Search Engine Optimization

March 30, 2006

Ask Shoots, Scores!

I consider myself a pretty intelligent person. I can usually tell where people are going with things. But I must admit. I had no idea where Ask was going with its latest blog entry.

I read Ask's entry entitled, George Mason Fact Guide, and thought to myself, Wait, this is about basketball? What? Don't tell me Barry re-branded again! I read through the article, learning more than I ever needed (or wanted) to know about the George Mason NCAA basketball team. At the end of the 'fact guide' is a postmark telling confused readers to follow the link provided for clarification. Feeling completely out of the loop, I did what I was told, and was brought to a Personal Technology article from WSJ.com entitled, Ask.Com's New Look Scores Big Points Against Search Rivals.

Ah, I get it. Cleeever.

The article compares Ask's recent rise in popularity with George Mason University's NCAA basketball team, which has (apparently – I don't follow college basketball) surprised everyone in this year's March Madness tournament, defeating both the reigning champion and touted frontrunner.

The article highlights all of the improvements Ask has made since it's re-branding – the non-cluttered homepage, better search tools, better relevancy, etc. – and encourages people to give the little engine a shot.

The article is a little too saccharine for my taste, but it has a good moral.

"Google is still great, and I'm not suggesting everyone abandon it. But Ask.com is well worth a try if you want to benefit from some features that go beyond Google. Like the George Mason basketball team, it just may surprise you.

See that. Don't discount the underdog; he may just surprise you. Aww.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/30/06 at 5:45 PM | TrackBack (0)
See more entries in Ask, Search Engine Optimization

Search and Destroy

In an attempt to get back at the DOJ for dragging them into court, Google went ahead and deleted all of the pages of a government website. Just kidding!

Well, about it being Google's fault anyway. Barry of Search Engine Roundtable has started a thread on the SER forums commenting on a post by Alex Papadimoulis entitled, The Spider of Doom. The post explains how webmaster Josh Breckman was contracted to develop a content management system for a 'fairly large government' site. Breckman was asked to design a system that would allow employees to log in and make changes to the content on a continuous basis. Because there was already an active website, the client also wanted to be able to 'reorganize and upload' the old content onto the new site before it went live. According to Papadimoulis' post, things were seemingly going quite well until one day all of the content vanished.

Was it Google out to settle the score? An International hijacker hoping to learn government secrets? A touch of company espionage? Jeeves out for world domination? No, none of that. After some searching and scrambling, Breckman was able to locate the cause of the wipeout: the dastardly wicked Googlebot! How did it happen?

"A user copied and pasted some content from one page to another, including an "edit" hyperlink to edit the content on the page. Normally, this wouldn't be an issue, since an outside user would need to enter a name and password. But, the CMS authentication subsystem didn't take into account the sophisticated hacking techniques of Google's spider."

Yes, that's right. The Googlebot went in and hit delete on every single page of the government-based website. But you can't blame the Googlebot – it was just doing its job. That's what you get for leaving open edit links on the front end of your site.

According to Papadimoulis, Breckman was reportedly able to restore an older version of the site using backups, while bringing up the root cause: security could be beaten by disabling cookies and JavaScript. However, the government site owners didn't understand quite what happened and instead ordered Breckman to never copy and paste content ever again. Yes, that'll do it.

One thing is for sure: Beware of Googlebot...and client-side security.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/30/06 at 1:40 PM | TrackBack (0)
See more entries in Design, Google, Search Engine Optimization

March 29, 2006

Never underestimate the power of monkeys

John Battelle comments on a Bear Stearns report that uses comScore data to show Google's continuing increase in its already overpowering market share. This time Google has climbed from 39.8 percent last year to a current 42.3 percent. But the interesting news coming out of this report isn't that Google has gained another handful of percentage points (what else is new), but that newly redesigned Ask seems to be gaining both ground and momentum, increasing their market share by .7% since the end of last year's fourth quarter.

It's been hard to get away from Ask in recent weeks. The uniquely flavored engine has been all over radio and TV lately as part of an International media blitz that hopes to introduce users to Ask 2006 – the one without the butler (no, we'll never let that go) and unique new search tools. The TV ads seem to be a hit among viewers who can't get enough of the 'un-evolved' searchers antics. Personally, I like using the ads for a rousing game of I Spy, picking out all the different tools being used in the 30- or 60-second clips. Users get a glimpse of Asks binoculars and better search in action. For those living in a cave and haven't seen them, Ask has posted their TV ads on their blog.

Analysts predict Ask's market share will continue to grow as users being to familiarize themselves with all the engine has to offer. The report highlighted both Ask's and Google's recent percentage gains:

"Year-over-year, Google and Ask showed strong search query gain of 29.4% and 27.9%, respectively, while the other search providers in the top five declined. On a sequential basis, Google and Ask also showed the highest growth at 8.3% and 14.6% respectively."

For Ask, it looks like a little re-branding and some monkey antics have gone a long way.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/29/06 at 12:02 PM | TrackBack (0)
See more entries in Ask, Branding, Search Engine Optimization, Search Engines

On a blog note:

Blogs may not be having a good week, but they sure are getting a lot of press. It's only Tuesday and so far they're housing rants, being subjected to rules, getting people in trouble, getting ripped off and accidentally being deleted. The pen may be mightier than the sword, but the sword never got this much action.

