For months I hear nothing about Ask, from Ask, or regarding Ask. No one reached out. No one made an effort to talk to Ask's loyal brand evangelists who had stuck by Ask through stupid marketing decision after stupid marketing decision. And then when Ask does make its return to the blogosphere, I'm being told that my report was bullshit. Where was the support?

Jim tried to explain was that the reason he hasn't reached out bloggers and brand evangelists sooner was because he was waiting until he had something to say. In March, he was still new and didn't feel like he has much to add to the conversation.

I didn't agree. In March, I needed Jim to step up and explain that the "rumors" were false.
If Jim would have spoken up maybe the conversation regarding Ask.com would be different. Maybe I would have allowed myself to believe him that they were still a true search engine. But he didn't, and as a result, the love and faith that I had in Ask.com left. What if by going silent for all those months you had officially alienated everyone who believed in you? What if it was too late now? What if people had moved on and didn't care?

Jim said that they would be reaching out now and trying to get their fans back.

He had to know I wasn't buying it. I was practically yelling out of frustration. Susan was Skypeing me and cheering me on to not let him off the hook. Robert Esparza, our VP of Operations, came in the room to make sure that I was okay and probably to find out from Susan who in the world I was speaking to like that.

I didn't mean Jim any disrespect, and I think he and Nick both know that the reason I was getting worked up was because of how passionate I was about the brand. The fact is, I don't believe them that Ask is trying to improve its status as a general search engine. They're not focused on core search. They're focused on buying their way into verticals. And that's not good enough.

Just because you're not asking users to pose queries in the form of a question doesn't mean you haven't become a question/answer based search engine. By focusing your energy on research and health and all the Smart Answers instead of improving the algorithm, you're branding yourself as the place to go for clear cut answers. It's not about searching for information. It's about looking things up. That's not search. That's not competing. That's getting away from being a core search engine.

How did the call end?

With Nicholas Graham serenading me with Waiting For a Girl Like You and then Jim purchasing the song for me on iTunes. I'm serious.

Is Ask.com serious about search? I don't know. But at least for now it seems they're serious about reaching out to bloggers. I guess that's a start. I haven't come around and forgiven Ask, but I'll continue to watch what they're doing and where they're going. With any luck, I'll be able to break out my once beloved-Ask.com messenger back once again. Until then, I'm still a broken-hearted former Ask.com evangelist.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/26/08 at 11:57 AM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Ask, Branding

June 25, 2008

SEO Headlines

Search Engine Optimization Can't Be Rushed

Birthday boy Lee Odden started a great conversation with his post about the importance of staying on top of your search engine optimization campaign and taking the time to do it right. We really can't stress this enough. SEO is not a one time deal, regardless of how big a company you are or how great your product is. Long term rankings mean truly investing in search engine optimization and continually tweaking campaigns for optimum performance. Working hard to get your site ranked and then forgetting about it is simply a waste of that initial investment.

Lee really hits the nail on the head with this:

"Companies that take their search engine visibility for granted or that ride the technical SEO loophole/manipulation train often get a hard smack back to reality when their online sales disappear. Orders start to slip or fall off the map altogether and the IT team red alert phone rings off the hook with calls from the business owner, "What the hell happened to our rankings???"

Amen, Lee. What happened was that you got lazy or you thought your big brand name would carry you through the SERPs. It won't, especially with how competitive things are today. How embarrassing is it when a savvy mom and pop shop is able to outrank the Best Buys and Nikes of the world simply with some elbow grease and creative thinking? Search engine optimization is important to your business. Treat it as such and don't let it fall by the wayside.

For a more in depth look at this issue, I'll point you back to our When is Optimization Necessary? And for How Long post from February 2007. Ah, I was just a baby back then. ;) [But not anymore! Send birthday cards for your favorite blogger to Bruce Clay and be sure to get them here before the weekend! -Virginia] Did you just call me old? You did, didn't you? Watch it n00b.

Siloing, Siloing, Siloing

Lots of chatter today about Bruce Clay, Inc.'s concept of siloing. Rae Hofffman talked siloing and PageRank sculpting in her recent Search Engine Land article about 404 pages and Shimon Sandler followed suit with Advanced SEO: Siloing Content. It's good to hear people talking about siloing, especially in the context of advanced search engine optimization techniques. See, guys, "advanced" doesn't have to mean "spam".

If you haven't silo'd your Web site you're missing out on serious ranking opportunities. Siloing splits the focus of your Web site by grouping content by theme, which in term allows you to rank for both your targeted and broad keyword phrases. It also takes into account everyone's favorite buzzword of 2008, PageRank sculpting, so that the most important pages on your site are getting the most juice.

We've written a lot about siloing in the past, so if you're still curious about what siloing is, how to do it, and how it can help your site, I recommend you visit our six-part newsletter series Building a Web Site Theme With Silos, as well as our blog post from earlier this year entitled Hey Rand, Do You Mean Siloing.

John Carcutt Wins 10,000 SEJ Prize, Donates It To Charity

Today Loren Baker revealed that John Carcutt was the winner of Search Engine Journal's Guest Blogging competition which ended in a blog off between John and Richard Burckhardt. When all was said and done, however, it was John's Are SEO Forums Still Needed? post that put him over the edge and helped him claim the amazing $10,000 prize package being offered by SEJ.

Amazingly, John says he will donate his prize package to a Mexican orphanage so that they can improve their Web site and raise awareness. How much do you love John? Like a gazillion percent, right? I know, me too!

Donating search marketing education to nonprofits is obviously something we're passionate about, as evident by our own SEO Charity Contest. For an update on that, check out the mid July edition of the SEO newsletter where we'll check in with our winner Ryan Freeman to hear about how his nonprofit is benefitting from white hat search engine optimization training.

Fun Finds

Chris Hooley opened up voting on the SEO Superlatives. Go cast your vote for me.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/25/08 at 3:05 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Fun Stuff, SEO, Search Engine Optimization

All Your Ads Belong To The Goog

Barry Schwartz says if you thought Google Trends for Websites was scary, meet Google Ad Planner. Beta testers can enter in demographic information and sites associated with their audience and Google will spit out a list of other sites their audience is likely to visit. Barry says he was able to find information like unique visitors, their income, gender, behavior, page views, category information, and lots more spy stuff. Right now the tool is in beta, so in order to play you'll have to request an invite.

The purpose of Google Ad Planner is obviously to help publishers find sites they want to place ads on by giving them more information about the publisher site. I get that, but good Lord is that a lot of information to be handing out. I wonder if this will send Google Analytics numbers through the roof, as well, as that's where they're getting their information, right? Knowing that Google pulls this info, if you're a publisher looking to find advertisers, you'd start using Google Analytics so they could get your information and make you look attractive, wouldn't you? I would. I'm not sure how I'd feel about this as an advertiser though. Would you trust the person who's selling you ads to also tell you where to put them?

Interestingly, Arthur Freydin gave readers an in depth walkthrough of Google Ad Planner and noted that it isn't yet integrated with AdWords. I wonder how long that will take to add on. Seems like a natural progression, for sure.

It's scary to see Google take complete control over the advertising world like this. Now, not only are they selling you ads, giving you tools to see how those ads convert and make them better, now they're telling you where to put them. I know; why don't you just hand Google your advertising budget and let them use it however they'd like. Oh wait. You're doing that now. Carry on then.

I know I said this last week, but it's a little scary to watch Google jump into this space. And poor ComScore and Nielsen? With Google Ad Planner they should just plan their permanent trips to the Caribbean now. Maybe you can get a deal if you book six months in advance? They're pretty much dead in the water. They can't compete with the amount of information Google has on its prisoners er, customers. No one can.

Barry has lots of screenshots of the new program over at Search Engine Roundtable. Head over there to check them out and then tell us what you think.

You'll also find some startling commentary by Brett Tabke in the WebmasterWorld thread on the topic. It's scary when you consider how many sources Google has for collecting your data, how much they know about you, and what they could possibly do with all that information.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/25/08 at 11:15 AM | Comments (3)
See more entries in Google, Pay Per Click

June 24, 2008

Advanced SEO is Traditional White Hat SEO

I wasn't lucky enough to attend SES Toronto so I'm still getting caught up on all the feedback and session reviews that came out of the event. In doing that, I stumbled across Andrew Goodman's review of the event where he talks a lot about the lessons that he and SES' Global Content Director Kevin Ryan learned last week.

