal & Blended Search
2:00pm-3:30pm: Searcher Track – Personalization, User Data & Search
4:00pm-5:30pm: ClickZ Track – One Billion Searchers
~6:00pm: Meet up with the rest of the Bruce Clay, Inc. gang!

Day 2: Tuesday, August 21, 2007
9:00am-9:45am: Keynote Conversation with Jim Lanzone
10:30am-12:00pm: Multimedia Track – Podcast & Audio Search Optimization
1:30pm-2:45pm: Multimedia Track – Images & Search Engines
3:15pm-4:30pm: Multimedia Track – Video Search Engine Optimization
4:45pm-6:00pm: Issues Track – Are Paid Links Evil?

Day 3: Wednesday, August 22, 2007
9:00am-9:45am: Keynote Conversation with Marissa Mayer
10:30am-12:00pm: Industry Track: Search APIs
1:30pm-2:45pm: Industry Track: So You Want To Be A Search Marketer
3:15pm-4:30pm: Industry Track: SEM Pricing Models
4:45-6:00pm: Industry Track: The SEO Reputation Problem (with Jason Calacanis!)

Day 4: Thursday, August 23, 2007
9:00am-10:15am: Analyzing the Analytics Players
10:45am-12:00pm: User Generated Content & Search
12:30pm-1:45pm: Social Media Track: Buzz Monitoring

Until Bruce and Susan get that cloning thing all figured out, I can only be at one session at a time. To make up for it, here’s a list of San Jose sessions I won’t be able to get to this time around, but have covered in the past.

• Video Search Optimization - covered in Chicago
• In House: Big PPC - covered in Chicago
• Mobile Search Optimization - covered in Chicago
• SEO Through Blogs & Feed - covered in San Jose and Chicago
• Successful Site Architecture - covered in Chicago and San Jose
• SMO: Social Media Optimization – covered in Chicago
• Organic Listings Forum - covered in Chicago
• Usability & SEO - covered in Chicago and San Jose
• Ads In A Quality Score World covered in Chicago and New York
• Duplicate Content and Multiple Site Issues covered in Chicago
• Local Search Marketing Tactics – covered in New York
• CSS, AJAX, Web 2.0 & Search Engines – covered in New York
• Meet The Search Ad Networks – covered in New York
• Linkbaiting and Viral Search Success – covered in New York
• Benchmarking An SEM Campaign – covered in New York
• Search Engine Friendly Design – covered in New York
• Advanced Paid Search Techniques– covered in New York
• Web Analytics & Measure Success– covered in New York
• Putting Search Into The Marketing Mix– covered in New York

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/15/07 at 12:05 PM | Comments (7)
See more entries in SEM Events, SES San Jose 2007

August 14, 2007

Attaboy, Ask: Two Fun New Ask.com Finds

Days like this warm my soul. Days when I can praise Ask.com for being creative and innovative, instead of having to lash out in response to another poorly thought out advertising attempt. Ah, rejoice in the serenity.

Yes, today, Gary Price and the Ask.com alerted me to two new, fun Ask finds that are definitely worth mentioning: A brand new Ask commercial that doesn’t suck (or insult women!) and a new Health Smart Answer that is 10 times less frightening than what Google Health is shaping up to be (no, I will NOT download my medical files to Google, but thank you for asking).

A Simpler, Smarter Commercial

Okay, so some of us have been programmed to wince as soon as we hear the phrase "new Ask.com commercial" but this time it’s really not necessary. The commercial doesn’t suck. And it isn’t insulting! In fact, it actually highlights their features. Oh my goodness, so many huzzahs!

Don’t believe me? Check it out:

It’s simple and sophisticated. There are no chorus lines, no strange dog/monkey hybrid, and no half-naked girls. Actually, there are no words at all. It’s a silent depiction of a searcher using the Ask engine and taking advantage of all of Ask’s unique features. It’s a commercial designed to distinguish Ask from its competitors by showing how much better its tools are. Seriously, a new calm has come over my body knowing that, even if it’s just for today, I can trust Ask.com again.

I really hope Ask decides to take a similar route with its next batch of commercials because, as Gary pointed out, Ask has many more features and services that could very easily be featured in the same manner. When it comes to search, Ask.com is still trailing behind Google in regards to the size of its index, but they really are doing better almost everywhere else.

New Health-Related Smart Answer

The timing of this release is particularly interesting considering today’s lengthy New York Times piece about Dr. Google and Dr. Microsoft and their plans to “improve the nation’s health care” (What? You didn’t know it was a search engine’s job to fix the entire health care system? They balance the national debt next week!).

Ask’s offering is completely different than what Google and Microsoft is suggesting, because while Google and Microsoft want to house all of your medical records and then put ads on them, Ask just wants to help searchers find the answers to their medical questions.

The new Ask Smart Answer works just like all of their other Smart Answers. Perform a search for virtually anything health related, such as [lung cancer], [bird flu], [prozac], [Vitamin E] or just name a part of the body ([eye]) and Ask will populate a Smart Answer will a collection of great information, links and images. And of course, the 3D component of their search, which we highlighted a bit yesterday, acts as a great complement by providing additional images, videos, dictionary information, news, news images, and even related blog posts (!) when appropriate.

Gary noted in his post at ResourceShelf that a search for [first aid] will also populate a drop down menu listing all of Ask’s First Aid Smart Answers. Good to know, but if your father is having a heart attack, please call an ambulance. Don’t bring up Ask.com.

It’s going to be interesting to watch the health vertical develop. Google and Microsoft are really pushing to bring personal health records online so that they can house them on their servers. I’m not okay with that. Even if they’re showing me the tightest privacy policy ever created, I don’t want or trust Google holding on to my health records. I’m far more comfortable with the “health services” being provided by Ask.

For me, going to Ask and trying to use their Health Smart Answers to diagnosis this weird lump on my arm is very different than giving Google or Microsoft the keys to my medical history.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/14/07 at 11:32 AM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Ask

August 13, 2007

The Search Engines Privacy Challenge

CNET has declared Ask.com the engine most concerned about user privacy. Hmm, I don’t doubt that Ask is concerned about my privacy, but how can we declare them the “winner” when we haven’t even seen the privacy policies we’re judging them on? I mean, they haven’t even been released yet. It seems odd to me.

Backing up a bit, CNET recently sent out an eight question questionnaire to representatives of the five major engines (that would be AOL, Ask.com, Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft, for those just joining us) asking them what kind of information their engine collects, how long they hold on to it, whether they engage in behavioral targeting, if they allow users to opt out, and other things searchers should know before they go handing over sensitive data.

After all the results were tallied, CNET declared Ask the best engine when it came to privacy, based pretty heavily on the merits of AskEraser. AskEraser being the feature that’s not released yet and for which no release date has even be set. Yeah, that one.

Actually, last I heard, Ask wasn’t even sure how exactly they were going to make AskEraser possible. Does just having an idea about how search privacy should be make you the winner? That’s sad.

Whether or not you buy the final ruling (I don’t), the article did provide one good takeaway for users: It very simply broke down and illustrated the different engine-specific privacy policies for users to take note of.

Here’s what you should remember about each of the engines:

• Ask.com: Once AskEraser goes live (whenever that may be), search data will be deleted in real-time. Ask does not link your data to the ads they’re displaying
• AOL: AOL retains search data for 13 months before deleting it. No, they don’t link user info to ads, but they do toy with behavioral targeting. Users are given the opportunity to opt out.
• Google: Google retains search data for 18 months and then only partially anonymizes a user’s IP so that it is harder to trace back to them. Google does not participate in behavioral targeting, nor does it link user info when serving ads. Good Google.
• Microsoft: Microsoft also retains user data for 18 months, but unlike Google, after 18 months the information is deleted, not just anonymized. Microsoft does utilize behavioral targeting (it also links user info to the ads being shown) and for some reason gives users no way to opt out of behavioral targeting on the MSN.com site. Users can, however, opt out of behavioral targeting on third-party sites.
• Yahoo!: Yahoo! admits to holding on to your data for 13 months and then partially anonymizing it after that. They do use behavioral targeting and link user info to the ads being served, and no, they don’t give you a way to opt out of it.

Any of that surprising to you?

I’ll admit, I was a little surprised by the results. I didn’t realize that Yahoo! and Microsoft didn’t provide a way for users to opt out of behavioral targeting. Why are users even tolerating that kind of behavior? The number of advertisers using adCenter is probably pretty small (in comparison to the other PPC networks, anyway), but what about Panama? Shouldn’t this brand new ad system take into account that not everyone likes having their history used to “better” their search? You would think.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/13/07 at 3:57 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in AOL, Ask, Google, Microsoft, Search Engines, Yahoo

Who Does Blended Search Better?

Okay, so a few months back Google did it, and then Ask did it and now it looks like Yahoo is following suit (Terry, maybe you should have held on to those shares…) adding all sorts of blended-like features to their search results.