It all started on Sunday when Robert Scoble heatedly responded to a Vista Office blog entry that incorrectly reported Windows Vista would need to have 60 percent of its code rewritten before launch. Adding insult to injury, other outlets then began reporting the same false news citing the Vista blog as their source. The blatant disregard for fact was all it took for an irritated Robert Scoble to fly off the handle. Scoble scolded the rising number of non-credible news sources and those that link to them, calling out bloggers who show little regard for the truth when reporting, and even referred to two individuals as 'jerks'.

Yes, you read that right. Microsoft's 'technical evangelist' did resort to calling people 'jerks' on his blog. Tact aside, Scoble's article was a passionate response to what happens when journalists deem unreliable sources trustworthy and mimic them without doing their own research.

Scoble's rant ignited of storm backlash (as well as supporters and cartoon strips) from the blogger community, including those demanding his termination. Scoble later apologized for his rant, but still maintained the heart of his post.

On the heels of the public meltdown, business writer Nicholas Carr opted to use Scoble's rant as a case study for why corporations shouldn't let their employee's blog. Carr attempted to portray Scoble as a bully in his post entitled, Seven Rules for Corporate Bloggers. Number one on Carr's list: Don't do it.

"If you have no compelling business reason to get involved in the blogosphere, then don't... If you give bloggers too much freedom, they may "go native" and tarnish your reputation by writing something stupid."

Based on Carr's rules, it's clear he views blog solely as a business tool. Personally, I think he's missing the point. (You know – a chance to connect with readers, give a sometimes-menacing corporation a human face, etc.)

But the blog drama didn't end there. Soon after reports came out that popular Washington Post blogger Ben Domenech resigned after ramped speculation that he plagiarized material he authored for various publications. Domenech wasn't able to aptly defend himself and opted to leave voluntarily before being fired. With the word 'plagiarism' floating around the blogosphere, you knew it wouldn't be long before it found its next victim.

Then came the Huffington Post's report that the AP stole a story off Rawstory.com and actually admitted they didn't feel the need to cite it because it was lifted off a blog – once again reinforcing that bloggers are second-hand citizens.

So what is it then? Should bloggers (like Scoble) be accountable for what they say, or are they irrelevant entities that merely serve as a feeding ground for mainstream media looking for an angle?

Larisa Alexandrovna of Huffington Post remarked:

"What we are or are not is frankly irrelevant. What is relevant is that by using a term like blog to somehow excuse plagiarism, the mainstream press continues to lower the bar for acceptable behavior. It need not matter where the AP got the information, research, and actual wording from. What matters is that if they use it in part or in whole, they must attribute properly. A blog or a small press publication or grads students working in the corner of a library all equally deserve credit for their work, period."

Amen.

Oh, and then there was the news yesterday that Google accidentally deleted their official blog. Blogger Project Manager Jason Goldman promises the deletion was Google's error and not the result of someone hacking into Google's system. Whatever the case, not to worry, kind soul Trey Philips noticed the error and reregistered the domain before nefarious spammers could do evil, and politely handed it back to Google. It could have been worse for Google; they could have deleted the whole Internet.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/29/06 at 8:28 AM | TrackBack (0)
See more entries in Fun Stuff, Search Engine Optimization

March 27, 2006

BC Weekend Update

New interfaces and updated toolbars – it's how the search engines spent their weekend.

Want to take a peek at the new, left-centric Google redesign? Google Blogoscoped tells you how. Follow these steps to grab yourself a look and then come back.

Okay, I didn't say the chances were drastic, but it does represent a change for the engine. The most obvious change is that Google seems to be switching its navigation center (complete with Page Rank-esque green relevancy bars) over to the left, making it resemble its Gmail infrastructure. Is the switch meant to highlight Google's ever-expanding set of tools, or is it designed to reinforce the left-hand side as the prominent search space? Both I think, and Ars Technica's Ken Fisher seems to agree, according to a recent blog post. Fisher hypothesizes the 'redesign' is meant to draw the user's eye to Google's tools, allow more search results to appear on the page, and to give Google more room to place more tools.

Either way, I don't like it. The tools and bright green relevancy bars distract me from the organic search results, and the three columns of text make my page feel cluttered. And as Google creates more tools, it's bound to get worse.

Also, highlighting Google's tools makes people do silly things with them --like compile a wacky list of the current highest paying AdWords search terms. According to a post at CyberWyre, currently the top five include 3 queries related to mesothelioma -- a word my spell check doesn't even recognize, good thing I saw all those TV commercials as a kid --, queries on loans, mortgages, tax attorney's and car accident lawyers. It's worth noting that just because Mesothelioma has a high bid of $54.33, doesn't mean that's how much clients actually pay for the click. Depending on the click-through rate and other factors, a client could be paying only a few dollars for the term. But if the DOJ ever asks for these queries, I say give it to them. Talk about boring.

And because Google isn't the only one who can update and improve features, the Yahoo Search Blog announced they have updated their Yahoo Toolbar. Yahoo boasts small improvements to bookmarks, mail alerts and others, but the most prominent improvement seems to be the addiction of a del.icio.us shortcut, which allows users to tag content straight from their browser. (By the way, I'm sure this addition has nothing to do with Yahoo's recent acquisition of del.icio.us.) I think it's great, if only because now I don't have to contort my fingers while trying to spell 'del.icio.us'. I'm serious, have you tried typing it? It's ridiculous.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/27/06 at 2:35 PM | TrackBack (0)
See more entries in Design, Google, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, Search Engine Optimization, Yahoo

How to achieve link building bliss

Earlier this month we pointed out the dangers of creating content-less content for the sole purpose of furthering link building campaigns, so the question arises: How do you create effective link building campaigns when you do have excellent content? Text Link Broker's Robert Sullivan recently published two articles with some excellent tips for users.

