Tag Archives: Search

SEO Firms Must Become Digital Media Agencies

Advertising, Search, Social Media, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One of these days, Marketers are going to learn. It will be a new dawn for marketing! A shining era in which everyone recognizes how interwoven search is with everything a business does. Until then, we’ll continue to plod along…

Joe Devine, CEO of The Search Engine Guys in Austin, Texas knows this all too well. Recognizing how search continues to evolve in our new social paradigm, Joe (with whom I’d love to shake hands for his perspective) shared some thoughts on how social search will transform SEO with Mashable.

Facebook and Bing Partner

In an obvious move but, perhaps, from a surprising direction, Microsoft’s search engine is to begin returning results based on Facebook “Likes” according to your friends. While an exciting announcement for Microsoft and validation of potential Facebook Like has to redefine web site popularity, how many really want social search? The internet is littered with examples of failed business models predicated on the idea that what your friends like is a better indication of what you like than the general public. Netflix long toyed around with such community concepts, enabling users to share their ratings with friends and receive recommendations from the network in kind. I for one disliked having to ignore many of the recommendations (my wife and I don’t even have the same taste!). What does this future hold for search?

According to Kara Swisher:

“It represents search based on what people are actually interested in rather than just crunching massive amounts of information and muscling it into something useful.” – BoomTown

Does it? With Facebook’s privacy issues of late, I’m not sure I want this information shared, let alone tailoring my search results.

So what?

The question Joe digests is the impact that this evolution has on us as marketers.

In its roughly 15 years of existence, SEO has grown from being a small wildcat operation run by webmasters and content services to being one of the most dynamic, fast-growing sectors of the tech market. The reason for this rapid growth is because — not in spite –- of the constantly evolving nature of search engines.

Simply, just another reason we exist. The bottom line he makes, and with which I vehemently agree, is that this actually changes very little. What do you need to do because of the marriage between Like and Search? Nothing, assuming you are effectively optimizing your site and creating engaging content.

At the heart of the evolution is ever more evidence that an “SEO” is a dying breed. A resource working for your company, that alone optimizes your site for search, is about as valuable someone exclusive to social marketing. Everyone wants to outsource social marketing but it’s such an integral part of your marketing strategy, affecting PR, SEO, viral marketing, and customer support, that you’re nuts to think that hiring someone to run your social marketing (alone) is a wise decision. Search engine optimization is a science and art so integral to everything else going on in your business that your internal resources or agency of record must be active throughout your digital media strategy, if not the scope of your entire marketing plan.

For crying out loud, integrate your search strategy with everything else or be doomed to go the way of the Tasmanian Devil (they’re extinct right?).

Yahoo’s New Search IU – Universal Search Finally Getting Somewhere?

Search, , , , , , , , ,

The promise of Universal Search or One Search has, for years, waffled between the promise of a better search experience and the reality of results diluted with local listings, videos, images, social network chatter, and other content often irrelevant to the needs of the user. Simply, the idea behind Universal Search is that one set of results can and should provide more than just web pages; the reality is that those other results are often simply woven into the traditional set of results, moving web pages or preferred content to subsequent pages. The experience often works well in a vertical (shopping, travel, finance, etc.) where the search experience has context, but across every conceivable result, it leaves something to be desired.

The universal direction for search engines left SEOs, and businesses, chasing video and local listings much more aggressively than perhaps they should; diverting attention from ensuring their web sites are optimized properly in favor of publishing video or getting listed in every local directory on the promise of get more content indexed by Google. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating avoiding local listings or consider video; this is an exploration of the Universal Search user experience. I’m only pointing out that everything should be taken in context.

Go Yahoo!

The real reason behind this post is a bit of praise for Yahoo! After much criticism on my part, and notwithstanding the replacement of Yahoo’s search engine with Bing, Yahoo steps up the game quite nicely with this redesign of their search results; fluidly incorporating other content without blending the results in a way that dilutes the experience. An AJAX like experience enables users to tab through video, twitter, or image content as it’s available; getting a quick synopsis of other results while leaving the familiar web results readily accessible.

Sparking an arms race in search, Bing can arguably be credited with prompting a spate of innovations in the search experiences in the last few months (some not so welcome). While others before them have attempted to light a fire under the search industry, Bing’s slick, innovative user experience has led, according to Matt McGee, to a increasing share of search volume (and dollars) by Microsoft.

So, go Yahoo! Purely from the user experience standpoint, what do you think of the new directions in search?

Sign of the economic times? Google Lets Brands Run More Than One Search Campaign on a Keyword

Google, Paid Search, , , , , , , ,

Did I fall asleep?  I turn my attention from Search for a few weeks (okay, so it’s really been a bit longer) and I return to find major companies running more than one campaign in paid search!