Yahoo’s offering isn’t as dramatic or as widespread as Google's and Ask’s, but I like where they’re going. In fact, watching Yahoo put more and more audio, video, images and maps into their search results lead me to one question: Who does it better: Ask, Google or Yahoo?

Let’s see.

Music:

If you’ve stalked me on any one of the various social networking sites, you know that I’m heart is filled with the glorious sounds of Country music. (I know, it’s very odd for a girl from Long Island to be such a Country fan, but you can’t help who you love, right?) And my Country group of choice? That would be the always awesome Rascal Flatts.

• Ask.com: Even if I didn’t already love Ask, their result for this query would be enough to do it. Ask.com clearly understands my Rascal Flatts love and is attacking this query from all angles. First there is the Rascal Flatts Smart Answer that comes complete with relevant links, such as their Official Site, ringtones, audio files, concert tickets, and other info. Then the 3D component kicks in, giving me a selection of images, sound clips coming from iLike, event listings and a seriously impressive Narrow and Expand Your Search option. This is perhaps the most beautiful page I have seen. I don’t even want to leave. But I have to. It’s time for Google.
• Google : Okay, Google sucks. I’m sorry, but this is not an impressive result. A picture so small I can barely make it out and a (non-clickable) list of some of their albums and songs? I’m bored.
• Yahoo: Yahoo has come up with a solid Music Shortcut that seems to mix what both Google and Ask are offering. It may not be as extensive as Ask’s, but Yahoo does give users video clips. Yahoo’s focus seems to be not so much on giving users everything on one page, but giving you a taste of all the different Yahoo properties and encouraging you to follow a link off the page and explore them. In other words, it’s all very Yahoo.

Who does Music better? Ask.com. No contest.

Sports:

Unless you’re a new Bruce Clay blog reader, you probably already know that I’m something of a Red Sox fan. I take my Red Sox very seriously, even more seriously than my love for the New England Patriots. I don’t want to hear any lip about the next bunch of shootouts, okay? [This example would have been more exciting if it had been about the Dodgers. --Susan]

• Ask: Not quite as information-filled as the Rascal Flatts result, but still a nice collection of media found here. In my opinion, the Smart Answer is somewhat lacking. (Isn’t Gary Price originally from Boston? Represent!), but the 3D component does a solid job giving users news images, regular images, video, and news snippets. Somewhat interesting, if you hover over the video clips you get a little preview sans audio. Nice touch.
• Google: Okay, this is totally boring. I never thought I’d miss seeing ads on the right side of the page, but the whiteness of this SERP is actually making me long for a touch of clutter. With the exception of a boring news results, Google isn’t working Universal Search into sports queries at all. Lame.
• Yahoo: A query for solely [red sox] or even [boston red sox] gives me no blended features except for scores and schedules. However, as announced on Friday, if you search for a specific player Yahoo’s SERP comes to life. For example, if you’re specifically interested in David Ortiz, Yahoo will give you his vital stats and links pointing out to all its different portals. Both Google and Ask offered similar player listings.

Who does Sports better? I like Yahoo’s athlete profiles, but overall I’m going to have to with Ask.com. I specifically liked the distinction between Images and News Images, Ask also lets users read the article associated with the different News Image, similar to the way Google does with Google News Image Version.

My only criticism: Ask, please remove Johnny Damon’s name from the list of Related Names. He does not deserve to be there. Thanks.

Maps:

A week from today I will be attending SES San Jose and sitting in an overly-air conditioned session room located at the San Jose McEnery Convention Center. I’ve been there before that was one year and approximately 5, 000 search sessions ago. I don’t remember it; let’s see if the engines can refresh my memory.

• Ask: Ask gives me a pretty standard Ask SERP – I get the business listing, images (some related, some not) and a map. Obviously, if I click on the business listing I’m brought inside AskCity where I can get directions and locate other businesses based on their proximity to the convention center. If you haven’t used AskCity before, it’s awesome.
• Google: Google’s result for the San Jose McEnery Convention Center is basically your standard business listing, complete with a map, address, and phone number. It’s useful in that you-get-what-you-need kind of way.
• Yahoo: Interestingly, Yahoo brings up no map-filled Short Answers unless you add “san jose” to the end of the query. I guess the “San Jose” “San Jose McEnery Convention Center” wasn’t good enough. (May want to work on that, guys.) Once you hit the right prompt, though, the listing is virtually identical to Google’s.

Who does Maps better? Although I use Ask for all my mapping needs, based on this query I’m going to go with Google. The result offered by Ask just seems busier than I need it to be. Google gives me all the info vital to my search and then gets out of the way.

Travel/Destination:

Quite sadly, my travel destinations are tied to the locations of the various search conferences, but let’s pretend for a second that I actually had a life that included travel. I mean, hitting Chicago in December is fun and all, but what about if I wanted to go someplace warm. Like Cancun!

• Ask: Again, Ask shows it knows how to do blended search. The images it provides are to die for, we get Wiki’s entry on Cancun, the current weather (88 degrees and partly sunny) and the current time. The Narrow/Expand your search features are nice but I’m a little surprised there’s no Smart Answer. I’d also like a map. Until a week or so ago I didn’t realize Texas had a coastline. I know; shut up.
• Google: All Google gives me are three Image results. Google did announce they were launching Universal Search, correct? So far I’m not impressed.
• Yahoo: Searching for [cancun] hits upon another Shortcut that I really like. There’s a link to the Yahoo Travel Visitors Guide, plus hotel information, flight info, a restaurant guide, and yes, a map! Yahoo even gives me the three top-rated things to do. A nice touch.

Who does Travel/Destinations better? Yahoo.

Final thoughts: In the battle of who does blended search better my vote has to go to Ask.com. They seem to be the only engine really “getting it” right now. Yahoo is setting itself up as one to watch, though. They’ve launched a few impressive Shortcuts lately that are helping to bring blended and multimedia types results on the SERP. And for all the hype, Google seems to be the engine least invested. What’s up with that?

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/13/07 at 1:00 PM | Comments (6)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

August 10, 2007

Friday Recap

Hey all, Happy Friday. And Happy Birthday to Susan! She’s 62 today. I got her a pony. Huzzah! [I'm going to let you get away with this only because maybe now Adam will know who I am. --Susan] - Team Adam!

I’ve decided that if I can’t have my boxer puppy (damn cats) then it is a lion that I want. Who knew they were so affectionate and sentimental. Cutest lion ever.

This is fun. Insert your Starbucks drink of choice and The Oracle of Starbucks will tell you about your personality. But be careful, the Oracle is kind of mean. It told me I’m a clueless stripper who likes wine coolers. That’s a lie. I hate wine coolers. [It told me that my friends are trying to kill me. This is actually true. --Susan]

Katrina B., the winner of Search Engine People’s SEO Lyric Contest, submitted a video rendition of her song “I’ll Optimize” (sung to the tune of “I’ll Survive”) for our viewing pleasure. All you need to know is that there are tight black dresses, pink boas, and lots and lots of shimmying. In other words, it’s hilarious.

I have a new hero. She’s from Maryland and was recently found (and arrested) covered in chocolate and crying hysterically atop a chocolate/fudge-stained couch. I’m telling you, this is going to be me in five years. Did I mentioned she also stole the fudge? Cause she did.

For more giggles, check out the SEO cartoons designed by the folks at 1st On The List Promotions. I’m partial to the SEO Costs How Much cartoon, myself.

Barry Schwartz blogged that he is anti-umbrellas and raincoats. That’s nice for him. What concerned me is that when I read it my first response was, “what’s a raincoat?” I have been living in Southern California for far too long.

Phil Lenssen shows us that YouTube sucks at life, Microsoft has better things, Digg needs more cowbell, and that some people don’t like Google’s [Danny] Sullivan. I bet you it was that Nigerian fellow.

Some guy was almost killed by his iPhone. No, seriously. He tells the story of how it wiggled its way off his treadmill stand and then viciously attacked him. I can’t lie; there were tears streaming down my face.

Have you been introduced to Minesweeper: The Movie yet? It’s nine shades of awesome.

A 12-year-old offered up a review of the One Laptop Per Child initiative and impressed everyone with his/her (?) sophisticated writing style. As one commenter noted, “most adults don’t write [that] good”. Heh. I’m telling you, sometimes these things just write themselves.

The Today Show provided us with a valuable lesson this week. It turns out that 5 second rule isn’t as God-approved as we thought, so stop eating things off the floor. Or at least blow on them first. [Now will you listen to me about those M&Ms? --Susan] M&Ms don’t count. They have a hard shell, they’re protected.

A nice visual of how you can tell if it’s time to get a girlfriend. Put down the Legos, my friend. You know how else you know it’s time to get a girlfriend? When you voluntarily undergo thumb surgery to make your thumb thinner and more iPhone friendly. Dude? For serious?