Sullivan's first article entitled, "Using your Established site to help your new site build link Popularity" details just that – how to use your established sites to help your new site rank. The idea may seem obvious, but many companies can overlook its value. Simply placing a link in the footer of your established site (or sites) directing the engines to your new site will help it gain immediate authority. This is especially true if your established site has a high Page Rank of 6 or higher. Linking your sites and allowing them to 'vouch' for one another will help you to quickly establish expertness.

New sites should always be submitted to the following three directories: Yahoo, DMOZ (The Open Directory Project), and (if applicable) Business.com. These directories, especially Yahoo, are considered to have a very high authoritative status among the search engines, and are therefore imperative to your link building success. Listing your site in these three directories will help your new site establish expert status and achieve quick Page Rank. According to Sullivan, listing your site in these directories could help it obtain a Page Rank 4 almost immediately. Search Engine Journal does a good job of detailing each of these directories, so I won't duplicate it here.

If you're going to submit your site to one of these directories, we also suggest keeping accurate records of what URLs have been sent, on what days, to what directories, in what categories. This will help you to keep track of what has been sent and what you need to follow up on.

When starting your link building campaign, remember the purpose of inbound inks – to establish a vote of confidence for your site. With that in mind, it's important to only solicit links from sites the engines identify as industry experts. How do you know who the search engines deem an expert? Well, beyond just typing in Google queries all day, Sullivan suggests utilizing clustering engines to pinpoint respected industry sites, specifically highlighting little known Japanese clustering engine, Clusty.

Now I know its Monday, but get those Simpson references out of your head, it's Clusty and we're not talking clowns. What is Clusty and how will it help your link building campaign? Sullivan explains:

"Clusty will organize results into groups called clusters. The following quote comes from Clusty’s site: “Thus a search for ‘pearl’ organizes the top 250-500 results into subject folders such as Jewelry, Pearl Harbor, Pearl Jam, Steinbeck Novel and Daniel Pearl.”

That means that not only has Clusty grouped results, but it has also applied similar ranking algorithms to those results ensuring that the “best” sites show up at the top."

Cluttering engines like Clusty or Ask help users identify what sites the search engines have deemed to be authorities for your topic. Clustering search engine breaks its index into categorized hubs which, according to Sullivan, are considered the authority sites within the community. These are the sites you want to solicit links from. They are the sites search engines look to in establishing relevance and authority. Using these engines can also be valuable in keyword research, but that's a different entry for a different day.

(Hat-Tip to Search Engine Journal)

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/27/06 at 2:11 PM | TrackBack (0)
See more entries in Design, Search Engine Optimization

March 24, 2006

Those other search engines

Did you know that there are other search engines out there besides Google? It's true! Sure Google gets all the press, what with joining the S&P 500 and starting their GeoAds and buying small, cool companies and their millions and billions of betas, but hey, don't some of these other engines deserve love too?

Sure, they do. And I'm just the girl to give it to them.

First up, Yahoo!

When they're not busy playing host to 'celebrities', the guys at Yahoo are working on delivering the most useful searches to 11-year-olds everywhere. Can't find out what you need to know about architecture principles at Google? Yahoo has your information on page one.

Next in line, MSN

Everyone's favorite small, scrappy start-up has announced that they're looking at increasing distribution of their new MSN AdCenter ads on MSN Search. They say they'll hit 70% volume in "several days". This means that those using Yahoo's paid search are going to see their ads getting less traffic as YSM ads are filtered out in place of MSN's.

Last and Jeeves-less.

Ask has been running some TV commercials recently. I can't decide if the monkeys are better or worse than William Hung. Two areas I do know Ask has everyone beat in are in their tools and interface. If you haven't listened to me the last several times I've raved about the cool tools Ask offers to improve search then now is absolutely the time. Go. Now. I'll wait. See, isn't that cool?

Posted by Susan Esparza on 03/24/06 at 4:21 PM
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization, Search Engines

Why Your Pages Need Text

Search Engine Roundtable defines SEO as 'dealing mostly with improving on-page content in order to "show" search engines that you are worthy of having your page ranked for a particular keyword', and I think most SEOs would agree with that. Therefore, it goes without saying (or so we thought) that your SEO campaign lives and dies on your ability to produce excellent content. So how do you optimize a site that is made up solely of images and contains absolutely no content whatsoever? Well that's what one HighRankings forum member asked of his fellow SEO-obsessed members. They all came to one general consensus. Do a complete redesign of the site.

The SEO-novice was trying to help a client who had just ~~wasted~~ spent thousands of dollars rebuilding his site with no consideration for SEO. The site was created using frames, JPG images and absolutely no text. The forum member needed help optimizing the site and offered up four possible solutions for the folks at HighRankings to choose from. Should he: add alt img tags to all of his images, create Meta Description tags, add content under the images or add new pages with text that linked to the image-based pages? If this guy was looking for some easy answers, he sure didn't get any.

Experienced forum members gave him a mandatory option number five: tell the client to sue the designer who put him here and do a complete redesign of the site. We would have agreed.

There are two key problems with having a site that is 100% image based. First, search engines are blind, dead and typically dumb. You have to (literally) spell out what your site is about. Engines don't understand images or Flash. They reward sites that they feel are industry experts, basing that determination on the relevancy of the content on your site. If you don't include strong text your site will simply be overlooked by the engines.