According to Andrew, the key "thesis" of the event was this: The core stuff works. The core stuff has evolved tremendously. It is vitally important and it is still moving the needle.

In other words, don't be so quick to let go of the traditional search engine optimization techniques in favor of the big Web 2.0 buzzwords. White hat SEO is evolving and is all the advanced SEO you need to rank well in the search engines and bring targeted visitors to your Web site.

I'd also have to agree with Andrew's statement that white hat SEO is being undervalued and underinvested in as search marketers jump ship to experiment with social media and try their hand at buzzword bingo. There may be great value in spending the time and money creating Facebook applications, toying with viral YouTube videos, and seeing if MySpace is filled with anything other than strippers and bands, but that often comes with an awfully low return on investment compared to the traditional stuff. Andrew takes a cue from Seth Godin and says that building the marketing sprinkles on top of your meatball sundae won't get customers into the basic navigation towards key objectives. That Facebook application you just invested 2 months creating may look delicious but it probably won't get your customers headed down that conversion path; however, a site that is technically sound and properly siloed will. Every time.

No one is dismissing the power that can come with social media. I've seen companies and do it well. However, the best way to kill your Web site is to start focusing all of your energy on social media and losing your focus on the core factors like content strategies, natural link development, analytics, paid search, conversion funnel optimization, etc. There's a reason these tactics have stood the test of time. And despite what some "SEOs" will try and tell you, they are progressing, they can compete competitively, and they do work.

Black hat SEO and getting quick links through social media are sexy topics. They're the crowd pleasers at SEO conferences even though three quarters of those in the room could never implement them. I get the appeal. However, the power of white hat search engine optimization has been proven over and over again, even if it is considered boring or square to promote it. White hat works. Every time. Don't discount it.

I found the anecdote below recounted by Andrew especially amusing:

"One delegate approached me nervously about the schedule for late on Day 2. Would the link building session actually focus on link building? Because if he was going to have to hear more general talk about social media, he definitely did not want to attend that session."

Hee. It's good to know that not everyone is addicted to the Web 2.0 kool-aid.

Props to SES Toronto for putting on what looked like a great show that concentrated on the heart of what search engine optimization really is. With any luck I'll get there next year.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/24/08 at 12:28 PM | Comments (11)
See more entries in SEM Events, SEO, Search Engine Optimization

June 23, 2008

SEO Weekend Update

Should Google Adopt an Ombudsman?

Barry Welford left a comment on Michael Gray's Google Website Trends wrist slapping that asked if Google would benefit from hiring an ombudsman, or more likely a team of them. It's a novel concept, but I don't think it's particularly realistic.

Barry thinks hiring an ombudsman and bringing in a third-party would allow Google to "ensure equity". I can see his line of thinking here, but what does that even mean? You're going to have a really hard time nailing down what "fairness" and "equality" means on the Internetz and what rights users have vs. the right of Google to run its search engine however the heck it pleases. Is it fair that Google is telling the world what keywords you target, what your traffic is, and who's related to you? Is it fair that Google has established guidelines that you have to adhere to if you want to appear in their index? Is it fair that Google can remove your site from its index for any time and for any reason? Is it fair that Susan's Web site ranks higher than mine even though I'm clearly superior? Probably not, but Google is a business and it has a right to do what's best for its search engine.

Regardless of my displeasure with Google's decision to share your site information for kicks, I don't think Google is out to hurt its users or webmasters. I think they do a pretty good job most of the time of keeping their users in mind and doing what's best for the average Web searcher. Unfortunately for you and me, we're not the average Web surfer, which means we often feel wronged when Google does something to change how sites rank. In my opinion, as much as I love the geek journalism term, hiring an ombudsman would be a bad idea. Giving search marketers a person to complain to won't make them feel more heard or listened to. It's just going to raise their stress levels when they spend the entirety of their day ranting and complaining to that one person. [And slowly remove the will to live from that person. --Susan]

Are Video Conversations Next?

Kim Krause-Berg says that social media as we know it today is on its way out. People crave human contact and what we have today takes that away from us. We're missing the feeling of being with people, being able to look someone in the eye, and form a real connection with them. Kim harks to a new social media system where people can form satisfying connections. Is that why video conversation site Seesmic just earned another $6 million in funding? Is Seemic that environment or can we only develop "real" relationships in person?

I don't know. I don't even understand the appeal of Seesmic. I'm not interested in video blog comments and the idea of meeting strangers and then having conversations with them seems unappealing, if not downright terrifying. And as much as I like the social connections that I've formed on Facebook and Twitter, I realize that part (okay, a big part) of the reason why I love conferences is because I get to hug my friends and gossip with them and be silly with them in person. Maybe a system like Seesmic will be able to help bridge those two relationships.

What do you think the next level of social media is? Is it video conversation among different social groups? Would that help people like Kim get the interaction they've been missing? How do you want to interact with people online?

Question: When's The Best Day To Send An Email?

Answer: There isn't one.

Jeanniey Mullen explains that there is no longer a "best" day to send an email. In case you thought you still had control over your customers' actions, you don't. You can't simply send an email and expect your customers to act. Things must now be done on their terms, which means knowing when they're thinking about your product, what they want from you, and being aware of what they're using to read your emails. This is where checking site logs and looking at Web analytics information is super important because it gives you a clear snap shot of your core audience. If you don't know who your customer is and what they want, you don't even have a chance of getting their attention.

Fun Finds

Marty Weintraub (whose last name I can't spell regardless of how many times I try) offers up 24 different industry recruitment channels. Yowsa. Who knew there were so many SEO job boards? [We should be posting to each and every one of them. --Susan]

The Google Operating System blog gives me the heads up about how I can play my favorite YouTube video on loop by adding a simple parameter. Sweet!

Microsoft says if Yahoo fires Jerry Yang they may bid again. Yikes.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/23/08 at 4:31 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Branding, Email, Social Media

Social Media Used To Be About Sharing

Li Evans had a stellar post over at SEM Clubhouse entitled What Is Social Media's Purpose? Honestly, It's Not About Links. Li's post was inspired by some of the social media advice that was presented at last week's SES Toronto that included creating multiple user accounts, tricking people into being your friend, and faking credibility in the names of achieving fame and links. As Li so eloquently points out, social media isn't about links or deceiving your audience.

What is social media about? Let Li break it down for you:

"Social Media is about conversations and the opportunity to share experiences through those conversations. Links are merely a by-product of a great social media campaign, and search engine rankings are merely a by-product as well. If you are measuring success in social media by the number of links you've acquired, you are really and truly missing out on what social media is all about."

Amen.

It's really quite sad what the search engine optimization community has done to social media. In all seriousness, I get why Diggers hate us. In a lot of cases we've done our best to ruin their community: creating content solely to get links, trying to game the system with multiple accounts, asking an unnatural number of friends to push our content, and basically insulting the entire community in the process. If I were them, I wouldn't like search marketers or search engine optimization either. Social media is a powerful tool, but in marketers' quick dash to capitalize on it, they've forgotten what it's really about.

Many of today's SMOs look at social media as something they can manipulate to get links. And that's just sad. That's not what social media is based on. It may sound naïve to say this (apparently that's my niche), but the best link bait is the stuff that produces smiles or increases knowledge on its own. It's the content that is passed around because people have connected with it on a real level. It's Susan twittering her excitement that Where The Hell is Matt? is back; it's two LOLCats complaining about rent in NYC and it's David Mihm's amazing Local Search Ranking Factors guide. It's the stuff that produces warm smiles or it's the amazing content resource that users want to bookmark so they can come back to it. If focus your campaigns around the content and not about the links, you'll have a much more successful viral or social media campaign, and one that you'll have to do far less work to pushing, promoting and annoying your friends with.

I really wish that was the angle most often promoted at search conferences and in social media guides. Obviously there's an element to social media that involves pushing content or helping it to gain visibility by somewhat "unnatural" means. But there's a difference between "helping" content succeed and violating the spirit of the environment in order to do that.