If you have a girlfriend and you’re cheating on her, don’t use 1-800-Flowers to surprise your mistress. Even if you think it won’t get back to your girlfriend, it will. You’re much better off to just buying flowers from the grocery store. And don’t give me that who-buys-flowers-from-the-grocery story line. You’re cheating on your girlfriend; let’s not pretend you have standards.

Going back to the Lego thing for a moment (Did I really just type that?), a giant Lego man washed up on a Dutch beach. How do you lose an 8-foot tall Lego man?

The Consumerist warns that French fries from Burger King and Wendy’s still contain too much trans fat. You know what that means – they’re still delicious!

Search Engine Strategies San Jose is coming up shortly (!), so here’s a fun little project to help you make use of all those meaningless business cards you’re going to acquire. Enjoy!

Things I Learned From BoingBoing This Week

• Root beer cupcakes look delicious but, very, very sticky.
• Nothing kills your motorcycle-riding street cred like a crocheted biker jacket. Dude, you may as well get a Volvo. Or a Nissan.
• Nissan is taking this whole breathalyzer car thing very seriously.
• One day we will be eaten by millions of plastic bags. Reportedly, they are angry over repeatedly being used to empty out cat boxes.
• Note to self: When flying from Burbank to LaGuardia, make sure the guy sitting next to me isn’t sporting a marmoset. Check.
• Bad Cop, No Doughnut has been replaced by Bad Cop Loves Hello Kitty.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/10/07 at 4:30 PM | Comments (4)
See more entries in Fun Stuff

Bruce Clay's Pay Per Click Expert Discusses Google's AdWord Tweak

Guest entry by Nick Guastella, Search Engine Marketing Analyst for Bruce Clay, Inc.

Remember when Coke changed its formula a while and people revolted? Well, get ready because Google is getting ready to change its top ad place formula and advertisers are sure to have an opinion. Let’s hope Google’s formula update leaves a better aftertaste than New Coke’s. [*rimshot* Sorry… – Lisa]

In its infancy, pay per click advertising was a simple case of the highest bid wins. It didn’t matter if you had a good ad, how high your click through rate was, or even if your ad took users to a page where they found what they were looking for. All powerful Pay Per Click God Decreed: He who spend the most money was awarded the highest position.

But then came Google, the new kid on the block who founded the idea of ranking ads based on a pre-defined “quality score”. No longer was it a simple case of the highest bid wins, now ads were being positioned based on their value to users. With the new Quality Score model it became harder for advertisers to get those top spots. They’ve had to work at writing better ads to get the best click through, select better landing pages, and essentially, work to decipher this new black box called Quality score. One thing advertisers haven’t been able to control is the bid portion. While one advertiser may have been willing to bid more than another, Google was looking at actual CPC to determine how ads would be positioned, giving advertisers less control.

Under the new formula, in order to gain the top pay per click spot (the one that sits on top of the organic results), Google will begin looking at an advertisers maximum CPC (i.e. how much money you’re willing to shell out to Google) instead of using the actual CPC (how much you’re really paying).

I think this will be a change for the better, not because it will offer the bid transparency that I sorely miss, but because by allowing advertisers to have a little more control of how they’re ranked by looking at max bids. Obviously, ad quality will still be a big factor and Google will continue to reward quality ads with lower bid costs.

We won’t fully know how effective Google’s new AdWords tweak will be until this goes into full effect, whenever that may be. Some ads may not see any movement, while others may suddenly rise in the ranks. In either case, it’s important to remember that in the end it’s really the conversions that count. While it’s always nice to be number one, sometimes the number two or number three spot is actually more profitable. Advertisers should monitor their ad conversion rates to see what works best for them.

Note from Lisa:

I know Nick is the pay per pick click expert in the group, but I feel inclined to add my two cents here, as well.

Google’s touting that this change will help advertisers by giving them more “control” over where their ads appear. The rationale being that now ads can be “promoted” to that top position based on advertiser's own action, not based on what their competition is bidding. If you set your max bid to $30.00, assuming your ad copy doesn’t totally suck and you can appease the quality score gods, then you have a pretty good shot at being positioned where you want to be, no? I don’t know, it just feels like Google is encouraging users to bid high in order to claim that top spot. Why don’t they just put a bounty on it and see who is willing to cough up the dough? Or wait – isn’t that what they’re sort of doing here?

Like I said, Nick is the PPC expert, I’m just the mouthy blogger.

Posted by Guest Author on 08/10/07 at 3:49 PM | Comments (5)
See more entries in Pay Per Click / Online Ads

August 9, 2007

Promoting Yourself Using Other Brands

Funny thing. I just mentioned Nick Stamoulis this morning and then I head over to my friend Simon Heseltine’s Search Engine Tigers blog and what do I see – a post about Nick Stamoulis. Darn, this guy is popular lately.

Simon was doing a routine Google search for his company, RedBoots Consulting, when he discovered a PPC ad hanging out on the right hand side. The ad was for a man named Nick Stamoulis. Thinking the name sounded familiar, Simon queried his old company, and sure enough, there was Nick’s ad hanging out on the right hand side again. Pattern, anyone?

Simon writes:

“My first thought was that both were SEMPO members, so to test this theory I went over to the SEMPO membership list and did some more searches - Bruce Clay, Fathom SEO, Ingenio, 360i, Flying Point Media, G3 Group, Kinetic Results, JumpFly, Performics, Sitelab International, The Search Agency, TopRank Online Marketing - each one had the exact same ad from Mr. Stamoulis displayed.

Nick Stamoulis has decided the way he’s going to brand himself is by bidding on the names of well known search marketers. That’s cool, I guess. I’m certainly not going to chastise his marketing habits; I just wonder if it’s the most effective way to brand yourself.

From what I can discover about Nick, he’s a professional search marketer. This tells me that Nick likely has all sorts of experience, knowledge and prowess in this area. So why isn’t he using it more? What is the philosophy behind bidding on competitor's brand names? I just feel like using the names of popular search engine optimization companies as a launch pad isn’t the way to get that name recognition you’re looking for. Not because it’s unethical or because it’s “bad” but because it does nothing to separate you from them, aka your competition. If I’m doing a search looking for Bruce Clay, it means I’m already somewhat committed to that company. Just showing up in the sponsored links section for that query doesn’t tell me that you’re better than BC. It just tells me that you, too, recognize Bruce as being an optimization expert. Wow, I should really call this Bruce guy!

You can make the argument that aligning yourself with respected companies gets you noticed, and yeah, that has obviously worked for Nick to some degree. But are they are going to remember you as being a search engine optimization company or are they going to only remember that you showed up next to Bruce Clay or RedBoots Consulting when they weren’t looking for you. You don’t want to be remembered for being annoying.

We’ll look at it another way. One of the reasons ranking for the phrase [search engine optimization] is so sought after is that SEOs know clients view it as a testament to their optimizing ability. If you’re charging thousands of dollars for search engine optimization services and yet you can’t even get your own site to rank, what does that say about your ability to practice what you preach? Why should I trust that you’re going to be able to get my site to rank?

Something else to consider before heading down the path of bidding on trademarked terms is that you’re not winning yourself any goodwill with the search marketers whose names you’re bidding on. Sure, some people don’t care, others may even be flattered, but there will always be those that are offended, and vocal about it. Those that feel like you’re trying to use their good name to make a buck. If you read the comments over on Simon’s blog or on Sphinn, you’ll see that not everyone is happy about Nick’s marketing techniques.

It’s probably important to point out that everything Nick is doing (besides placing his telephone number in the display URL, which he’s since fixed) is 100 percent legal and within bounds. The courts have ruled that it is totally okay for companies to bid on trademarked terms (they’ve also ruled it's okay for the owner of the trademark to sue you). I just wonder if it’s the best plan of action. I have no doubt that Nick is a talented search marketer; he’s clearly got the linkbait down. My fear is that by heading down the path where you piggyback off others success may make you more enemies than you gain clients. If you’re a good search marketer, why not get attention by showing off your skills?

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 9/07 at 5:51 PM | Comments (4)
See more entries in Blogging, Pay Per Click / Online Ads

Understanding the Keyword Density Curve

A question popped up over at LED Digest yesterday asking if there is a perfect keyword density. Okay, so I was originally going to be all snarky and comment that, no, there is no magic number for how many times you use a keyword on a given page. Why would that have any affect on search engine optimization at all? But then I realized I’ve already used up my allotted percentage of snark this week so instead I’ll just be helpful.

Yes, dear friend, keyword densities do matter. They actually matter quite a lot.

The LED Digest subscriber didn’t just want to know if they mattered (otherwise this would be a really short entry), he specifically asked what the perfect keyword density is for any given page and what is the maximum/minimum a search marketer should try and achieve.