Second, having no content on your site doesn't help your visitors. Creating unique content is your chance to tell them who you are, what you do and how you're different from your competition. You should use your content to separate your company from the pack. First make yourself equal, and then establish yourself as better.

So what do you do if you already have a Flash- or image-based site? We honestly believe the best thing you can do is redesign. Don't cut corners by trying to add content to the bottom of your site. Doing so will not help you to rank well and will just lead to future headaches. And don't even think about putting text where only search engines can see it. You will be labeled a spammer and immediately booted from the engines.

We believe the best thing you can do is strip your site down. Get rid of the Flash and create a content-rich homepage for your website. Describe who you are, what you do and why you're special, using at least 250 words of strong, targeted text.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/24/06 at 10:26 AM
See more entries in Design, SEO Tips & Tricks, Search Engine Optimization

March 23, 2006

Matt Says

Matt Cutts was in rare form late last night, knocking out four articles in a one hour span. Matt managed to crank out articles on Google's supplemental index issues, doorway pages, the forthcoming Bigdaddy and gave props to plucky Jeremy Zawodny. Easy man, take a break!

First on Matt's list was the issue of Google's supplemental index, an issue that has been all over the WebmasterWorld forums lately and has had site owners up in arms for weeks. The supplemental index is Google's auxiliary index. The engine will only use this index if they are unable to find relevant results in the main index. Normally, this means your site will never show up in the results page for normal queries. It's also often a sign that pages are dropping out of the index altogether. You can understand why site owners were infuriated.

Matt (and GoogleGuy) says they have analyzed a variety of different sites and have figured out what was causing the glitch. What was causing the glitch? Matt says, in Bigdaddy, if your site is not crawled as much as the main index, it may result in your pages showing up in the supplemental index. Site owners who found themselves stuck in the supplemental index should start to see a full recovery. If you're not out yet – hang in there. Matt says you should be out within the next week.

Next up – prepare for Bigdaddy! With the supplemental index issues under control, Matt says there are just 1-2 data centers left in the big Bigdaddy switchover. Bigdaddy is a 'software upgrade to Google’s infrastructure' that will provide the foundation for a lot of improvements to Google's search quality in the coming months. Matt says improvements will include smarter redirect handling and improved canonicalization. We can't wait.

A quick advisory note from Matt: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Matt says, if someone offers to give you money to rent subdomains, subdirectories or pages from you, say no. If you agree to host their pages and they find themselves creating spamming pages, you may be penalized as well. Remember kids; just say no to doorway pages.

And finally at 12:36 this morning, Matt stopped to give props to Jeremy for calling out Yahoo! on their 'lack of leadership' and 'a serious lack of vision' in a post entitled, 'Why Google Finance Makes Me Sad". Jeremy posted a heartfelt entry expressing his sadness, publicly calling out Yahoo! and offering suggestions for improvement.

"As a company, we need to get better about facing this stuff, dealing with it, and get back to kicking ass. But I have no idea how to make that happen. Maybe this will result in some useful discussion somewhere.
There's a light at the end of the tunnel. All hope is not lost. Unlike a small number of Google product launches, this one didn't blow the doors off. It's no Gmail or Google Maps. Yahoo! Finance isn't out of the game. But I sure as hell hope this is a wake-up call!"

Aww, Jeremy. We love it when you tell it like it is.

Thanks for the updates, Matt. Now someone go and take away that man's laptop.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/23/06 at 11:26 AM
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization, Search Engines

March 21, 2006

Launches, Updates and Rumors: Just another day at the Goog

It's not fair. I was up-to-date on my Google news when I left work yesterday afternoon and I come in today and everything has changed again. How is a girl supposed to keep up with a search engine that never sleeps? Here's what you need to know to get you through Tuesday.

While you weren't paying attention, Google launched a beta version of Google Finance. The financial portal offers stock or mutual fund quotes, related news stories, message boards, company information, interactive Flash charts and blog postings.

Key Google Finance features include:

Search – This could be this beta's claim to fame. Past finance sites require users to know the company's stock symbol, while Google Finance allows users to simply search by company name. No more feeling inadequate when you can't remember your company's symbol. Most excellent.

Related News – Google Finance provides users with relevant, up-to-date news stories that correspond with what their stocks and companies are doing that day. Now stock enthusiasts can see not only how their stock is doing, but perhaps use the day's news to put it into context.

Charts – Charts can be created to show the volume of news stories for a particulate company, as well as give key financial statistics. Taking a cue from Google Maps, users can drag and zoom in on chart information to get expansive details.

Message Boards – Every publicly traded company will now include a message board that is a part of Google Groups. Google employees will monitor the boards to prevent inappropriate or spammy comments.

At first glance, Google Finance looks like a step up from the competition. Charlene Li disagrees, stating stock users will likely be resistant to change as change means having to re-enter all their detailed portfolio information. We'll have to see if a better search and fancy charts are enough incentive for people to make the switch.

Improved AdWords Keyword Tool: Google has revamped their AdWords Keyword Tool to allow advertisers to view global trends and traffic histories for their keywords, as well as monitor traffic fluctuations for a twelve month period, according to WebProNews. Results are displayed in graph form. Complete details can be found on the AdWords site.