If you're worth the money your clients are paying you, you shouldn't have to trick people into pushing your content. Creating 15 Digg or MySpace accounts with different personas and personalities isn't clever social media optimization. It's spamming; it's deceitful; and it's kind of sad.

Social media is about enabling the conversation about your brand or company to happen. It's about authenticity and generating an image that your customers can trust. If you're attempting to do that bartering votes for the creation of Wikipedia pages, you're going about things the wrong way.

Li does a good job summing things up:

"Use social media for true customer engagements, be transparent, be honest, be who you are. People want to interact with real people from companies, they want Truth in Marketing. They want to tell stories about how great your employees are, what kind of heart you have and how you care about your customers and audience. The audiences couldn't give a damn about your links, or how many sock puppet accounts you have."

Agreed. And it'd be nice if that's what all of our speakers were preaching at conferences. Otherwise you get conference goers like Rahaf Harfoush asking where the ethics were in your panel on Social Media Success. I think they were left at MySpace's door.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/23/08 at 11:48 AM | Comments (4)
See more entries in Social Media

June 20, 2008

Google Trends for Websites? Not Cool, Google.

Quite a bit of commotion today in response to Google's decision to do something with all your site data they've been sitting on. Starting today, savvy site owners can use Google Trends for Websites to do some competitive research and discover unique site metrics like estimated traffic, also searched for, also visited, and traffic for different regions/countries. And it looks like there's no way to opt out. Wow, way to go, Google!

In order to power its new spy tool, Google is combining Google Analytics data, search volumes and other third-party market research. The traffic information will be neatly plotted out for you in a line graph, with the rest of the information listed underneath. Site owners will have the opportunity to get secret data on five domains at a time.

It does come with some caveats though. For example, beware that the information may or may not be totally accurate. Since Google Trends is in Google Labs they claim to have no way to improve the quality of the data. They also add that since the data is estimated and aggregated over a variety of sources, it may lose some of its validity. Then by all means, still put it out there.

You're also dealing with a pretty limited data pool as the information typically only goes as far back as mid 2007. This is Google "Trends", right? How well can you spot long term trends with only a year's worth of data? And if you're a small business, don't even bother putting in your domain. You probably don't receive enough traffic for Google to care about you or your competitors. Sorry. Have a cookie instead.

Barry Schwartz calls the tool "a great way" to find additional keywords, link partners and resource, but I'm not so sure. Personally, it makes me a bit uncomfortable that Google has no problem handing out site owner's information like this. What if you don't want your keywords and traffic information published for everyone to see? Sure, there are plenty of other ways to get this information, but let those other independent companies do it. Google's just shelling it out there for no reason and without getting consent first. Lame. I'm no Google conspiracy theorist, but it makes it hard to continually hand over information to Google when you know "features" like this are running around in the back of their heads. Who knows what's coming next.

Again, it's not that the information Google's handing out is super secret, but what in the world made them think site owners would want them to use their information in this way? It's also interesting that you can't get information about Google itself, but you can get information about Microsoft and Yahoo. Now, now, Google, play fair.

I don't know. Take the new feature as you will, I guess. Just try and use it for good.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/20/08 at 3:45 PM | Comments (6)
See more entries in Google, SEO, Search Engine Optimization

Friday Recap

Happy Friday, everyone. Any fun weekend plans? I think I'm going to camp out in the office this weekend. It's too hot outside to leave. I fear I may melt. I wonder if I can get coffee and ice cream delivered here? Hmm...

In honor of the Boston Celtics and their complete shaming of the pitiful LA Lakers, I give you this:

Anything is possible, my friends. Anything. Boston is the greatest sports city in the world. [Why is he rocking like that? He's giving me motion-sickness. --Susan] Seriously. Shut up. The man is a warrior and just brought another championship back to Boston. I'll kill you.

It's also home to some of the most debauchery-filled bloggers, or at least that's what Boston's The Phoenix would lead you to believe. They compare "real" journalists with bloggers. They're thoughts are pretty much summed up by this photo:

Actually, that's probably pretty accurate. Go Boston!

Vanity Fair created its own visual of what the blogosphere looks like with their blogopticon. Notice how Jason Calacanis managed to sneak into frame there.

A universal edit button has been created to alert people when they've stumbled upon a wiki. Is this really necessary? The only people who edit wiki's are nerds. And nerds never need to be notified of a nerding out opportunity. [We can smell them; it's almost like a 6th sense. --Susan]

Chris Hooley is taking category suggestions for the SEO Superlatives. Maybe if we participate and encourage him, Hooley will continue to remember that he has a blog and that sometimes these things called "posts" can go there. The blogosphere called while you were away, Chris, it said it missed you. Stay.

Tamar Weinberg posted a great public message to Universal Music Group after they took down Weezer's viral Pork & Beans video. I typically hate these kinds of videos, but Tamar was born to be a social media activist. Her passion really comes through and sells it. Hopefully Universal will hear her plea. Awesome job by Tamar on this one.

Google Blogoscoped introduced me to Totlol, a YouTube for toddlers aka daycare for the digital age.

The newly engaged Loren Baker (congrats, Loren!) got himself all worked up when Google invaded his private property and sent their spy cars into this private community to film it. Loren's pretty hardcore about taking them to task. Check it out.

I'd be mad too though, I guess. You don't want kids getting an up close and personal view of your home. You may find them swimming and vomiting in your pool later. Gross.

PingPongPie asked who does Matt Cutts follow on Twitter and then created a list with the answers. It's interesting in that I was able to find some familiar faces that I didn't know had Twitter accounts. I can proudly say that, yes, Matt Cutts does follow me on Twitter. I'm sure he completely enjoys hearing about my life dilemmas and ranting. Sorry about that, Matt.

Lifehacker gives us a cheat sheet for power naps. Mmm, naps.

Looking for something fun to do this weekend? Build your own rollercoaster. All you need is some scrap metal and a hammer. No engineering experience necessary.

Things I Learned On BoingBoing This Week:

• My birthday is next weekend and I would very much like one of these fancy ice cream scoops. Preferably the pink one. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
• A woman lived like a hamster for 3-6 days (they're not sure?). That's nothing. Susan's been living as a hermit for almost 27.
• A pedal-powered tennis ball launcher? Sweet!

Oh, and buck up Yahoo, things aren't so bad.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/20/08 at 11:55 AM | Comments (3)
See more entries in

June 19, 2008

SEO Headlines

According to Yahoo weather, it was 105 degrees earlier in Simi Valley, CA. The palm trees and ocean views don't look so inviting right now, do they? Yeah, I didn't think so. Can I come live wherever you are?

Yahoo Opens Up YMail. Or At Least To Some

For reasons I don't quite understand, Yahoo began offering email addresses under two new domains: rocketmail.com and ymail.com. I guess that's nice. Though I tried to register a ymail email address and Yahoo said I had to wait. I guess they're rolling out the feature slowly and I'm not yet on the invite list. Don't these people know who I am? How am I supposed to secure thelisa [at] ymail [dot] com if they let everyone sign up before me?

But enough about me.

Yahoo says the goal behind the new email accounts is to "attract Web surfers unhappy with their current addresses". They argue that there are plenty of people out there who feel "stuck" with an "ugly" email address. Yahoo's here to help! Or at least they're pretending that's why they're here. They're really just shouting "ymail is kind of like gmail, right? It sounds the same. Use us! OUR EXECS ARE LEAVING!" Besides sounding a bit desperate, I just don't think it's a good idea. Why fragment your brand like that? And are there really that many people feeling slighted over their email address that they need to create a brand new domain and give life to an old one? Do they realize what a pain it is to switch email addresses in the first place? Who wants to invite that amount of misery on themselves? [Tell me about it. Four years and I still can't get my relatives to stop emailing my hotmail account. --Susan] Just because we're not talking about me anymore doesn't mean we're going to magically start talking about you. No one even likes you. Don't pretend you get email.

Icahn Issues The Ichan Report

Everyone's favorite thorn in Yahoo's side Carl Icahn has launched his own blog to (hopefully) continue to further torment Yahoo with! If only because it's kind of fun to watch Yahoo squirm.