Well, if he’s looking for a number, we can’t give him one. While it would be super great if there was magical number for how many times you had to use a keyword to rank for it (37!), there isn’t. And how could there be? Imagine someone came out and said in order to rank for the phrase [huzzah] you have to use it 4 times on your 250-word page. Then everyone in the free world would be filling their pages up with exactly 4 huzzahs. How would that help Google to understand what page is the most expert? It wouldn’t. Search engine optimization will never be even remotely that easy.

How many times you must use a keyword in order to rank for it is going to depend on a million different factors. One of the obvious is how competitive the term is. If you want to rank for a total left-field term like “puppydogsareawesome” then you may only need to throw it up in the title in order to rank for it. However, if you want to rank for something more competitive like “car” or “SEO” or just plain “puppy”, then it’s going to take a much more concentrated effort, consisting of many, many, bundles of pages all focused on that one term.

Bruce is currently in Australia for SEO Training, but if he were here, he would tell you that keyword density is like a bell curve. The ideal keyword density will never be a static number and your goal isn’t necessarily to get to the peak of the curve. Most sites will find themselves falling either over or below the optimum mark. True keyword density goals will always be determined by the index as a whole. Your job is to be “least imperfect” and get your site closer to the engines' ‘optimum’ mark than your competition. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but each of your keywords is going to have a different optimum density, and so will each search engines. I know, it’s annoying, but every search engine touts a different optimum keyword density level and will give terms a different level of importance based on where they appear on the page.

Isn’t search engine optimization fun? Totally!

If you’re an SEOToolSet subscriber we make finding the optimum keyword density level for your targeted terms considerably easier thanks to two of our SEO Tools: the Single and Multi Page Keyword Density Analyzers. While both are top notch at measuring your site against your top ten competitors, the Single Page KDA is best suited to help you get your page competitive and then the Multi-page KDA will step in to help you take over fine tuning your pages to take those top positions.

If you’re not an SEOToolSet subscriber you can still get all this information, it’s just considerably more time consuming. We recommend you study your competitors’ sites and get an idea of how many times they’re using the terms in order to rank for them. How are they using them? Where are they putting them? What other kinds of related terms are they using? It’s all part of the puzzle.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 9/07 at 5:40 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in SEO Tips & Tricks, Search Engine Optimization

Is Mixing Humor and Blogging A Bad Idea?

Okay, so I have this problem when it comes to blogging. Basically, it’s that I think I’m funny. Actually, I think I’m hilarious. Often I’ll write something or respond to an unwelcome Susan blog comment and I will immediately burst into giggles over my own creation. It actually scares Susan which, in turn, makes the entire thing that much funnier to me. But as Copyblogger’s Brian Clark remind me today, sometimes humor is dangerous and bloggers should decide if it’s absolutely necessary to their posts.

I think it’s a tough call. Am I writing my blog posts around the next punch line? Of course not, I’m trying to tell you a story, but I do like to throw a little quip in there every now and then to make sure the lot of you are paying attention. Sometimes I also do it to make sure I’m still paying attention.

One of the greatest differences between a blog and a newspaper is that blogs get to take on the personality of their author. They’re personable and it’s the being personable that helps readers develop an attachment. The best way to bond with someone is to make them laugh (or feed them). If you can keep them laughing (or eating), you’ll keep them coming back, and you may even make them fall in love with you (I make a mean meatloaf).

Of course, if you don’t make them laugh, and your attempt at humor, instead, breaks their train of thought while they are reading your entry, that’s bad. When you try to be funny and people don’t get it, they tend to get angry. Ask Brian.

“Sure enough, one reader ridiculed me for my “purple prose,” while another actually chastised me. An especially self-important blogger named Nancy Friedman even wasted 963 words of her life equating me to the end of good writing as we know it. Nancy doesn’t get a link, because trolling for links via attack post is so 2005.”

Heh. That’s the thing, trying to work humor into a blog entry or even onto your Web site really is a tricky thing because not everyone has the same sense of humor. And as funny as your writing is to you, not everyone will get it and you don’t want to alienate your readers or make them feel dumb. Being funny is great and can be a powerful branding device, but if it sacrifices the clarity of your message it’s not worth it.

I think the key to adding humor into blogs or even into your Web site is to understand your reader’s sense of humor. Brian mentioned that the way comics write material is that they’ll try out different variations of their jokes on different crowds to see what works and what flops. I tend to look at blogging in a similar way.

Not that we’re out there trying to come up with silly jokes or one-liners, but I think over time you get to know what your audience responds to and what they roll their eyes at. You can see what makes them comment nicely and what makes them comment that you’re an embarrassment to the English language.

If you’re trying to bring humor to your blog, my initial advice would be to play off your audience’s knowledge base. What topics or bits of humor are specific to them? If you can hit upon their specific geekiness and make them laugh, you’ll have a fan forever. You should have heard all the Windows jokes being thrown out at WordCamp. It was ridiculous.

Personally, unless I’m having a really cheesy moment, I stay away from the blatant jokes. Being sharp or displaying a touch of wit is different from reciting the riddle I just heard from the crazy guy on the street.

And yes, even though it’s hard for me to understand, I realize that not everyone thinks I’m funny. Just ask Nick Stamoulis, he definitely doesn’t think I’m funny. (Hi, Nick!) Hopefully, you don’t find my attempts at humor so distracting that you lose the message of the post, because it really is the message and the story that is important. If the jokes or the sarcasm are getting in the way, tell me. I’ll try and control myself because really the quips are nothing more than the chocolate syrup on the sundae. The sundae of optimization.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 9/07 at 3:05 PM | Comments (13)
See more entries in Blogging

August 8, 2007

Comments In Google News? Oh, No!

Google News has quite possibly opened up the largest can of worms ever announcing that individuals or organizations mentioned in stories appearing in Google News will now be allowed to comment on the story. I want to know whose idea this was. We need to find this person and throw rocks at them, ASAP.

The way this whole crazy thing works is that any person mentioned in a story picked up by Google News can email their comment to news-comments@google.com. The wannabe commenter must use their real name and be able to verify they are, in fact, the person represented in the story (this should be SO fun for Google to figure out!). Once approved, the comment with be attached to the story on an individual story page (!). It’s probably also worth noting that there’s no link involved. There’s not even a nofollowed link, the link just isn’t present at all. If Google thinks this is going to deter comment spam, it’s not. Anybody even remotely mentioned in the story is going to start leaving “valuable” comments just to get themselves a little more search engine love for vanity searches. This is bad, bad, bad.

I suppose we should all cheer and clap for Google trying to present all sides of a story or letting the actual news participants have a voice (isn’t that what the news article was for?) but there is so much potential for this to go horribly wrong that all the positives are getting lost on me.

I mean we have a blog, we allow comments, and we get a lot of spam. If our blog of 5 readers gets a lot of spam, can you imagine how much spam Google is going to get? Maybe that’s the positive – spammers will be so busy spamming Google they won’t have time for the rest of us?

And what kind of editorial standards will Google be using here? They said they’ll publish the whole text of the comment without edits but what about harsh language? What about personal attacks? Are they going to allow that in or does Google get to decide what qualifies as an appropriate comment?

What’s the cut off point? How long are commenters going to be allowed to respond to a story? Under this system, it’s going to be very easy for today’s news to run into tomorrow.

What’s also interesting about the decision is that with it Google is no longer just an aggregator of news. Now they’re participating in it. Over at Deep Jive Interests they seem to think that this is a good thing, that those mentioned in the news will be able to tell “their side” of the story and that news will become “personalized”. Call me old fashioned but I don’t want my news personalized.

Remember when the news followed journalistic standards? When the news was written without editorial opinion and the story was presented as unbiased and “just the facts”? That’s the way news should be. If you want personalized news, or if you want read opinions on the news, go read a blog. Or watch TV. Traditional media is supposed to be objective and unbiased. Adding comments allows people to inject a slant into the story that doesn’t need to be there. What if Person A is a big Google News reader and Person B is somewhat technology retarded? Then we hear more of Person A’s “side” than Person B’s, right? That’s not journalism, nor accurate.

And why would we even need this? Any respectable journalist, and you would hope the journalists being mentioned in Google News are respectable, will include every possible angle to a story. This means the viewpoint of the people represented should already be mentioned. Why do we have to hear it again? If you’re going to open up comments on news pieces (which I really do think is a horrible idea), at least give us new viewpoints, not viewpoints already being expressed.

I’m sure I’m coming off sounds all sorts of grumpy over here, but I just don’t like this at all and I’m not sure what Google’s thinking. Are they trying to create individual story pages so they can sell ads on them? What’s the deal? Why are we even opening this can of worms?