To many of you this may not be news; like I said, I’m playing catch up.  Just the same, it’s new to me so let’s investigate and start with from the beginning as I think this is a huge change for Google and the industry.

Square one

In the beginning, Google restricted companies to one ad campaign on a given keyword.  To most, this policy was irrelevant, smaller companies could neither afford more nor conceive of ways to run more campaigns on the same keyword.  As a result, to some, it was a great equalizer; for big companies, big brands, deep pockets, and diversified conglomerates, running more than one campaign is a means of boxing out competition in search – forcing everyone to one per keyword prevents this.   Take, for example, a major travel site facilitating hotel reservations, car rentals, airline tickets, etc.  On a search for “Hawaii travel” (I just got back from Kauai), a consumer wants a diverse set of options from which to choose; Google’s policy once ensured this, enforcing that search results present different alternatives.  Now, major travel companies, so long as they promote distinct products or price points, can own two spots: Book a hotel in Hawaii; Cheap flights to Hawaii.

On one hand, this strikes me as a more appropriate marketplace; businesses have different products and services and should be able to promote them on relevant keywords.  On the other hand, it makes it much more difficult for the small and self employed business owners who have neither the money, nor time, to play this game.  Sure, the local travel agent could do the same but would they know how?  Could they afford it?  And really, how many major travel businesses can you count on two hands? Times 2 ads and the ad space is taken and small travel companies are out of the game.

Frankly, I’m not sure how I feel about it.

Sign of the Economic Times

What I find more interesting is the underlying implication.  Why the recent change in policy?  What would search revenue look like for the internet giant if they had not done this; not reduced restrictions on the search marketplace?  To be sure, better or worse for advertisers, what the change means is more competition for ad space; driving up rates and revenue during a time when they were likely in decline.

What frustrates is that the change does more to support bigger companies that the surface suggests.  I’ve long struggled with and investigated the idea that known brands have an advantage on Google because the impact of Quality Scores – clicks on ads factor into position relative to what you bid.  A logical model for Google (they make the most possible by favoring ads/brands that drive more revenue) but unknown companies have to scratch their way to some recognition, while known brands, with the deeper pockets, pay pennies for the same real estate.  Now, the big brands can own double the space while still paying less per click – they’ve just gained an exponentially increasing benefit over small businesses.

I suppose what frustrates more is the loss of what was effectively a great equalizer.  While the one ad policy may or may not have been the right choice for Google and businesses at large, it did equalize the opportunity to acquire search real estate, in some way.  I’m increasingly a fan, a champion, of companies like eBay, crowdSPRING, oDesk, and free web services that compete antiquated paid models.  The later includes businesses like Amazon’s publisher service, iTunes, Skype, Campfire (alright, yes, Campfire is a paid service I just think its REALLY cool), Tokbox, and admittedly Outright.com and our partners.   The former make it easier and cheaper to find or promote products and services.  All, level the playing  field by eliminating barriers to entry and putting players on the field to compete based on skill, not (so much) dollars or influence.   Google’s just moved a step from that crowd and I’m disappointed.  In a strange twist of fate, it occurs to me that Google, who owns Google Docs (free web services that do as much against Microsoft Office), has just pulled an Apple iPhone App Store move.

The Sitemap, Your Hostess with the Mostest

Natural Search / SEO, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I had a great conversation the other day with a friend who was asking about the importance of a sitemap. While a protocol exists, prompting an easy answer to most questions, it was proposed that following it didn’t really matter with Google owning search.

Fine opinion to take if you are the type to put all your eggs in one basket. What I encouraged, and hope you consider, is that when a convention, a standard, exists, follow it!

Where the conversation turned to debate was on the question of the location of the a sitemap (which, too, has a standard). Proposed, was that your robots.txt file points bots to the sitemap so its location doesn’t really matter.

hostessWhile a sitemap in a unique location serves its purpose, and works just fine, I turned to an analogy (I like analogies) to defend the standard. Think of your sitemap as the host or hostess at your favorite restaurant. When you (the crawler) enter the restaurant, you expect to find that person right up front, smiling, behind a podium, with menus in hand; ready to show you to your table.

Now, keep yourself in the shoes of the search engine crawler and consider; how have you felt when you’ve entered a restaurant only to find that the host is missing from the podium? Probably not enough aggravation to turn you away but, I’m sure you’ve given pause, turned to your friends, and said, “well…”
Of course, as soon as the host appears, you’re satisfied and off to dinner but that moment, that infinitesimal moment, is a road block in an otherwise perfect experience.

What happens when that host isn’t there at all?