According to the New York Times, Icahn's blog looks to "address the lack of accountability on the part of corporate boards and the myth of shareholder". Sadly, however, it doesn't look like we're going to hear any behind the scenes Yahoo/Microsoft dirt. We're not even going to hear him take Jerry Yang to task. Bummer.

C'mon, Carl. You can't tease us! If you're going to start a blog, give us something entertaining to read. None of this veiled and abstract stuff you're doing. We know you want to bring Yahoo down and get it sold to Microsoft. Use your new microphone.

[grabs popcorn, waits.]

Fun Finds

Jeremy Zawodny announced that he'll be heading to Craigslist in July. Does that not seem like the most random job shuffle ever?

Barry Schwartz confirms that page load time now is a real factor in Google's AdWords quality score.

Michael Arrington calls out the A.P. for quoting 22 words of his content. He says they now owe him $12.50. Hee. Sometimes don't you just love Arrington?

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/19/08 at 5:16 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Yahoo

Fight For Your Right To Desphinn

I've come across a few threads on the subject of desphinning and now I'm just plain curious: Do you desphinn your colleagues when you visit Sphinn? If so, what criteria you use? Do you simply have to disagree, find the content offensive, or maybe you only desphinn when something is blatantly spam? Would you desphinn more often if it was anonymous and you didn't have to provide a reason?

Yeah, you would, don't lie!

As most are aware, the desphinn feature was added to the site back in February. At the time, Michelle explained how it should be used as follows:

"You see a topic on the What's New page and you either disagree with it or otherwise think that it doesn't deserve to go Hot - make it to the home page. You click the "Desphinn" button, submit your comment (which is required and will be public) explaining why you disagree with the post. Then a negative sphinn is applied against the story. For stories on the home page, that have already gone hot, the procedure is the same. "

Cool, but here's the thing, hardly anyone actually uses it. Why?

I'm not the most active Sphinn user, but I do visit the site every day. I subscribe to RSS feeds for both the Hot Topics and the New Topics. I may not vote on every story that comes my way, but I do click through to the site and spend a decent amount of time reading the articles, leaving comments when inclined, and seeing what the conversation is about. In that time I've desphinn'd a total of three articles - two were pure fluff that I didn't think deserved to hit the front page and one was an article that I found offensive and of little value. That's it. Three articles.

And those really are my two tests. I will only desphinn content for the following reasons:

• The content has no real value to the community and doesn't deserve to be listed.
• It's offensive to either me or to my community.

I won't desphinn if it's spam (there's a Spam button for that), if I disagree with it, if it's written by a competitor, etc. I have two reasons and that's it.

Even saying that, I know there are times when I've wanted to desphinn something but haven't and there are reasons for that. Kevin Muldoon was on the same page wondering why don't Sphinn users desphinn. I think the reason for that is pretty clear: no one wants to make enemies or be seen as a jerk. No one wants to offend anyone else. There have definitely been times when I wanted to desphinn something but then didn't when I saw who posted it. Let's not lie; some of us take these things more to heart than others. I don't want to kill anyone's morning.

At the same time, I also don't think walking around on eggshells, leaving comments you don't mean, or turning a blind eye to bad information is good for this industry. If something doesn't deserve to be promoted to the front page, for God's sake, desphinn it. That's why the feature is there. You're not insulting anyone, you're protecting the quality of a social community that hundreds (thousands?) turn to every day for Internet marketing information.

Another thread on Sphinn asks if desphinning something is rude. It's only rude if you want it to be. There's no reason why you can't desphinn something without coming off like a jerk. Simply hit the desphinn link and then state your case like an adult. People should be able to handle that. If not, it's because we hand out too many trophies these days and issue too many unwarranted pats on the back. Realize that sometimes people just have differing opinions. It doesn't mean everyone hates you. Realize that you don't have to Sphinn a post about who Matt Cutts follows on Twitter simply because Matt is mentioned in the title and he's SEO royalty. Matt, I love you, and I'm glad to have you as a follower, but who cares? :)

Part of me really wishes the option to desphinn was anonymous, similar to how you can vote up and down people's comments. I completely understand that Danny is trying to promote transparent and ethical behavior, but what he's really done (with the best intentions) is to create an environment where people are afraid to speak up. People often say that anonymity is what fuels bad behavior on the Web, but it's just as dangerous when people are afraid to act because they don't want to be seen as the bad guy. Rendering people into silence is, in my opinion, even worse than giving an idiot a microphone.

If there's something on Sphinn that shouldn't be there, desphinn it. If you disagree with something to the point where leaving a comment doesn't seem like enough, desphinn it. Some of our more sensitive industry faces may get a case of hurt feelings (I proudly admit to sometimes playing on Team Oversensitive SEO Babies), but as long as you're acting professionally, they'll get over it.

Go find something that doesn't belong on Sphinn and desphinn it. It may just make your entire day.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/19/08 at 4:08 PM | Comments (4)
See more entries in SEM Industry

How Much Testing Is Too Much?

I was reading Search Engine Land yesterday (as I'm known to do) and came across Jon Miller's article how about much landing page testing is too much. Jon offers up a highly fancy-looking equation that you can use to determine when you're done testing your landing page. It made me giggle. A landing page test calculator? Really? There are three very easy ways to know if you've done enough testing and none of them include a calculator:

1. You've reached the burn rate where the test findings will breed only minimal results.
2. When there are other, more critical elements or pages to test.
3. When the person in charge of your testing process threatens to quit if you make them run one more darn A/B experiment.

See how easy that was? And no formula involved!

Truthfully, whether you're doing A/B Testing where you test one element or a time or you're using a Multivariate testing tool like Google Website Optimizer, you can test forever. It doesn't matter if you're talking landing pages, new site elements or better copy on interior pages, the iterations can go on forever. There will always be a better way to word something, a better place to put that image, or a new angle that your customers may die for. But at some point, the benefit of conducting the test looks like this:

(I have mad MS Paint skills, eh?)

Most search marketers will know intuitively when they've reached the burn rate for a particular test. It's when you implement the change and find it didn't improve the user experience on your Web site or result in a lower cost of conversion. When you get there, move on and start testing another page or site element. There's no use having one perfect page if the rest of your site is falling by the wayside.

When you're doing your testing, conduct it in one week increments so you take into account any day of week or time of day effects. Your test may run several weeks long or a even solid month depending on what you're testing. You shouldn't end your test until you have complete confidence in the answer it's giving you. Sometimes that means running something more than once.

Make you sure you have enough data when you're conducting your tests and don't ignore your baseline measurements. Your customers may have preferred the "old" way to the new one. Don't be afraid to admit that to yourself.

Once you're confident with your results and reach that elusive burn rate, move on to another page element and start the process again. Search engine optimization isn't about perfection; it's about balancing your "good enoughs".

But don't forget to come back in the future. Once you think you have a page optimized, it doesn't mean you'll have it optimized forever. Your users and what they're looking for change so frequently that it's important to go back and restart old tests. You can step away, but you have to come back and retest and re-measure things like clicks, engagement indicators, user behavior, etc.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/19/08 at 2:42 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Analytics

June 18, 2008

Understanding The SEO Site Review Process

In many instances, the search engine optimization process officially starts with the site review. It's when your optimization vendor gets his or her first look at your Web site and really starts looking for holes and ways to improve it. Sometimes it's simply one person who goes over your site and other times it's a group of people, either way, however your vendor handles this process will impact life of your campaign.

At Bruce Clay, Inc. site reviews are a group process. When a new client comes on, a site review is held where every analyst with some free time congregates in one of our conference rooms and helps the lead on the project pick apart the site with a fine toothed comb. They tear apart your source code, make fun of your '90s graphics and research what your site is about it. I've gotten to sit in on a few and they're known to get pretty lively as our analysts debate what's the best series of techniques for a particular site and how the lead analyst should proceed. Since I'm not a real SEO, I like to sit in a corner and watch the masterminds work. I'm usually given the job of guarding the Red Vines. And by "guarding" I mean "eating them". This keeps me occupied and ensures I don't cause any trouble.