Google Health? Rumors are everywhere as Search Engine Watch points to a speaker list found at PC Forums that lists 'Adam Bosworth, Architect, Google Health' among those expected to appear. The question on everyone's minds: What in the world is Google Health? And why does it need an 'architect'? We don't know but it looks like Google may be up to something. We'll keep you posted.

Google Page Creator update: And while you've got Google on the brain you may want to check out the Google Blogoscope where Philipp Lenssen has a fun entry about how people are using the month-old Google Page Creator tool. Lenssen highlights a small collection of pages on boobs, diamonds, spam and more boobs. Geez, give a man an outlet...

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/21/06 at 10:27 AM
See more entries in Branding, Google, Search Engine Optimization

March 20, 2006

Monday 'Musements

It's hard to know what you're walking into on Monday morning. Sometimes they start off a little rocky. But not this one -- it's been an amusing Monday morning in the world of SEO. We've heard about all the lawsuits pending for poor Google, but today Search Engine Rountable gives us a Google lawsuit with a twist! KinderStart, a 'directory' aimed the parents of 0-7 years old, filed a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court in San Jose that claims Google violated its free speech rights by blocking some of its pages, resulting in a 70 percent drop in traffic and a significant loss of revenue. Poor guys! You know what they're asking for? Financial damages (okay, maybe) and Google to explain its super-secret, patented algorithms to them. Oh, those kids.

The folks at KinderStart alleged Google of the following:

Now that's pretty ridiculous. So ridiculous that it's not the issue at hand here. Because even more outlandish to us, is that had KinderStart bothered to look at their site they would have seen what Google saw. Countless pages of comment spam, redirects, thousands of purchased sub domains and severe duplicate content issues. All spiders saw while crawling were useless pages of incoherent keyword text and redirects, so they removed it. That's what Google is supposed to do when they catch someone spamming, remove it. I guess that's what the guys at KinderStart get for not reading Matt Cutts blog last week.

I'm not even sure what KinderStart is. I know what it's (not so convincingly) pretending to be, but it looks like half link farm/ half spam farm to me. If that's not the case, why do they link to Viagra sites? Is this a problem for children ages 0 to 7? Why the links to the various poker and gambling sites? Why is breast augmentation mentioned just one too many times? That doesn't sound like relevant content to me.

Sidenote: It looks like Sergey and Larry are having an amusing conversation about this very topic.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/20/06 at 2:42 PM
See more entries in SEO Tips & Tricks, Search Engine Optimization

Denied!

I am starting to feel a little bit better about living here. While you were drinking green beer on Friday, the Associated Press reported that United States District Judge James Ware ruled the government could only take a peek at 50,000 randomly selected websites and declined their request for a list of people's search queries. For those of you keeping score it's Google/The People - 1, The Establishment – 0.

Ware promised during last week's non-decision that he would take the issue of privacy concerns into consideration while he deliberated, and it looks like he made good on that. In his 21-page ruling, Ware stated it was privacy considerations of Google users that led him to deny part of the Justice Department's request.

"To the extent the motion seeks an order compelling Google to disclose search queries of its users the motion is denied."

This is a huge win for not only Google, but for Internet users. Ware has set the tone that the government does not have unrestricted power when it comes to demanding data from search engines and Internet companies. I imagine Yahoo, AOL and MSN will now hear an array of (deserved) criticism about rolling over to the government so easily. It will also be interesting to see how this affects the Gmail court case as well.

For right now, Google seems to be basking in the spotlights of this tremendous win. Google Associate General Counsel Nicole Wong:

"We will always be subject to government subpoenas, but the fact that the judge sent a clear message about privacy is reassuring. What his ruling means is that neither the government nor anyone else has carte blanche when demanding data from Internet companies."

In his ruling, Ware noted that the assumption of privacy users feel 'may not be reasonable', but 'may nonetheless have an appreciable impact on the way in which Google is perceived, and consequently the frequency with which users use Google'. Is our wanting an anonymous Internet, where we don't have to fear how queries and searches will be used in the future unreasonable? Maybe. Perhaps we have been living under a false sense of privacy. But the fact is -- we feel like, we should have it, we've taken it, and we're not willing to give it up. And with Google's help, maybe we won't have to.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/20/06 at 10:01 AM
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

March 17, 2006

No Email is Safe

Here we go down a very slippery slope. News.com reports right on the heels of Tuesday's Google/ courts saga the news that a Judge has granted a subpoena brought by the Federal Trade Commission asking Google to turnover the complete contents of one user's Gmail account, including the deleted messages. This is not good -- for Google, for Gmail, for online users everywhere.

The FTC is 'asking' for the emails in correlation to a case regarding credit counseling company AmeriDebit. The company was sued by the FTC in 2003 alleging AmeriDebit deceived customers about credit counseling and failed to use customers' money to pay their creditors. The FTC believes information pertinent to the case can be found in a man named Peter Baker's Gmail account. Peter Baker is a shareholder for a company linked to the missing money. Baker has (not surprisingly) objected to the subpoena, saying it could disclose confidential information, including attorney-client conversations.

The kicker for most people comes toward the end of this statement:

"All documents concerning all Gmail accounts of Baker...for the period from Jan. 1, 2003, to present, including but not limited to all e-mails and messages stored in all mailboxes, folders, in-boxes, sent items and deleted items, and all links to related Web pages contained in such e-mail messages."