Without a sitemap, and hopefully you already realize this, your website is effectively a restaurant that says, “Please seat yourself.” Patrons are quite capable of seating themselves but, they pause, they debate, they point to open tables. For certain, your restaurant isn’t considered as fancy as the one next door.

So you realize you NEED a host, does it really matter where it lives? Why should a sitemap reside at https://yoursite.com/sitemap.xml? Perhaps more aggravating to me than the restaurant that doesn’t seat you (my expectation is usually previously set), is the one at which the podium is at the back of the restaurant, past the bar, through the tables. Max’s Opera Cafe at Stanford Mall does this (sorry Max); to get your name on a list for a table, you have to wade through the bar and the other customers waiting to be seated. Best advice I can offer? DON’T DO THAT!!

(Worse? They effectively do the same thing with their website; check it out, you have to wade through an intro before you get to the site).

Don’t make me clamor through the crowd just so I can say I want to get into the place! Don’t put the host somewhere other than where I expect it to be!! Why? Because when that search engine crawler comes crawling, it is going to look where it expects to find it, find nothing, and take a left turn at robots.txt before it gets in. Why put it through the hassle??

Now, I’m not one to put research behind this type of supposition. I haven’t tested whether or not it matters and someone could probably point out that it doesn’t. But I’m a patron at a restaurant and when a standard exists, stick with it, or I think a little less of you. Enough to walk away? No, not necessarily; but I probably won’t come back as much.

Final thought; of course this begs, what then is the robots.txt file if not the host? Doesn’t it point the direction? I suppose, it serves as the sign on the door; telling people whether or not you are open, hours of business, and what’s on the menu. The Yelp sticker is just showing off.

In SF next week? Come Chat with Lorna Li and myself

Conferences / Events, Natural Search / SEO, Paid Search, Search, Social Media, , , , , , , , , , ,

I am very excited about the Unintentional Entrepreneur meetup next Wednesday! If in the Bay Area, I’d love to see you there! We’ll have pizza, drinks… the event is FREE!

We’re going to talk about some the fundamentals of a new business; managing income, expenses, and taxes; establishing and maintaining your brand online; and quick, critical marketing considerations such as SEO and network (social or otherwise). Kevin Reeth will be there if you want to pick a brain on startups or what we’re doing.

Lorna, founder of Search Marketing Salon and one of the best social and search marketers in the business, will share some thoughts on marketing your business. The chance alone to chat with her is worth the price of admission (free, by the way). I’ve had the pleasure of catching her at a few conferences and love her conscientious approach; she writes Green Marketing 2.0, aimed at helping activists, nonprofit professionals, and social entrepreneurs understand the basics of how to use web-based tools increase the visibility of important issues.

Register now we so know you’re coming; July 15th at 6 pm. We’ll take care of the food and drinks and open the doors to Langton Labs (which is a fantastic art gallery) to have some fun.

Google Please Work on the Blog Search Algorithm!

Blogs & Blogging, Google, Vertical Search, , , , , , , ,

One aspect of the regular search algorithm that seems of increasing importance to blog search is authority; page rank, or what ever you want to call it. Simply, ensuring that blog search fosters the inherent premise of a blog by promoting real bloggers.

I LOVE blog search. I can’t stress enough how much I prefer it over regular search for finding great authors and opinion pieces about news, work, tips, and resources – through blogs. I’d rather link from SEO’Brien to other bloggers, endorsing and supporting those passionate about sharing their experience and wisdom, while trying to earn a living online.

Enter blog spam. Or perhaps it should be called Black Hat Blogging? As traditional media companies and spammers have caught on to how blogs effectively optimize content for search engines, automatically ping crawlers, and prominently index in both blog and traditional search results, everyone is turning to the platform as a means of attracting attention. Publications traditionally considered news channels now flood blog search results with editorial and commentary alike; sure, often written by bloggers or transparent reporters (by which I mean that they are clear about the fact that it is a paid reporter blogging… not that reporters are trans… nevermind) but they have one quality that distinguishes them from bloggers – they are all run by media companies with a bottom line more influenced by the dollar than the passion of its author.

I want experience driven, not reporting or opinion based, content from my blogs.

Worse? The pure spam
With exponentially increasing regularity that reminds me of the time I drank too much Metamucil, blog search is littered with sites put up only to automatically populate with others’ content, promotional articles that link only to one service or business, or the brief “click here to read more” snippets that link to ebook publishers, seminar hawkers, or just amazon.com’s affiliate program.

Is it too much to ask to make blog search bring me results from genuine bloggers? I’m not asking that you figure out how to prevent promotional blogs and articles; heck, we’re all in it for that reason, just do me the small favor of refining blog search so that I can find my friends, my peers, the professionals who work and sweat for their living and want to offer a few insights and pearls of wisdom from a blog.