Here's a (very) condensed look at some of the factors our SEO analysts look at when conducting a site review:

The Initial Viewing: The lead analyst on the project is given the keys to the projector and throws your Web site up on the big screen. We spend a few minutes checking it out, clicking on links, and trying to get a feel for who you are, what you do and what your visitors are coming to you for. It's a pretty quick "look and feel" test that we give ourselves to help the analysts who are new to the project catch up. We'll also look at some of your competitor sites to see what you (and we're) up against.

Server Information: Once we familiarize ourselves with your Web site, it's time to look at your server information. This includes check out your IP address and making sure it hasn't been left exposed so that it renders your domain, seeing if there are any internal redirects (302 or 301), and checking for duplicate versions of the home page through www. vs. non-www, trailing slash or index page, secure and non-secure, etc. We'll also check to see if your site has a robots.txt file, how 404s are handled, as well as any dynamic pages or query strings. We like to start with this section to make sure that, above everything else, the site is technically performing the way it should. It makes the ongoing process much easier if the server is performing properly.

On Page Factors: Once we confirm that the site is stable, it's time to take a look at all of the on page factors. We'll conduct a Google site: search to see how many pages are in the primary index vs. how many have been filtered (if any). From here, we can see any duplicate or deficient Meta tags and/or content. We'll also do spot-checks to check for duplicate content where we'll take a paragraph of text and search for it in Google. You'd be surprised how useful this is for identifying potential duplicate content problems on a Web site.

We'll also throw the domain in the FunnelWeb Profiler to catch anything overlooked from the site: command. This is especially useful for finding pages missing Meta tags. From here we can also see the linking structure of the site, the most prominent keyword phrases used, etc. Once we've completely gone through that, we'll run the home page through our Keyword Density Analyzer to see more on-page information including use of Heading tags, links, keyword densities, W3C Compliance, etc. The KDA found in our SEOToolSet is one of our strongest tools available for checking the health of a Web site.

Check "Feel of the site" Factors: Once all of that is complete we'll head back to the site to take a closer look. This time we're focused on checking out your site map (if there is one), looking for any resources that could be used as Link Magnets, and analyzing the amount of content per page. This really helps us get a feel for the "flow" of the Web site. In this phase, we'll start looking for potential silos (both physical and virtual) and pull out source code from pages to see how they are structured (table-based or div-based). This information is particularly handy when it's time to do page edits. We'll also look at anchor text links, whether or not the global navigation matches the directory structure, if image links contain appropriate ALT attributes, and any internal scripting that should be externalized. From there we'll check out which external sites you're linking to and whether the number of outbound external links is close to or exceeding the number of inbound links to the site.

Keyword Research: The last step in our initial site review is to start thinking about keyword research. We want to know what opportunities are out there for your site to rank. We'll use Google to search for any potential keyword candidates to see what kinds of results are returned and how competitive the space is. From this, we can come up with a general game plan of terms to focus on and on which pages to optimize certain keywords for. It also gets us thinking abut the natural silos that are rest within your site and which ones will need to built out in order to get your site ranking for both your broad and specific keywords.

Recommendations Discussed: Once everyone has gotten a chance to explore the site, our analysts will start talking about recommendations that should be made to the site. It's really neat to see how tactics are customized to fit individual clients' goals and how our analysts brainstorm ideas together. At this point the analysts will typically break and I reluctantly walk the Red Vine container to Bruce's office. But not before I've finished my gazillionth string of the Lord's candy.

The search engine optimization process is delicious.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/18/08 at 4:57 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in SEO, SEO Tips & Tricks, Search Engine Optimization

Can YouTube Save Itself With Long Video Play?

A report from the Silicon Alley Insider says that YouTube will shift its strategy as it tries to end its monetization woes with long-form video. YouTube is currently running a test with content partners to abolish the 10 minute video maximum and replace it with a maximum file size of 1GB, which equals nearly an entire full-length movie. Well, good luck with that, YouTube.

The reasoning why YouTube is heading to long-form video makes sense from a business perspective. You can only place so many ads in a 30 second video. Creating longer videos means more room for ads. But this is YouTube. By trying to make long-form video the standard on your Web site, you're changing the core of your site. If YouTube now goes the long-form route, they virtually become a brand new site and risk alienating their entire audience. YouTube's about short videos. It's about sleeping cats, skateboarding injuries and the quick stuff. Trying to change that won't be easy.

There's talk that YouTube will try and partner with indie and small-time filmmakers to get them to upload their video to the site and use YouTube as a distribution channel. It's a noble goal but I question their ability to pull it off. First, indie filmmakers are usually pretty concerned about video quality, aren't they? Are they going to spend time mastering a film and then upload it to YouTube? I'd be surprised if they did. Even if they did, how much money will be in independent films? If Google wants to do long-form video they're going to have to start paying for content. The major networks and film studios, the kind of long video viewers would actually watch, aren't going to go for a revenue deal. They're going to want to be paid.

And second, you can't just change your spots because you're trying to figure out how to monetize your Web site. No one goes to YouTube for a 2 hour video. That's not their audience. You can't suddenly be something you're not simply because it may make you more money.

Or maybe they can?

YouTube includes video analytics now, right? It'd be interesting to take a look at some of their 10 minute videos and see what the viewership is. Are people watching? Have they accepted it?

I'd be pretty cautious if I were YouTube not to ruin everything that your audience loves about you. There are a host of video upload sites on the Web and they all serve different niches. YouTube is about short term video. Hulu is about finding television shows and other professionally licensed content. Seesmic is about participating in a video conversation. The reason these sites are successful is because they do one thing really well and stick to it. It'll be interesting to see if YouTube is successful at changing its spots and re-training its audience. People are starting to accept longer videos, so they have a shot. It's just not one I'd bet on.

NewTeeVee says that YouTube is slated to make a big announcement tonight at 6 pm PT in Los Angeles, so maybe we'll get some insight in what they're planning to do.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/18/08 at 3:43 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Branding

Joe's Jeans, Please Fix Your Web site

aka The Dangers Of Creating Your Site Entirely In Flash

I love jeans. I also love Web sites. Imagine how much I love Web sites that sell jeans! Because it's Wednesdays and I'm on a bit of a sugar high, I thought it would be fun to call out one of my favorite jean Web sites and show how their lack of search engine optimization is hurting their bottom line.

Welcome to Joe's Jeans (warning: lots of half-naked girls. Click at your own risk). The site is super sexy, right? C'mon, there are ladies shimmying around in whichever jeans you show an interest in, it's gritty in a way that jean sites should be, and overall, the site just uses Flash in a lot of really sexy and interesting ways. Call me a nerd, but the page load countdown is awesome. I know, I lead a sad life.

Truthfully, Joe's Jeans is one of my favorite jean-retailer Web sites. The only problem is instead of following best practices for search engine optimization and using Flash as a complement to their Web site, they basically designed the entire thing that way. Which means only 120 or so pages are indexed and the site ranks for nothing except its own name. The only way to actually find the Joe's Jeans Web site is to type it in directly. Search engine optimization fail.

The only pages on the Joe's Jeans site NOT in Flash is the Shopping silo (and various PDFs, Contact page), which is built entirely off bad shopping cart software where none of the Meta data has been edited. Yes, the Meta data on each page looks like this:

Guys, you want to fix that. By actually paying attention to things like your Title, Keyword and Description tags, you may actually rank for some of your proprietary terms like Honey jeans or Cigarette Jeans. Give it a shot. Your jeans are teh awesome. People want to know about them. You shouldn't be letting Google just strip your Title off DMOZ.

The engines can't index your Web site because the entire thing is in Flash. Two suggestions: Either edit your Shopping silo so that there's an HTML link from your home page pointing there and it contains real content and keywords OR put your Flash elements in a noscript tag with a separate file for each category and put the contents of the Flash file there in a search engine readable form. While you're at it, try adding content to those bare-as-a-baby's-bottom pages of yours. For serious. There's not an ounce of content on any of your pages. Have you even seen your Web site? Its pictures of pretty people in jeans. I get it, you're selling jeans, but sometimes words are good at selling things too. They establish trust, credibility and they help you to rank for the things that are relevant to you. [Plus they'll help me pick which pair of awesome jeans I want to buy first. --Susan]

Interesting content is also a great way to get links. And seeing how the only way you're seemingly ranking right now is through your 2,385 or so inbound links, links are good for you. How about creating a guide for buying the perfect pair of jeans or a fun movie that showcases the debauchery these ladies are having in your jeans? Do you know the link potential for that done right?