Deleted messages? Really? Baker estimates he may have 'tens of thousands' of e-mail messages in his Gmail account. While Google has been ordered to produce all of the deleted emails, it will be very interesting to see how many they are actually able to recover. Google's privacy policy says deleted e-mail messages "may remain in our offline backup systems" in perpetuity and does not guarantee that backups are ever deleted. Two things: first, 'may remain' – what does that mean? And second, I think it's time they add '...until they're brought up in court' to their Delete Forever button.

It seems we are already starting to see the effects of Tuesday's Google/ DOJ non-decision. Regardless of how many emails the FTC can actually receive from the Google, the idea that the government can go in and demand such information is appalling and a very dangerous thing for online users everywhere. What information will you give Google knowing they may be forced to divulge it at the drop of a hat? If Google loses the trust of its users they could suffer a huge decline in the use of what has become a signature tool for them.

I really detest where all of this going. Having an Internet that is completely controlled by the government, where users will be fearful of entering in search queries or sending emails for fear it will brought against them. Even law-abiding users are likely to be cautious. What happened to an anonymous Internet? What happened to privacy rights in general?

If Google is forced to give the FTC the information it wants, how will that affect online services like Hotmail or Yahoo or AOL? The courts are quickly falling down a very slippery slope. And beyond that, what consequences will this have on the way people conduct their online lives in general. Will bloggers be fearful of writing things that go against the government in fear it will be reference later? Will customers be cautious about the kinds of things they purchase or view online? Are we in some kind of a time warp? It's a spectacular victory for the United States government and a disgusting display for private citizens everywhere.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/17/06 at 2:30 PM
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

March 16, 2006

Google + Wyse = Goobuntu?

Yes, we're back to the Goobuntu rumors. But are they rumors or on their way to reality? According to Wyse Technology, the leading thin-client manufacturer, they are already in talks with Google and Yahoo for the design of low-priced computers. We cry Goobuntu!

Wyse told the Silicon Valley Watcher that Google and Yahoo are interested in using low-priced PC-compatible computers to reach millions of users in developing countries. So is Goobuntu the $100 laptop project that's been all over the forums? Or is that project just a test run for Google's ultimate destination – a Google-based operating system to include Writely, GDrive, Gmail, CL2 and other applications? Probably the latter, or at least that's what Search Engine Journal is hypothesizing.

For those unfamiliar, the $100 laptop project was developed by MIT with Google's (among others) backing. The goal is to provide free machines to children in third world countries who cannot afford computers of their own. The computers involve a 'hand crank' to generate power and lack many features found on a typical personal computer, such as a hard disk. The charitable project was mocked Tuesday by the richest human in the world, Bill Gates:

"The last thing you want to do for a shared use computer is have it be something without a disk... and with a tiny little screen... geez, get a decent computer where you can actually read the text and you're not sitting there cranking the thing while you're trying to type."

He's just jealous. Poor Origami. Regardless of Gates' opinion, the low-cost computers could be a logical next step for Google to expand their reach. SEJ hypothesizes Google's recent acquisitions:

1. Low cost computers that don’t have big hard drives (say the $100 laptop or similar device)
2. Ubiquitous high-speed access (see GoogleNet or FON)
3. Web-based consumer software apps (e.g., GMail or Writely)
4. Virtually unlimited personal online storage (GDrive)"

Well that does sound like a Google operating system to me, or at least a 'compelling roadmap' for things to come. Is the $100 laptop project the first step to Goobuntu? Maybe. Of course Google denies all rumors of a Google-based operating system and laughed at the mention of Goobuntu. But then why the pairing with Wyse? And why did they steal Microsoft architect Marc Lucovsky last year? Goobuntu!

I think it's in the works. Or at least I hope it is, and so far I like what I'm hearing -- a low-cost computer already equipped with Google software. Sounds like a dream. Granted it couldn't run on a hand-crank but that's a design issue and design issues can be changed. The release of such a computer would surely knock Microsoft of the map as the primary platform, if Bill Gates' latest PR moves don't do it for them. Keep your fingers crossed. Goobuntu!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/16/06 at 4:27 PM
See more entries in Google, Rumors, Search Engine Optimization

Let Your Bookmarks Define You

This excites me in the geekiest of ways. Search Engine Journal has a post this morning about a revamped del.icio.us feature that I like, a lot - their new URL History tool. This ingenious creation tells you not only who bookmarked your site, but when they bookmarked it and what words they used to tag it. It also allows you to see what other sites, blogs, etc they have bookmarked, giving you a more complete profile of your target audience. Awesome!

del.icio.us is an open-ended social bookmarking site where users can tag their favorite sites, articles, blogs, music and more to store them and make them accessible from any computer. Users are also able to view information bookmarked by others.

The improved URL tool is extremely useful for analyzing how users associate or define your site, especially for companies just starting SEO campaigns. Doing a URL history search for BruceClay.com I can see that 47 del.icio.us users have bookmarked our site. Date information is presented on a per-month basis so sites can compare new bookmarks (three this month) against old lurkers. The tag cloud and tag descriptions show me what tags are used most often. For example, I can see that most users describe us using the tags 'analysis', 'marketing tools', 'tips', 'SEO', and 'tutorial'. Knowing what words and phrases users associate with your site will give you a better idea of what they're looking for and why they visit.

This tool is also handy for establishing keywords. According to SEJ, noting what words users themselves have chosen to describe your site may help you discover missed opportunities for optimizing or to identify terms that fall outside of industry jargon. For example, do users tag our site under search engine optimization, SEO or optimizing? It looks like most use the acronym SEO. Once you know what terms users view as being important you can customize your site and marketing campaigns accordingly.