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 8/07 at 12:20 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Google

August 7, 2007

NYT To Lower The Gates, Google, Wikipedia & Robots.txt

The New York Times Unlocks Premium Content

I’m-sure-they’re-trustworthy anonymous sources are telling the New York Post that the New York Times will be doing away with the TimesSelect subscription-only content on its Web site (you still with me?). Rumor is NYT publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. has already made the decision but is waiting for software issues to be resolved before announcing it. Oh Father, please let this be true.

Personally, I think this makes total sense for the New York Times (and not just because I want to read their op-ed pieces). The TimesSelect wall is keeping the users unwilling to pay $49.95 a year (represent!) away from some of the site’s biggest draws, including its rich archives and, yes, its op-ed columns. The paltry $11 million they make from users dumb enough to cough up the money isn’t worth the traffic they’re missing out on. Getting rid of this gate would be a very, very good decision for the New York Times.

Let’s all keep our fingers crossed that this is real. Try your toes too.

Google SERPS Indexed In Real Time?

A funny thing happened yesterday. I wrote a post yesterday entitled Building Communities Within Your Community and hit publish. I read the post over, saw I had not linked Ciaran Norris’ name to anything (still haven’t. Help me, Ciaran.) and decided to do a quick Google search to see if I could find a good site to link from. I did my Google search and saw that the entry I had just posted was already appearing in Google’s index. See it? Right there towards the bottom of the second page? Good heavens, I thought, Google sure is on top of things.

And, yes, they are. We’ve been hearing about Google’s super speedy indexing for a few weeks now but today Matt Cutts chimed in talking about the minty fresh indexing Google is doing. You have to admit you’re impressed. I know I was. It couldn’t have been more than 10 minutes (and it was probably considerably less than that) that I had posted the published button and my post slightly mocking Ciaran’s penchant for starting silly Facebook groups was already in the index (note: indexed doesn’t equal ranking). That’s the mark of a great search engine. Nice work, Google.

Color-Coded Wikipedia Entries?

This struck me as an interesting idea: ResourceShelf comments on a program developed at the University of California, Santa Cruz that aims to color-code the text found in Wikipedia entries in order to signify which phrases are trustworthy and which may be questionable based on the editors past performance.

“The program analyzes Wikipedia’s entire editing history–nearly two million pages and some 40 million edits for the English-language site alone–to estimate the trustworthiness of each page. It then shades the text in deepening hues of orange to signal dubious content. A 1,000-page demonstration version is already available on a web page operated by the program’s creator, Luca de Alfaro, associate professor of computer engineering at UCSC.”

Would that actually work or is that just going to cause more accounts to get hijacked? And I also don’t like the idea of saying just because John’s information was accurate for the Wikipedia page on elephants means he’s also an expert on doll collecting. And as RS points out, how does one measure “quality” anyway? I Is it how it's written, the sources used? I think we just need to accept that when you open something to the masses quality will always suffer. It’s up to the individual users to track back the sources and deem the material quality or not.

Exclude By Keyword?

Russ Jones proposes a new exclude-by-keyword directive for the standard robots.txt that would tell the search engines to ignore the pages of your site that have been spammed with inappropriate and unrelated words. It would look a little something like this:

User-Agent: *
Disallow-by-key: cialis
Disallow-by-key: viagra
Disallow-by-key: xxx

What do you think? Would the engines go for it?

Fun Finds

Search Engine Roundtable found that Microsoft adCenter is simply getting too popular for its own good. Aw, it’s hard being pretty.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 7/07 at 5:18 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Branding

Everyone’s talking About Behavioral Targeting. Again.

I like when the conversation comes back around to behavioral targeting because it’s like the giant elephant in the room. We all know its there and that people are using it but we’re not supposed to talk about it. Behavioral targeting is marketer’s dirty little secret. Don’t look! No one’s collecting any information about you, honest.

Fine, so I’m being a touch dramatic but you can’t deny that behavior advertising is back in the conversation something fierce lately and people are getting all uncomfortable. We watched Yahoo released SmartAds, AOL acquired behavioral advertising firm Tacoda and just recently Google claimed it was “wary” of behavioral advertising (though they have no problem tracking users' every movement). All the talk is making people nervous, so much so that the FTC is gearing up to hold a town hall meeting in Washington D.C. in early November to discuss the topic. Can you smell it? Can you smell the fear?

Personally, I’m all for behavioral targeting in most cases. When it’s done right, everyone benefits. Marketers are able to target users based on previous behavior, which in turns helps customers receive products and ads that are actually relevant to their interests. They get what they were looking for before they even realized they were looking for it. It’s scary but it’s cool. And frankly it saves me the time of trying to figure out what the heck it is I wanted in the first place.

Of course the issue that goes hand in hand with behavioral targeting is privacy. We want to make sure companies are disclosing their data collection practices to users. We want to know what type of information is being collected and whether or not it could be tied back to us. We want to know who has access to this information. We want to know lots of things that help to make behavioral advertising seem useful instead of creepy. I’m glad that Uncle Bob gives super awesome birthday presents, almost as if he “just knows” what it is I wanted, but I’m less impressed if he got that information by reading my diary without my permission. And I’m calling the police if he got his information by peeping through my bedroom window.

If you’re an Internet marketer, there’s nothing wrong with using behavioral targeting to help you present users with offers and services more relevant to them, but you have to be upfront.

Let them know that you’re collecting this data and include a detailed privacy policy describing how this information is going to be used, how long you’re going to keep it and who’s going to have access to it. Also, while I don’t necessarily have a problem with you tracking my movements through your site, Susan might so [I do. --Susan] give her an easy way to opt-out (and don’t make her feel guilty about it). Realize that, to avoid looking like a scary, creepy stalker, you’ll likely also have to define what these terms mean. Opt-out may be familiar terminology to you but it’s not to everyone. Some people actually have lives that exist outside the computer. I know.

The only time behavioral targeting concerns me is when users can’t turn it off and have no say in how their information is being used. It’s for this reason that the idea of Google going down the path of behavioral targeting scares me. Not because I don’t want them using the ridiculous amount of information they have on me, I don’t really care. It worries me for the other people. The people who are overly paranoid and don’t want anyone keeping track of their movements. If Google decided to start using the data it has on to you to “improve” your search experience then they could pretty much do whatever they wanted. It’s their engine. There’s no need for them to make you opt out of anything. If you want to “opt out” you have to go use Yahoo or Ask.com or Microsoft or something else. That’s an entirely new monster and very, very worrisome.

I’m curious to see what this two-day FTC town hall meeting will reveal. It’s supposed to bring together consumer advocates, tech experts, book nerds and industry representatives to discussion the consumer protection issues raises. It’ll be interesting to see what comes out of it.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 7/07 at 4:37 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

Google Hack: Finding Supplemental Results

Guest Entry by Mike Terry, SEO Analyst for Bruce Clay, Inc.

Like everyone else in the SEO community, we’ve been scrambling to deal with the recent blow of having supplemental results unlabeled and intermixed with the regular search results. We believe we’ve found a solution.

Even before Google stopped labeling supplemental results, it was useful to automate the process of finding and viewing them. If you had a very large site, it was nice not having to wade through several--or several dozen--SERPs just to find the supplemental pages. To that end, a small collection of obscure search command lines had been gathered by the community to filter out primary index entries and leave only pure, unadulterated supplemental results. The most popular of these was:

site:domain.com *** -asdfgh

… or variations which essentially did the same thing, such as:

site:domain.com *** -view

As we reported last month, however, this supplemental search results command line was disabled by Google. It’s fun to note that in the comments at that post just a month ago, folks were basically saying, “So they took away an undocumented command. You can still find supplemental results with a regular search. What’s the big deal?”

The big deal is that it was a portent. Soon all traces of supplemental results would be expunged from Google’s interface.

Aside from above, other syntaxes that once worked, but have since been purged include:

site:domain.com ~s
site:domain.com/&
site:domain.com * -asdf

With our old tools broken, we set to work finding alternatives. It didn’t take long. We hacked away, and eventually BC SEO Analyst Darren Slatten hit upon the magic incantation. Let’s build it up step-by-step (Note: Client www.finemoments.com used in examples by permission.):

1. Primary and Supplemental results mixed:

site:finemoments.com/boybabybirthannouncements/ (39 results)

2. Primary results only:

site:finemoments.com/boybabybirthannouncements/* (3 results)

3. Supplemental results only:

-site:finemoments.com/boybabybirthannouncements/* +site:finemoments.com/boybabybirthannouncements/ (36 results)

For the last, you’ll probably have to click on the link to show omitted results.

Item 3 does what we want. What it lacks in brevity it makes up for in workingness. It contains a “plus” (+) command and a “minus” (-) command. (The plus is technically superfluous; it’s just there for labeling.)

The plus command in 3 retrieves all documents prefixed by the specified URL fragment, including primary and supplemental content. The minus command in 3 retrieves all documents in the primary index, but doesn’t check the supplemental. This is crucially different from the behavior shown when combining some other special search commands and operators with the site: command.