And touching on a Usability Fail: Let me be able to BUY your jeans from the jeans pages. I love your Honey curvy jeans. I'm watching the Flash animation and seeing the pretty girl walk in them and hoping that my butt could look that cute in those jeans. You've got me emotionally pining for these jeans. I've forgotten everything my father has ever told me about saving money and not spending $200 on a whim. But in order to buy them, I have to leave the page I'm on and head to the Shop silo. From there I click on Jeans->Women and am presented with no real categories but a picture scroll bar on the bottom of the screen.

Then I get to go through the annoyingly arduous task of trying to find the jeans I fell in love with on the other page. At this point I have already forgotten what they're called, my emotions have settled, and I'm headed over to some other Web site selling overpriced jeans with silly names. At least they make it easy for me to waste my money.

[While I'm on your shopping cart I also notice that we've now switched from www to non-www, so you perhaps want to fix that. Also, you're using relative links instead of absolute. Search engine optimization no-no.]

The bottom line is that all the bad stuff about your Web site is making me forget all the good. Like how hot your jeans are. How I like how you're appealing to customers by showing what the jeans look like on and how they move (even though they'll never look that good on real people). How dynamic the site is.

But without search engine optimization, it doesn't matter how cool your site looks. People can't find you. A search for [honey jeans] brings up Nordstroms, Lisa Kline, an eBay store, other online merchants, and a blog in your name that I don't think you run. The only place you appear is on the paid side. Not good. Most users aren't going to click over there. They're going to stick to the organic side even if they don't even realize that's what they're doing. They're going to buy from all the other Web sites that are ranking for your proprietary terms. You're better than this and you need to fix your Web site so that you rank for all your different product lines.

I have an idea. We'll do your search engine optimization. You get me a free pair of some of your $200 magic jeans that will make me look like I have a butt. Deal? Have your people call my people. [Lisa, you're not allowed to make those kinds of deals. Unless you get me a pair of the Socialite Kickers while you're at it. --Susan]

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/18/08 at 11:09 AM | Comments (2)
See more entries in SEO, SEO Tips & Tricks, Search Engine Optimization

June 17, 2008

Improve Your Company & Brand Through Listening

Over on the Web Digest For Marketers blog, Larry Chase has a great post about the importance of listening. It's a brief 200ish words, but I'd really ask you all to read it. It's worth it, both to your company, your brand, and really, yourself.

As people, we're not always the best listeners. We hear what we want to, assume we know where the story's going, or think we can't learn from whoever is speaking because we're obviously smarter than they are. It's a shame because that mentality usually means you're going to miss out on a lot of great stuff. It's also detrimental to your company when you assume that your customers or competitors can't help you and to your brand when you assume your way is the right way and no one can prove to you otherwise.

How can listening help your company grow?

Find Content Holes & New Ideas: Your customers are pretty smart. They're on your side and invested in the success of your company. They want you to succeed simply because each time you do it you make them look smarter for trusting in you. So when they offer up a piece of advice, ask a question, enter in a complaint, type something funky into your search box don't just dismiss it. Listen to them and acknowledge their input. If they're asking questions, maybe you need some additional content to address it. If they're talking about a specific line of products you don't offer, maybe it's time to expand your Web site with a new silo. Often the best link bait ideas come from listening to your audience and then giving them exactly what they want in the form of a new application for your site, a resource guide to answer their questions, etc. Listen to your customers. They are your business.

Creates a Better Conversation: The more you listen, the more valuable the conversations you have with others will be. Those who express opinions without listening to everyone else fight and learn nothing. Those who do listen debate and get to see things from an entirely different perspective. Which side would you rather be on?

Increase Your Industry Knowledge: When in you're in a room full of colleagues, shut up. Don't dominate the conversation in an attempt to show everyone how smart you are and sing your own praises. Just shut up and listen. A lot of people are surprised that the Lisa they meet in person is a lot quieter and seemingly more reserved than the Lisa that plays with you on the blog. While I assure you that I'm the same person, the truth is that I often get more out of listening than talking. When I listen, I learn. I pick up on the tidbits and nuggets of knowledge being released better. It helps me take what I'm hearing, add it to what I already know and come away with a stronger grasp on concepts.

Earns You Friends: As cool as you think you are, your company's not an island. In order to grow and increase your own brand, you're going to have to lean on others at some point. Listening is a really great way to make friends and show that you're invested in the community at large. It's also a great way to brand your company as one that cares. Those who don't listen are quickly outed as only caring about their own agenda. That's not the image you want to portray, and it's definitely not the kind of company you want to become.

Gain A Competitive Edge: When you stop talking about yourself, you get to hear about everyone else. By turning your ear to the conversation, you may pick up on some juicy information like what your competition is working on, who's getting cozy with whom, whose product just flopped, which new applications are all the rage, what your customers are talking about, etc. The more you know, the better equipped you are to make informed decisions and propel your company and personal brand forward.

Listening is like driving. We all think we've mastered the skill when usually we're one second away from slamming into the car in front of us and causing a massive pileup. Do yourself a favor. Stop talking and start listening. You never know what you may hear.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/17/08 at 3:38 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Branding

SEO Headlines

Quoting The A.P.? That will cost you $12.50, please.

As a follow up to our story yesterday, I guess I should mention that the A.P. has decided in order for you to quote 5 words of their content, it's going to cost you $12.50. If you could go ahead and figure out how much you owe them, let them know where it's going to be published, and then send them a check I'm sure they'd appreciate it.

And before you go getting any snarky ideas, know that you're only allowed to quote the A.P. in a positive light. You see, not only does the A.P. reserve the right to take away your right of fair use, but they also reserve the right to terminate your licensing agreement if you use their content in a way that they find offensive or damaging to their reputation. Free press what?

I'm really confused as to what the A.P. thinks they're doing here. I'll never understand why the mainstream media continues to declare war on the blogosphere and search engines instead of embracing them and looking at us as a new distribution partner. Links from blogs generate new visitors and a better conversation. Stop ageing yourself and participate. All these stupid new "standards" you're fruitlessly trying to create simply make you look silly and like you're new to these Internetz. Get a clue, A.P.

Making Light had my favorite comment on the lunacy that is the A.P. turning to a Web form asking people to pay for something they have the right to do anyway:

"In this spirit, I will shortly be putting up my own Web form through which people can PayPal me money in exchange for my promise to not blow up the moon."

Hee. See, now that's an excerpt I would gladly pay $12.50 for. :)

YouTube, Are You Watching Hulu?

Last week Google CEO Eric Schmidt commented that they just haven't found a way to make money off YouTube yet. The potential is there and even with all the smart folks they have working behind the scenes, but they can't figure out how to make it work. Today Mark Cuban practically pulled his knee jumping up and down for Hulu, a start up video service that has been able to turn a profit.

Mark points out how Hulu has been able to piggyback off YouTube to gain traffic and revenue, while also doing a great job at monetizing the videos on their own site. And Mark's right, Hulu has been doing a stellar job to rave reviews, but you can't exactly compare it to YouTube. Hulu is about finding licensed professional content, while YouTube is trying to monetize user content. They're worlds apart.

Mark may have been one of the very vocal objectors to Google purchasing YouTube back when the deal was simply rumored, but he shouldn't take Google's initial difficulty trying to monetize as a clear sign that he was right. All it shows is that Google has a great challenge ahead of them. Let's be honest, no one has a clear game plan for monetizing video right now. Not even the awesome Hulu.

Careful with all the jumping up and down you're doing, Mark. You may hurt yourself.

Fun Finds

David Mihm released the totally and utterly impressive Local Search Ranking Factors. You're going to want to bookmark that and read it a couple of times. It is truly a goldmine of information.

My buddy Eric Lander offered up Confessions of a Boston Celtic Fan and says that the series will end tonight in Boston. Hell yeah, it will! Go Celtics! (Our entire SoCal office would kill me for saying that.) [I still don't understand why it's not pronounced with a hard C. --Susan]

Andy Merchant asks if you're branding your company or your personal brand on Twitter.