Let's not forget my favorite feature! del.icio.us also shows you what else users have bookmarked using the same tags and keywords they used for your site. What a great way to search out competition or just get a better feel for your audience. I can see that a user that bookmarked us under "SEO" also tagged GoogleRankings.com, Performance Metrics, various SEO blogs and a popular SEO design site bookmarked with the same term. Where else can you get such detailed, free targeted information?

I must say I am uniquely impressed with this new tool. There is an unlimited opportunity for users to research and analyze their site and audience to make improvements. Plus it has what every good tool needs - just a slight touch of evil. Excuse me while I go ~~stalk~~ research our competition.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/16/06 at 10:53 AM
See more entries in Design, SEO Tips & Tricks, Search Engine Optimization

March 15, 2006

Another Tool Leaves the Nest

While you were still reeling from yesterday's Google/DOJ non-decision, Google released their Google Desktop out into the world last night, officially ridding it of its beta status. Ah, they grow up so fast. The new released version includes all the evil (but optional) GDrive 'Search Across Computers' components, as well as a unique Quick Search Box and Lock Search option.

Those who opt to give Google complete and unfiltered access to all of their personal files and information so that the search engine can "store" it on their hard drive (I know, I'm paranoid), can enable Google's new Quick Search Box. This search tool lies 'hidden' in the center of your desktop and allows users to perform a full search, scanning both web and desktop files. To make the box appear, simply hit the Ctrl key twice. Hit Ctrl two more times and the box will magically disappear. Pat your stomach and a cookie will be released out of your CD-ROM. Just kidding! (Though I'm sure Google is working on a tool for that too: GCookie.)

If you're the kind of person who's only afraid of people seeing your information (as opposed to corporate search engines), you may be interested in Google's Lock Search option, designed to prevent anyone from doing a Desktop Search on your computer. Simply click on the Lock Search icon and you will no longer be able to search from the Desktop homepage, sidebar, deskbar or Quick Search Box. Snazzy.

The released version of Google Desktop includes vast improvements and updates to the desktop sidebar and panels, homepage, advanced search, results pages, timeline view and preferences page. Complete details of the improvements (and there's a bunch!) can be found on the Google Desktop info page.

The upgraded status comes just two days after the folks at Computer World publicly labeled Google Desktop 3 an 'unacceptable security risk', warning IT managers to steer clear of the Search Across Computers function that could potentially weaken a corporation's network. The controversial feature allows Google to store a user's information so that it can be indexed, thereby making it searchable. Google promises the information is encrypted and accessible to only limited number of Google employees.

Big Brother paranoia aside, the new Google Desktop looks like it will be a hit among unorganized users. Good job guys... but I'm still not letting you read what's on my hard drive.

(Hat-Tip Search Engine Watch.)

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/15/06 at 3:33 PM
See more entries in Branding, Google, Search Engine Optimization

March 14, 2006

Google Will Likely Be Forced To Share

It was a Google, DOJ showdown as the two met at high noon (by East Coast standards, anyway) in San Jose federal court to once again wrangle over Google's right to hold on to their search data and the millions of Web addresses and URLs it contains. United States District Judge James Ware has said he will likely require Google to turn over some information to the Department of Justice, reported the Associated Press. What (or how much) information they will be forced to give up has yet to be determined.

The Judge said he would 'pay special attention to privacy concerns as he weighs the government's request for the information with the interests of a private company,' the news wire reported. The Judge also stressed he was 'particularly concerned' about the DOJ's demand for a random sampling of Google's search requests, stating he didn't want to set the perception that search engines could become tools for government surveillance. There has always been a certain degree of anonymity attributed to Internet queries; Ware seems to recognize the 'chilling effect' he could cause by tampering with that.

The DOJ originally demanded a random sampling of billions of URLs and over a week's worth of Google's search queries. The government has since reduced that number to 50,000 Web addresses and 5,000 random search requests from Google, something the engine views as a small victory.

Google Attorney Nicole Wong:

"We're very encouraged by the judge's thoughtful questions and comments. They reflected our concerns about user privacy and the scope of the government's subpoena request. At a minimum we've come a long way from the initial subpoena request, which was for billions of URLs and an entire week's worth of search queries. When the government was asked to justify their demand they conceded that they needed much less. Now the government has on its own already reduced that to 50,000 URLs and 5,000 search queries as a result of this process."

The wire reported that DOJ attorney Joel McElvain acknowledged that the DOJ has 'likely' obtained enough information from the other search engines to conduct its study, but said the study would 'be improved with Google's data". You have to wonder if the DOJ is now just continuing its fight with Google based on principle. They could surely take the data received from the other engines and use the money they are spending in court fees to research other, non-litigated avenues.

The DOJ originally subpoenaed Google nearly seven months ago, asking for a breakdown of search requests and requested URLs to defend a legal challenge to the Child Online Protection Act. Google has maintained the government's request would intrude on its users' privacy as well as its closely guarded trade secrets.

The folks at Search Engine Watch have compiled a comprehensive background for those who have been asleep since September.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/14/06 at 2:52 PM
See more entries in Google, Search Engine Optimization, Search Engines

March 9, 2006

Google rolls out demographics targeting

We all knew it would happen sooner or later. Without much fanfare, Google AdWords has added a feature enabling customers to target their ads based on age, gender, income or "some other factor". Advertisers can select up to three categories to set preferences and the matching is a wide net rather than a laser focus, catching everyone that fits in any of the categories not only those that fit in all the categories.