After retrieving both sets, the plus set is filtered by comparison to the minus set and we’re left with only supplemental results.

Incidentally, if you try to use 2 above to just view the primary results, but Google finds “too few” primary results, it will show you a couple supplemental results. I haven’t verified how much is “too few”. It’s probably one of 0, 1, or 2, but I’ll leave finding the exact number as an exercise for the reader. If you suspect you have very few primary results, you can of course compare the results of 2’s command to the supplemental results (3’s command) and see if there are any matches. If so, you know 2’s results are not “legitimate”.

Here at Bruce Clay, we’re not one-trick ponies. We’ve developed other methods for identifying supplemental entries and mutually verified the results with each other. Unfortunately, we’re afraid Google will block these command lines, which forces us to hold in reserve some of our better techniques. Perhaps that’s not such a bad thing. After all, we must keep some secrets, mustn’t we?

Posted by Guest Author on 08/ 7/07 at 11:49 AM | Comments (5)
See more entries in SEO Tips & Tricks, SEO Tools, Search Engine Optimization

August 6, 2007

Online Stolen Identities, More Facebook News & Google vs. Yahoo

Social Networking Results in Stolen Identities

The Sydney Morning Herald (via Marketing Pilgrim) had a disturbing story this weekend about a 25-year-old female was being harassed after someone stole her identify and created a false MySpace profile in her name. The profile included comprising photos, lewd remarks, and the woman’s home address and phone number. How’d she realize someone had stolen her identity? Easy, odd men started appearing on her doorstep. Sweet!

Seriously though, that’s a pretty horrible way to find out that someone has been misrepresenting you online. The SMH states the obvious saying that Internet identity theft has become an alarming new form of stalking, harassment and defamation. Yeah, no kidding.

MySpace has a reported 3.8 million profiles in Australia, and really, there’s no way to know how many of those accounts are fraudulent. The best thing you can do is be vigilant about monitoring your identity. If you find someone is defaming your name with a fake profile, contact the site and make sure they remove it. Sad times.

UK Advertisers Step Away From Facebook

TechCrunch reports that major UK advertisers Vodafone, Virgin Media, Halifax, Prudential, First Direct, and the AA have all opted to pull their ads off the social networking site once they realized their ads were displayed on the Facebook group page for the British National Party.

Sorry, one quick question: Were they not aware this could be a problem beforehand? That their ads could appear anywhere on the site?

I’m just saying, Facebook is a pretty big site with groups and profiles for everything under the sun. Unless these advertisers signed something that said their ads would only appear on certain types of pages, they had to know they at least ran the risk of having their ads appear next to content they wouldn’t choose themselves, right? It seems if you were concerned about your brand, you’d read the fine print.

Two things are clear: Social networking sites are going to have to devise filtered advertising systems and Internet marketers need to be more vigilant about researching where their ads may or may not appear. (Or accept that their ad may be shown on the home page for the We Eat Puppies Facebook group.)

What’s the difference between Yahoo and Google?

The Google Operating System blog had a fun find on Friday highlighting a Yahoo Answers thread that asked: What’s the difference between Yahoo and Google?

Based on the responses the GOS blog found that Google is associated with simplicity and usefulness, while Yahoo is associated with multimedia and prettier, slower loading pages. Sounds about right.

If we continue to read the thread we also learn that Google’s email is still invite-only (shh, don’t tell them), that Yahoo has five characters while Google has six, and the engines are rated Yahoo, MSN and Google, respectively. I’m sorry, what?

Fun Finds

Slate reports that Rudy Giuliani’s 17-year-old daughter was openly supporting Barack Obama via Facebook until Slate sent her an inquiry about it. Uh oh, someone is so totally grounded.

Aaron Wall defines the SEO Learning Life-cycle.

The IAC bid goodbye to Google’s DoubleClick and pairs up with aQuantive’s Atlas.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 6/07 at 4:59 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Branding, Microsoft, Search Engine Optimization, Social Media

Building Communities Within Your Community

The always awesome Kim Krause-Berg issued a thought provoking post on Friday entitled Why Social Media Bugs Me, ME, ME! Why does social media bug Kim? Because there’s too much selling and pushing of irrelevant content. Kim doesn’t care about your agenda, she only wants the headlines that are important to her. This is Kim’s world, after all; why should she have to be subjected to your garbage?

When I read Kim’s post my first thought of was, “Go, Kim!”
My second thought was, “Kim, you’re not hanging out in the right neighborhood.”

I think a lot of people feel like Kim. They look at the social media sites and at first glance all you can see is the spin (Note: I spelled that with an ‘h’ the first time. Thanks, Danny.). There are too many people trying to sell to you, too much weak content, too many fake promises and too much waste. This is not what social media is about. It’s just not helpful.

The proper way to use social media sites is to find like-minded users and then break off into smaller, more engaged topic communities. Communities that actually encourage discussion about topics relevant to you specifically.

This is something I wish Sphinn offered. I’m becoming a total Sphinn head, but that front page of never-ending content is only useful for users trying to get a general idea of what’s going on. It’s not at all helpful for members who are trying to find a certain conversation, or better yet, trying to start a conversation. Danny had the right idea forming a Water Cooler section, but I think its open-endedness is keeping users away.

Not to sound like a pathetic brand evangelists, but I feel like this is what really separates Facebook from its competitors -- how strong the user-created communities are. If you’re looking for a social community that’s targeted to you and where you can hold actual discussions, then I think Facebook trumps most other sites. [Such. A. Fangirl. --Susan] - Why are you talking?

This is where the Kims of the world belong, assuming they/she can get passed the silly apps (it’s not always easy). Kim doesn’t want a generic social media site. She wants a site that’s targeted to her interests only and that will show her the headlines that she wants to read. Not what you want her to read.

Obviously one of the reasons I like Facebook is because it’s clean and it keeps me connected with my friends and contacts that I don’t get to see nearly often enough (Like Marie Howell from Bruce Clay Europe. Hi Marie!). But the other reason I like Facebook is a result of how engaged my groups are. I’ll admit, I may have my share of vapid Facebook communities (i.e. Red Sox Nation, most groups created by Ciaran Norris), but there are also a slew of groups present that really are valuable and introduce me to new ideas and discussions.

I’m talking about the Internet TV, vloggers and media disruptors group, the vaguely-titled Search Engine Optimization group, and the most powerful of them all, an SEO/SEM awareness group that I won’t properly mention thanks to Rae Hoffman’s colorful way of naming things.

The groups on Facebook are what allow me to skim through the headlines (of course some are more active than others). They’re what help me finds the gems before the clutter, they allow me to eavesdrop on industry conversations, and because they’re so small, no one is out to spam you. You’re not going to hear about how the Meta Keywords tag is the key to search engine optimization; you’re not going to see comments (or at least, not a lot) about how you absolutely must go check out someone’s site. Group members are producing content for the group, not for themselves. And that changes the spirit of everything.

Despite what Susan thinks, I’m not saying everyone needs to join Facebook. However, I think for someone like Kim (meaning you have a brain) the average, top level-only social media site isn’t going to do much for you. You’re going to be bombarded with topics that aren’t particularly relevant to you. The key to using social media is being able to form communities with the larger community. I’m sure there are other sites out there that let users do this, I just don’t know about them. I like Facebook.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 6/07 at 4:28 PM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Social Media

Being Clear in Online Conversations

Niniane Wong posted part 4 of her "geek conversations about love" series this weekend, a cute little AIM conversation between her and a friend who was taking his girlfriend to dinner for her birthday (the girlfriend's, not Niniane's). The conversation is short but amusing--Niniane asks where they're going for dinner, he provides her with the URL of the restaurant, as you do if you're a geek and you're going to dinner. (Note to local restaurateurs, get a Web site. It's important to geeks.)

Then something interesting happens:

ozzir: i was going to propose
niniane: WHAT?
niniane: really????? That's so awesome!!
niniane: omg
niniane: i'm so excited for you!
ozzir: ... that we stop celebrating birthdays
niniane: god damn it

Check out what just went down: Ozzir used language that was familiar but ambiguous. He started his sentence "I was going to propose" and then hits enter, stopping the communication (but not finishing the sentence, yet.) Niniane reacts immediately (probably typing with the same speed that makes Lisa sound like she's using a machine gun on her keyboard) with glee and congratulations, interpreting "propose" in its colloquially understood context of "propose marriage". Ozzir (who I'm guessing doesn't type quite as quickly or maybe he was just deliberately messing with Niniane [I think it’s just that he’s a boy. Boys are dumb. – Lisa]) finishes his sentence "...that we stop celebrating birthdays." Niniane is obviously disappointed by this turn of events [Imagine how the girlfriend feels. -- Lisa]. She was excited and then discovered that he wasn't talking about the same thing that she was at all.