And in case you didn't know, today is Firefox Day. Go download it. If the site's stable by now, that is.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/17/08 at 3:31 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Blogging

June 16, 2008

SEO Weekend Update

Hello. Do you have coffee? I'll give you a cat for a cup of coffee. Coffee? No? Just some SEO news then? Fine.

What's Your Blog Comment Policy?

Scott Allen had a really good post with Thoughts on Blog Comments, Moderation, and the Conversation where he talks about the part comments play in the overall conversation on blogs. There's been some debate about blog comments lately, both internally and abroad, and what right the blog author has to moderate or even delete them.

Personally, I think it's completely the blog author's job to set the rules and make sure that everyone in the community sticks to them. Around here I've had to do quite a bit more moderating and editing than in the past. Some subjects have hit closer to home or excited a far more passionate response and sometimes people let they emotions get the better of them. When someone leaves a lengthy comment that is nothing more than a personal attack on someone else, it's not going to be posted. If it can be edited and salvaged, it will be. But if all you've contributed is a 1,000 word essay on why you don't like X and why X would be better off locked in a closet with no food or water, well, you're not giving me much to work with. Take a nap and then come back.

Blog comments should enhance the quality of the conversation. They should offer alternative points, present debate, enter in some humor, etc. They should keep the integrity of the blog intact. If not, then the owner of that blog has the responsibility to moderate it and help bring the conversation back on topic. Or at least those are the rules we play by. What about you? Do you publish everything that users submit? How fearful are you to edit the thoughts of others?

Yes, XML Sitemaps Are Important To SEO

Barry Schwartz asks if Google Sitemaps are important to search engine optimization. We also talked about the issue back in February in our SEO Newsletter article entitled Building an XML Sitemap.

Barry points us to the Google Groups thread where Googler JohnMu explains that it's generally worth the time to set up a complete XML Sitemap, listing the kinds of data that Google is most interested in.

Back in February, Bruce Clay Senior SEO Analyst Maryann Robbins discussed many of the same features and explained that building an XML Sitemap was absolutely essential for search engine optimization purposes. They not only give Google a complete list of the pages you want indexed, but they also give you the opportunity to provide supplemental information about those pages. They help with canonical issues, tell the search engines how often the page changes, when the page was last modified, how important the page is to your Web site, etc.

So if you're asking whether or not XML Sitemaps are important for search engine optimization, the answer is "absolutely" and "yes".

Microsoft's Plans For Search

Now that Yahoo is no longer an option, General Manager of Microsoft's Search Business Group Brad Goldberg sat down with Robert Scoble to talk about what they're looking to do next. Topics discussed in the interview include Microsoft's plans for mobile, how they plan to compete with Google, the quality of the Live engine, and whether a Mahalo-type strategy could help them gain market share.

If you have half an hour or so, it's worth a listen.

Fun Finds

The Times of London reports that the average teenager's iPod has 800 illegal music tracks. Hee, ouch. Those damn kids are nothing more than a horde of pirates!

Everyone's favorite job search engine Indeed.com has just launched job analytics for employers. Now if only we could get them to launch a coffee delivery program for employees.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/16/08 at 4:24 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Blogging, Live Search, Microsoft, SEO, Search Engine Optimization

Impact Your Industry Through Blogging

Jeremiah Owyang had a great post on Friday about the opportunities and challenges of corporate, team and personal blogs. A lot gets said about blogging. People talk about how it's a great way to add content to your Web site, to establish yourself as a leader, to join the conversation, to put out fires, etc. You've all heard the arguments for why blogging is a worthwhile branding strategy for your company. But I don't think any of those reasons represent the real power of blogging.

If you tuned into SEM Synergy last week, you may have heard Bruce, Virginia and Susan talking about corporate blogging (or not, there seemed to be some sound difficulties with the recording). During their chat, which I couldn't participate in because Susan had locked me in a closet, Bruce touched on a benefit of blogging that I don't think gets nearly enough attention - The ability to form your industry and help set its course.

Even if you're just now getting the hang of marketing your company on these Internetz, you probably haven't missed much. Whatever your industry, chances are it's only in the very early stages of being formed and cutting out its presence online. By joining the blogosphere and developing a strong industry voice, it gives you the ability to help shape it. What other medium affords you that?

We'll take Bruce Clay as an example. Coming back from SMX Advanced I took an unpopular stance and argued that SMX Advanced had perhaps veered off course. Part of me wishes I hadn't written that post because of all the personal attacks and infighting that occurred, but I know that in the end it was worth it. It started a conversation that needed to be had. What is advanced search engine optimization? Does black hat SEO fit into that? Where is our responsibility? Is it a matter of risk vs reward? I think it was an important conversation to have. It's one that will help shape the way advanced conferences are run in the future, and in turn, what direction our industry will take.

That's what blogging is about. And that's what I love most about it.

If you're not really invested in your industry and are just out to make a quick buck, then don't even worry about it. But if you got involved in whatever space you're in because you care, then blogging gives you an enormous platform to steer the conversation and the actions of your industry. Yes, doing this will undoubtedly help you establish yourself as an authority in your field, but even bigger than that is how it helps shape the industry itself. It ensures that the important issues are discussed and debated in the open. It encourages progress.

If there's a topic that's affecting your kind, blog about it. Get others to blog about it. Use your blog to push the conversation along. Don't repeat what everyone else is saying or join the bandwagon. Stick up and fight for the industry issues you believe in and the ones you don't think get enough attention. You may get a few rocks thrown your way, but at the end of the day, you're doing something that matters. Sure, you're building your brand and creating content for your Web site, but you're also laying the groundwork for the future of your industry.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/16/08 at 3:59 PM | Comments (1)
See more entries in Blogging

The AP Hates The Blogosphere. We Hate Them Back

Over the past few weeks I've come to find that my patience for stupidity is at its lowest in the morning. Combined with the fact that it's Monday, the most sleepy and irritating day of the week, you can imagine my reaction when I opened up my feeds and heard that the AP was going to set guidelines for how bloggers can link to and reference their articles. Oh sweet Jesus. Are you kidding me?

I decided to write them a note:

Dear A.P.,
Get over yourself.
Hugs and Kisses,
The World (minus all the Belgians, of course.)

The A.P.'s display of moral superiority comes after they sent the Drudge Retort (a Drudge Report parody site) a letter demanding that they remove several posts that contained short quotes from various A.P. articles. According to the New York Times, each quote contained between 39-79 words. Not exactly gregarious and definitely falling within fair use. [Even setting aside the protected status of parody --Susan] The blogosphere did not react kindly. Michael Arrington and TechDirt have both decided to ban the A.P., or at least seek out alternative publications to link to when possible. Other grassroots anti-A.P. movements are also in the works.

The A.P. tried to clean up the mess it had created with a comment over at TechDirt that did nothing but offend even more and raise some eyebrows. The comment left by Jim Kennedy makes reference to the "licensing agreements" that many bloggers have with the AP to display their stories in full.

Is that what this is about? The A.P. wants bloggers to have to pay to include a snippet of their text? Good luck getting people to agree to that. The record companies can barely get people to pay for music. You want them to pay for a paragraph? Hee!

Blogger Jeff Jarvis called out the A.P. for leaching off original reporting and not crediting original sources. He was so insulted by the A.P.'s stance that he's launched the FU AP campaign asking bloggers to stop linking to the A.P. until they apologize to the Drudge Retort's founder Rogers Cadenhead.

As frustrating and time warping as this whole scenario is, it's actually kind of humorous for a few reasons.

First, when are people going to realize that bloggers send you traffic? The more often a blogger takes a small quote from your article and links over to you, the more people who are going to follow that link and discover your content. Instead of looking at TechMeme and bloggers as competitors, look to them as partners helping you to push your content. They're not going away. You may as well find a way to work with them.

Second, bloggers don't need your guidelines. We don't care how you want us to link to you or reference you or talk about you. We have our own guidelines. We're not going to acknowledge yours. Perhaps we would have helped if you were smart enough to engage and ask for our input, but you didn't. You assumed you knew better. Now you fail.

When will mainstream media and large corporations realize that angering the blogosphere is not in their best interest? We may seem small and fragmented, but we're not. When you go after one of us, you suffer the wrath of the entire army.