These ads will be displayed on the Google Network (in other words, AdSense) so those of you who choose only search pages and not content pages are still out of luck. Bidding is on a cost per thousand (CPM) model as are all site targeted campaigns. As it becomes more and more available, demographic targeting will become a popular avenue for advertisers looking not just for more traffic but also better conversions. It only stands to reason that if ads are seen by a very targeted niche audience, that audience will be more likely to buy what you are selling.

According to John Battelle, Google is working with Comscore/Media Matrix to classify domains in the Google network with Comscore's panel-based demographics. At this time demographic site selection is available only for campaigns which geo-target users in the United States. The deal is non-exclusive so look out for Yahoo to jump on the bandwagon soon enough. MSN of course, has been touting their demographic targeting all along.

Google recommends using several methods to identify which sites are most appropriate to display your ads. To help you out the Help Center entry on demographic site selection links to How do I use the site tool? Some more helpful advice comes from Brent Franson in the comments to MarketingPilgrim's entry on this topic.

Make sure to check the site before adding it to your site-targeted campaign.

Understand that the predicted impressions per day refers site impressions not ad impressions. It is interesting to note that the estimated number of impressions per day for cnn.com and match.com is 0-10k but bookofmatches.com is at 100-500k and plentyoffish.com at 500k+

Review organic and PPC efforts of prospective sites to better estimate traffic and target audience.

Solid advice even without demographics targeting.

Posted by Susan Esparza on 03/ 9/06 at 1:35 PM
See more entries in Google, Pay Per Click / Online Ads, Search Engine Optimization

Google 'Write' On Track for Microsoft Takeover?

Google is back to acquisitions today... though much quieter than usual. Without the hoopla a Google acquisition usually stirs, marketing guru Jen Mazzon of Writely.com has announced the acquisition of her company by Google. Writely (still in beta) is a collaborative word processor that runs in a web browser – the perfect new addition for a search engine rumored to be creating its own Office. Microsoft, who?

Writely is the perfect addition for Google, allowing users to create, save and share OpenDocument, Word, PDF and RTF files and blog postings online with a fun WYSIWYG format. Save where you ask? Well, maybe in their GDrive. It's all coming together.

Google looks to be preparing to give Microsoft a real run for its money – or at least its customer base – with all their recent additions. Who needs Outlook when you have Gmail? Who needs to suffer a through desktop locked Word document when there's web-based Writely? Who needs Access when there's Google Base? Who needs PowerPoint when you can create Google Pages? And it's all free!

That's how Om Malik sees things. Om started the Google/ Writely acquisition rumor yesterday on his blog and highlighted challenges he thought Google may face while trying to be a better Microsoft:

The general population is still unaware of all things Web 2.0 and are conditioned to use Microsoft Office; if for no other reason than just habit.

Microsoft Office documents are stored on local machines and not on Google’s servers. Convincing the masses that their documents will be safe (especially with all that has been going on lately) may be quite challenging—-Even if it’s FREE!

Om thinks the general public is 'conditioned' to use the Microsoft Office products, but I'm not too convinced of that. I think Google Office's target audience would be plenty keen to jump on a Google-based bandwagon. I think they've gotten used to the idea that going Google is the new, better way of life – especially when Google is offering superior, absolutely free alternatives.

As for the safety issue – while I may not jump at the chance to have my personal information stored on Google servers – if they want to save a backup copy of my blog and word documents, I am a-okay with that. Anyone who knows me can tell you about my penchant for accidentally deleting things or losing documents in my Temporary Files folder.

The folks at Writely seem as excited as I am about the deal – or at least excited enough to create a Top 10 Reasons Why Being Part Of Google Is Fantastic list. Call me crazy, but I like these guys.

Writely has currently closed off the creation of new accounts while they move over to Google, but those interested can signup to be notified when they begin accepting new registrations – I did.

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/ 9/06 at 12:05 PM
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization

March 8, 2006

Google Cover Up Revealed! Meet Google CL2!

It’s coming – just not anytime soon. Michael Arrington of TechCrunch got his lucky hands on some ‘leaked screenshots’ of Google Calendar, currently nicknamed CL2. The site was experiencing some technical difficulties this morning (sparking office speculation of a Google cover up!) but it seems to be up and running just fine now (foiled!).

Early reports say 200 beta testers are currently assessing the anxiously awaited CL2, which looks to be a traditional calendar with an AJAX twist. The calendar will allegedly be tightly integrated with Gmail, and will allow users to integrate their CL2 calendar with other calendar programs and use SMS (Short Messaging Service) notification systems.

Some known features include:

Subscription feeds for iCal and XML.
Event creation, search functions, multiple keyword shortcuts, sharing, notifications (including email, SMS, and pop-ups).
Separate personal and group calendars.
A searchable events database with a public webpage (for public events) to share details.
The option to make your calendar public, private or just show what times you are busy.
You can add other calendars by searching public calendars, friend's calendars, holiday calendars, or by entering a public calendar address (iCal or Atom).

The calendar program appears to use a clean, blue and white interface and should be a power tool for users. The login screen is currently lurking on Google servers, but unless you’re one of the (very, very) blessed 200 beta users it won’t get you far. Beta-haters who do enter a login are treated to an ‘invalid request’ message.

For those who just can’t get enough, the blogoscope is running this image.

Get excited!

Posted by Lisa Barone on 03/ 8/06 at 2:03 PM
See more entries in Search Engine Optimization