Do you do this to your visitors and clients? When they come to your Web site, are you having the same conversation that they are? Do you give them the whole story up front or do you offer a misleading statement that gets them excited only to have a huge let down later?

Most people on the Web are doing research. They have a problem or pain that they want you to solve. In order to do that, you have to speak their language and communicate with them in a clear and unambiguous manner. Make your Web site speak to your visitors in a way that won't leave them confused or misdirected. It's okay to be cute and clever but not if you're leaving your visitors confused and dismayed.

This means all visitors, not just the human ones. Remember, search engines don't understand human context. You have to talk about things in a way that explains to them what's going on. What would a search engine have thought of Ozzir's statement "I was going to propose"? Are they smart enough to know that propose usually means marriage or would they have waited for the rest of the sentence to find out what was being proposed? You can't depend on Google to know everything that you do about your products or services.

When you're evaluating your site's effectiveness, don't just look at the content; look at the structure as well. Is your message consistent? Does it make sense? Can I go through the site and feel like I know what's going on all the time; or is every page jarring and disconnected, onto a new subject every time I turn around? If I've clicked through to your site, I have expectations that you're going to be worth my time. If you're not, I can go somewhere else.

It's like those cards that smart aleck parents get for their kids. The front says "For your graduation, I got you a brand new car..." then the inside delivers the zinger, "d." Sure, it's funny, but it also makes you look like a big jerk if you're doing it deliberately and a moron if you're doing it unintentionally.

Don't send out the wrong message to your visitors. You should build excitement and then deliver. Don't be a disappointment [*cough*Like Susan*cough* – Lisa]. Don't get me excited and then laugh at me when I find out that you weren't talking about what I thought you were. That doesn't make you clever, that makes me feel like an idiot and determined to never talk to you again.

Jerk.

Posted by Susan Esparza on 08/ 6/07 at 12:42 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Branding, Design, Search Engine Optimization

August 3, 2007

Friday Recap

Today’s edition of the Friday Recap is brought to you by Optimization Cat:

[Sorry, one of our analysts whipped that up in 30 seconds and I thought it was funny. (Thanks, Devon!)]

Moving right along then…

TechCrunch is suddenly offering dating services and bringing together missed connections. I’m not sure if this is some sort of TechCrunch/Craigslist marriage or if Michael Arrington is just a huge softie. The safe money is on the latter.

Speaking of “aw” stories: Facebook helped a mom reunite with the son she gave up for adoption 20 years ago. See? Facebook is the site that brings people together.

This week we learned that when Danny Sullivan isn’t building his boys a tree house, he’s making them play cricket and dressing them up in their mental institution whites. You’ve heard of cricket, right? It’s when British people play baseball with flat bats. Shouldn’t it be “criquette”? [Why would they spell it like that? They're not French. --Susan] - Because there’s a ‘q’ and a ‘u’ and it’s funny!

If you haven’t met 14-year-old blogger/podcaster/kickass kid Daniel Brusilovsky yet, you absolutely must go check out Robert Scoble’s recent interview. I know it’s hard to sit through Robert’s geek laugh, but this kid blew me away at WordCamp.

If you’re a Comcast subscriber, please take a moment to confirm that your phone number hasn’t been changed on you. Apparently they like to do that.

Internet Explorer was named the most influential tech product of the last 25 years? I’m sorry, did I enter bizarro world and not realize it?

Over at Science blogs, Kevin Beck asks if sugar is more addictive than cocaine. I’m sorry, have you seen the flood of Americans having a hard time fitting through narrow doorways lately? Clearly, we like us the sugar. We only go for white powder when it’s caked on our doughnuts.

Thanks to the Consumerist for helping me start that diet I’ve been thinking about. Did you hear about the deep-fried mouse that was found in a bag of Lays K.C. Masterpiece BBQ chips? Yummy.

A fun photo of a goat walking a tightrope with a monkey on its back. Sure, it’s cool, but can the goat do anything else? If not, I say we eat him.

I stumbled upon this photo and immediately developed a really sick feeling in my stomach. What do you think? That kid probably has no face left. But if Jake Brown can fall 50ft and walk away from it, I guess there’s some hope.

If you find yourself with some time to kill this weekend (I’m sure you’ll make friends soon, Susan), check out the 50 Must Watch Video Web Clips as deemed by the Telegraph. May I recommend the video of the fat well-nourished woman falling into a hole?

Oh, and here’s a list of places I don’t want to move and why. I know you were interested.

• Georgia: If you ask for a raise your boss may kill you dead. Yikes.
• Arkansas: After this woman is done breeding there won’t be any room left. Seventeen kids? Sweet Jesus. Someone get her a kitten.
• Japan: They make their cats (and small dogs) wear Hello Kitty costumes.

Things I Learned From BoingBoing This Week

• Where Susan’s parents got her from. [Race jokes, Lisa? Really? --Susan] - Oh, whatever, that comment had nothing to do with you being part Mexican and you know it.
• What the inside of a whale looks like.
• Some people think jellyfish weren’t scary enough with one head.
• Giant wall stickers are wicked awesome. I think the cow would look absolutely stellar in my apartment.
• What kind of cake to get Susan for her birthday. (Alert: Susan turns 100 on Aug. 10th!) [Racism, ageism...what next? (For the record, I'll be 26. And I like Starbucks giftcards.) --Susan] - You’re 46 and you know it.
• USB hubs are the new legos
• The reason Comic-Con fanatics should not be allowed to spawn.
• I want!

Everyone wave goodbye to Bruce. He’ll be heading to Australia shortly for next week’s Australia SEO training and Melbourne’s Search Engine Bootcamp. Jeremy and Des, we expect you to take good care of him and return him in time for SES San Jose!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 3/07 at 3:36 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Fun Stuff

August 2, 2007

Create your own SERP, Google Traffic, & Yahoo’s Big Decision

Create Your Own Search Results

Mike’s back across the pond blogging about a new Google feature that lets users add a specific URL to their search results so they can call upon it next time. It sounds like the added URL essentially becomes a bookmark. Once you tell Google that this page is important to you for a certain query, Google will make sure it appears on your page (followed by a pretty red asterisk) the next time you perform that same search.

I kind of like the idea of being able to associate different results with different queries. I wonder how effectively Google will be able to match up past favored results with user queries? Would the query have to be replicated exactly? Probably, otherwise this system would get completely cumbersome. Still, consider that forty percent of all search queries are users trying to find information they’ve already found before, and you can see how useful this feature may be.

I’d be curious to see this on a larger scale. How many URLs can I save before Google runs out of room on its SERP and stops showing me stuff? How good is Google about being able to remember stuff? I guess we’ll have to see how this all plays out. Regardless, a nice find by The Grehan.

Google Understands Traffic

Speaking of cool new features, Google has won me over with this one. Andy Beal tells us that Google finally understands the pain that goes along with living in California! When you use Google maps for major cities, Google will not only give you the standard directions and driving time, they’ll also estimate how long it will take if there’s traffic. Thank you, Google!

See, I knew it would take longer than 53 minutes to drive from work to LAX.

Does Yahoo Have To Buy Facebook?

Or any social networking site for that matter?

The New York Times is making the case that if Yahoo doesn’t want to be left behind in this social networking revolution then they need to hurry up and go buy one of the major players. The NYT seems to be hinting that Yahoo should try and pick up Facebook but then they estimate Facebook to be worth a cool $4.9 billion. I’m pretty sure Yahoo can’t foot that bill.

Personally, I don’t think snatching up a social network is going to do Yahoo a lot of good. I’d rather see them using that $4.9 billion to do actually do something interesting. Maybe they could host a really fancy company lunch day to figure out why all their top executives keep jumping ship? Or use it to get users excited about the brand again. There’s a new regime in place over there, right? Let’s see some life. If I was Yahoo, I’d also be somewhat concerned that Microsoft is about to come up and steal their ad thunder. But, eh, what do I know?

Fun Finds

Did you speak at BlogHer? No? Well, Stephan Spencer’s 16-year-old daughter did and she’s making your kids look like a bunch of couch potatoes. (Yes, I did just make fun of your children.)

Aaron Wall posted a great interview with Danny Sullivan on Tuesday.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 2/07 at 4:38 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Branding

Google Phone Rumors Follow FCC Decision

Lots of buzz today regarding the Wall Street Journal story that claims Google is cozying up to wireless operators to create a Google-rich phone complete with search, email and other mobile gems, while also developing their own handset at the same time.

Rumor is that those who have seen Google’s phone prototypes (yay, unnamed sources!) say the phone isn’t as “revolutionary” as the glorious fanboy creation. It really doesn’t even appear that Google is all that concerned with the phone’s specifics as long as it comes pre-installed with Google goodies. The WSJ says that Google is more than willing to give up control and allow wireless carriers to create their own phone based on a common set of specifications. Who cares about the phone itself, Google just wants to sell ads.