This was a huge fail by the A.P. Forget just looking silly and like they've never heard of the Internet, the A.P. is doing a stellar job of coming off like a bully here, overstepping their bounds, rights and trying to get bloggers to adapt to a set of "rules" and "standards" that the A.P. has yet to create. Sorry, A.P., but we're not interested. We're so not interested that we'll not only boycott linking to you, we're working on removing all your precious TechMeme links.

Consider yourself unlinked from the blogosphere.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/16/08 at 12:40 PM | Comments (2)
See more entries in Blogging, Branding

June 13, 2008

Friday Recap

Hey, guys. It's Friday and I have a belly full of gelato. Mmm, Italian deliciousness.

IT services provider Telindus conducted a survey and found that 39 percent of 18-to-24 year olds would quit their jobs if their bosses blocked Facebook. Well, yeah. That's because 18-year-olds are working at McDonalds or in the mailroom. I'd quit my job too. For any reason I could think of. [I'm pretty sure at that age I quit one of mine to go to the beach. And I hate the beach. --Susan]

If you want to buy a Facebook account (and 200 or so friends) you can do on eBay. Buying friends? Is nothing sacred anymore? Anyone want to buy my cats? [Prices as follows: $10 for Swat, $1,000 for Jack Jack. --Susan] Don't be crazy. $3.99 for Swat.

If you want to ruin your day, TechCrunch helps us take a look at some of the average salaries at Google:

If you're looking for some good reading, check out the 100 Awesome Webmaster Blogs by and for Women. I think you'll recognize some of the faces.

Watch as Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak unlocks Kathy Griffin's iPhone. On television. What a waste of an unlocked iPhone. Kathy Griffin is totally not smart enough to appreciate it. Or to exist without cameras following her.

Andy Beal chimes in on the Yahoo/Google/Microsoft saga. Or at least I think that's what he's doing, right? Poor Brad. It's hard being the underdog.

Michael Gray announced he's running for president because it's the only way he knows of to stop Google from global domination. Good luck, Michael! We're rooting for you.

WebProNews is getting hilariously ridiculous with their conference videos. The latest one features Danny Sullivan "chatting" about SMX Advanced while also demonstrating the patented Sullivan shimmy. DSul, FTW!

I stumbled across this video giving folks a look at what life is like inside the Bruce Clay offices. Yup. It looks just like that.

An anonymous "female" from a "big SEO company" used Shoemoney's nonSEO blog to "rant" about how "she's" tired of people asking for Diggs and Stumbles. The post is unoriginal and not all that well written. What was funny was that everyone assumed the mystery author had to be one of the four known SEO female ranters: Rae, Jane, Becs or myself. I'll give you a hint. It's not any of us. We can write. [It's not me either, even though I can't.--Susan]

Barry Schwartz blogged about having to sleep on the couch. Ah, marriage can be a cruel mistress sometimes, eh? ;)

Oh, and Barry, listen up: Stork101.com says they can predict your baby's gender with 100 percent accuracy! If they're wrong, however, you get nothing. I think it's time for an SEO blogging prodigy baby, don't you?

Wedding Paper Divas had some geek wedding invitations that got a smirk out of me. C'mon, like you've never wanted to exclaim, "Wii are getting married"? Liar.

Susan sent Virginia and myself the MASH game online and we all took turns reliving what it was like to be in the 5th grade. I'm going to marry my current boyfriend, honeymoon in Rome, have one child and drive a red Jetta. Yey adulthood!

Also sent by Susan: the greatest display of stupidity ever. I'll let you digest this one for yourselves.

Things I Learned On Boing Boing This Week:

• The Simi Valley fires that broke out in 2005 look way more fun on film than they were in person.


• Taking naps during the day does a better job of keeping you awake than sleeping later or filling yourself with coffee. [I think this means we need company approved nap-time post lunch.--Susan] I like our system now where we just close the door because we're "so busy working".


• God loves bananas and I love robot cupcakes.


• Long ago small children used to play with plastic wigs. Good God, the world was boring without the Internet and Nintendo's Wii.


• What Google News would look like if the world was a happier place.

To all the dads out there, we hope you have a wonderful Father's Day and are treated to lots of special moments. And if you want to spoil the dad in your life, check out the Chicago Tribune's gadget-filled Father's Day guide or maybe go see Kung Fu Panda like Michael Gray did. My own father requested a dwarf pear tree. He's not the gadget type. Happy Father's Day, dads!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 06/13/08 at 2:11 PM | Comments (0)
See more entries in Fun Stuff

June 12, 2008

SEO Headlines

Should Your Employees Be Your BFFs?

Barry Schwartz pointed me to an article from Ad Age this morning that asks Do Bossfriends Create Great Employees. It's funny, because if you asked me that a year ago my answer would have been completely different than what it is now. When I was still wet behind the ears I would have said that a boss can absolutely be buddies with their employees. I may have even rattled on about how it creates team unity and that hitting a beer bong in a social setting with those whose paychecks you sign was totally okay. Now, however, that kind of behavior would make me cringe.

As a boss you should be friendly with your staff. You should create an environment of trust and openness and free expression, but that doesn't mean you should be best friend. There's absolutely a line you have to draw. You don't want to get into a situation where employees' feelings are hurt because their bossfriend suddenly has to care about getting work done or the bottom line. You don't want to open up an environment where employees get too comfortable or too casual and their professionalism suffers. You want there to be chemistry and for your employees to feel supported. That doesn't mean that you have to help them close down the bar.

I think we manage to have a good balance around here. We have a pretty casual environment and open door policy when it comes to getting time with Bruce. We have company BBQs, bowling days, movie nights, spontaneous lunches, etc. But I'm not hanging out at Bruce's house tonight to watch the Celtics beat the Lakers. I'll be doing that at home, with people who are actually my friends.

Sorry, Bruce, but I just want to be friendly. I don't want to be your BFF. :)

Yahoo, Microsoft, Google & The Internetz

Yahoo says that their talks with Microsoft really are over and that no deal has or will be made. Take a moment to compose yourself. It'll be okay. Here's a tissue.

Better?

Yes, TechCrunch reports that though Microsoft and Yahoo had both gone back to the table for negotiations, in the end Microsoft couldn't justify the price Yahoo was after, and Yahoo realized it'd just be neutering its search engine anyway. The two will just have to go it alone.

Don't worry, Yahoo's not about to fall out of the headlines. Just this afternoon they announced a non exclusive search agreement with Google like we all thought they were going to. The deal will allow Yahoo to run Google ads alongside its search results and some of its Web properties in the United States and Canada.

From the press release:

"Under the terms of the agreement, Yahoo! will select the search term queries for which - and the pages on which - Yahoo! may offer Google paid search results. Yahoo! will define its users' experience and will determine the number and placement of the results provided by Google and the mix of paid results provided by Panama, Google or other providers. The agreement applies to paid search and content match and does not apply to algorithmic search. The agreement also applies to current partners in Yahoo's publisher network."

Companies With An Identity Crisis Fail

Dave Goldenberg had a great article over at Digital Web Magazine entitled Why Do Web Startups Die? Lack of Alphalpha. Dave says the biggest reason new companies fail isn't because they don't have the talent or the drive to back up what they're trying to do, it's because they never really identify what it is they want to do. They don't know who they are, where they're going, what makes them different, etc, and as a result they fall on their face.

I mentioned this in Tuesday's Avoiding Product Fail post, but you really have to know what you're creating and what niche your product is going to fill before you launch it. Otherwise you those vital first moments of your existence solving your own identity crisis when you should be out presenting a strong brand image and getting your message out to your audience. As was hailed in the Cre8asite Forums, you don't want to be that nerd in the singles bar. You want to assured, nimble, and ready to woo the masses.

It's hard enough to launch a new company. If you don't have a clear plan for how you're going to do it and become the next TechCrunch, you may as well not even try.

Fun Finds

Christopher Hart, the new Director of Regional Operations for Bruce Clay East, sat down with Jim Hedger during last week's SMX and talked about his plans for the new office, bringing SEO training to the East Coast and how BC East will fight through the noise of New York.

Chris Brogan tells us all how to