The WSJ reminds us of a fun Eric Schmidt quote:

"What's interesting about the ads in the mobile phone is that they are twice as profitable or more than the nonmobile phone ads because they're more personal," said Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt at the D: All Things Digital conference in May.

Yup, and that’s exactly what Google is focused on.

Google seems to be hitting mobile pretty aggressively, coming from both ends on this one. You can’t blame them. Local search is growing 40 percent faster than regular search, and mobile is an extension of that. It makes sense for Google to want to be there to try and own the space out of the gate. How else will they be able to snatch up the same disproportionate amount of revenue and market share that they have going with regular search?

At the same time, you have to wonder if they’re pushing too hard and turning off both wireless carriers and users. You know the wireless carriers have to be looking at Google with terror in their eyes. Google’s already invading their turf and causing trouble with the FCC, now you expect them to let Google inside their walled garden? Good luck. Sure, the carriers may get more subscribers by pairing with Google, but it’s not like the Goog is going to share that revenue.

And, of course, as a user, I’m paranoid about the idea of letting Google invade my phone. Don’t get me wrong, if I’m going to send an email, do a search or map something out via my phone, I’m going to use Google 80 percent of the time (Ask’s maps rock), but even I like the illusion that using Google is a choice that I have made out of my own free will. Even if it’s not true, and my Google barcode is showing, please just let me go on thinking that, okay? Don’t try and force it on me.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 2/07 at 2:31 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Google, Rumors

Bruce Clay Inc. Sounds Off On Supplemental

From the moment I walked into the office yesterday I knew Google had done something. Maybe it’s because I have a cosmic connection with Matt Cutts and the Goog, maybe it’s because I am unbelievably awesome, or perhaps it was because one of our SEO analysts came busting through my door shouting at me and ordering me to email “my friend Matt”.

Hey, what did I do?

I did nothing, but just as they hinted they would, Google decided late Tuesday night that it was finally time to kill the supplemental search results label from its index. We had seen the move coming for awhile, but now it’s official. You’ve already heard Danny, Barry, and Google’s take on the move, so I thought it might be fun to round up a collection of Bruce Clay’s finest and see what they thought of the supplemental label’s recent disappearance.

Here’s what they had to say:

Mike Grehan, Vice President of International Business Development

From an SEO point of view, going forward, getting rid of (or not highlighting where a specific URL is indexed) is great for us. If clients see pages that we are responsible for, marked supplementary results, they immediately think we're not achieving for them. It's bad enough them complaining that they're not "on the front page of Google" without having to explain why they're not only not on the front page - they didn't even make it out of Google's rest room.

Now, hopefully, we can get back to a situation where you're indexed but not ranked. And nothing worse (as in you're indexed, don't rank and actually, you're in the toilet.)

However, regardless of the way they let this seep out of the Google webmaster blog and elsewhere with their vague explanations... One has to consider this. If the supplemental results supported underrepresented categories at times, post Universal they have tons of extra material. Far richer to fill a page with a mixture of Universal results than just primary and secondary web pages. Ergo, think gap soon to be filled by rich Universal results, not supplemental.

Aaron Landerkin, IT Manager/former Senior SEO Analyst

The fact that supplemental results will not be marked as such sucks if you are a person who wants as much information as possible, like me. I don't like the fact that I can't quickly evaluate how deeply a site is being spidered or if there are any pages that need to have the content/linking improved like I could before. While the lack of information is somewhat frustrating to me, I doubt it will change the way that we do projects or evaluate sites, and if it does, it won't be that much.

In the end, it really isn't that big of a deal. I think it will be more of an annoyance when clients ask "How many pages do I have in supplemental?" than anything else.

Additional Aaron thoughts: By not labeling them, they are taking away the distinction between a "good page" and a "not-so-good page". It could be that they found that people wouldn't click on supplemental results because they were "supplemental" -- maybe they are trying to take away that distinction so that they can take away the perception that some results aren't as good as other ones.

Fernando Chavez, Senior SEO Analyst

“I don’t think this change does anything except make the SEO’s job more of a pain. It does not change the fact that these pages have very little link popularity and have little to no SEO value. Some people may argue that this change will be a positive because then clients will not worry about their pages being in the Supplemental Index. The problem is that we should worry about it. Personally, I’d rather be able to show clients their Supplemental pages and explain to them why it’s a problem and how we will try to fix it. Good communication is extremely important in these cases because the odds are that sites with a large number of Supplemental Results are not going to rank very well, at least not until these pages have moved into Google’s Primary Index. Nothing frustrates a client more than not ranking well without an explanation of why. This explanation is much quicker and clearer if we can simply do a site command to point out the problem pages.

Most Google search results will not be affected at all by this change because the pages that used to be labeled Supplemental Result will still have very little chance of ranking for any competitive phrases. They will still have all the characteristics of a “Supplemental Result”; they just won’t be labeled as such. Again, the change simply makes “Supplemental” pages harder to identify for SEOs, webmasters, and site owners. I hope that some way to find a site’s Supplemental pages will be added to Google’s Webmaster Tools very soon.”

So do we, Fernando. So, Matt, can we expect a new feature to the Google Webmaster Tools sometime soon? What do you think?

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 2/07 at 10:40 AM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

Are We Setting The Bar Too Low For SEOs?

Rand Fishkin outlines ten questions SEOs should be able to answer before they start offering search engine optimization services. Rand, we love you, we do, but you’re setting the bar far too low. What are the four major search engines? Why is Alexa inaccurate? What’s “the long tail of search”? I grill the guy at the fresh fish market harder than that.

There’s a difference between having a basic understanding of search and how the search engines work and being a professional SEO. Heck, the questions Rand was throwing out even Susan and I could answer without much thought, and trust me, people, you do not want either one of us optimizing your Web site. Your competitor’s Web site maybe, but definitely not your own.

I think my problem with Rand’s questions is that there were too many “what’s” and not enough “how’s”. Being able to identify something doesn’t mean you know how to use it. My computer-retarded mother (no offense, Mom) can probably name the four major search engines, but that doesn’t mean she knows how to use them. I can name most of the parts of my body, but I won’t be performing surgery anytime soon.

If you’re touting yourself as an experienced SEO, I don’t want to know what you know; I want to know how you’re going to use what you know. I want to know how you’re going to use Universal Search. I want to know how you’re going to help me get back into the index after I accidentally got myself booted out. I want to know how you’re going to make my site mobile-friendly. I want to know how you would handle [X] if [A], [B] and [C] happened. I’m not interested in a quiz to see if you’ve been doing your homework, I want a test that proves you’ve been reading ahead.

Susan and I have merely done our homework. We can answer Rand’s questions because we’re knowledgeable about search and the principles behind search engine optimization. We read the search marketing blogs, we read the occasional forum thread, we have more newsletter subscriptions than we do fingers and toes, and we work for one of the most respected search engine optimization companies in the industry. Just being in this office we’re constantly hearing things.

But we’re not practicing SEOs. We have no experience implementing anything. I may be able to do a site review on a client’s site and pinpoint everything that’s wrong, but I probably wouldn’t be able to fix it.

I feel like if the search engine optimization and search marketing industry is ever going to be taken seriously the bar has to be set much higher than it is right now. Eventually we need to require people have more knowledge than what they’ve heard from others. Eventually we need to start adopting some sort of industry certification or training program. Eventually a standard needs to be set.

Why not encourage that now? Let’s not reward people for being simply “good enough”.

Rand rattled off an interesting stat in his post, stating that less than 30 percent of the companies paying for organic search engine ranking services are getting a good deal. I don’t know where that number comes from but I absolutely believe it. Finding a good SEO is no easy task, mostly because business owners don’t know what to look for and because SEO wannabes can often spend months hiding behind fancy buzzwords while wasting your money.

I was trying to come up with a fun little anecdote that illustrated the difference between being an informed searcher vs being an SEO when I remembered Rand actually gave me one a few months a year or so ago (God, time flies).

Last September, Rand sat down for an interview with PayScale.com. (Unfortunately, the video appears to have been taken offline, so if I’m mangling your words here, Rand, I apologize!). During the interview, Rand discussed a recent interview process (I believe this was Operation: Find Jane) and explained that one of the questions he was using to weed out potential employees was something like, “how would you improve Craigslist.org?” Rand was likely looking for things like branding strategies or ways to increase traffic or conversions, but instead the interviewees, who were search-savvy but not necessarily SEO savvy, were talking about things like changing its color to make it prettier. Because, you know, SEO is all about being pretty.

In a time when search engine optimization is constantly being labeled spam, with everyday searchers claiming that all we do is muddy up the search results, it’s really time to start demanding more from the members of this space. If you can answer Rand’s questions correctly then you probably have a decent understanding of the search space, but that doesn’t mean you’re ready to start charging for SEO services.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 08/ 2/07 at 9:31 AM | Comments (4)
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization