Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Your Favorite Eric Schmidt Quotes?

Do you want Google to tell you what you should be doing? Mr. Schmidt thinks so:



"More and more searches are done on your behalf without you needing to type. I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions," he elaborates. "They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next. ... serendipity—can be calculated now. We can actually produce it electronically."


Of course the problem with algorithms is they rely on prior experience to guide you. The won't tell you to do something unique & original that can change the world, rather they will lead you down a well worn path.


What are some of the most bland and most well worn paths in the world? Established brands:



The internet is fast becoming a "cesspool" where false information thrives, Google CEO Eric Schmidt said yesterday. Speaking with an audience of magazine executives visiting the Google campus here as part of their annual industry conference, he said their brands were increasingly important signals that content can be trusted.


"Brands are the solution, not the problem," Mr. Schmidt said. "Brands are how you sort out the cesspool."


"Brand affinity is clearly hard wired," he said. "It is so fundamental to human existence that it's not going away. It must have a genetic component."


If Google is so smart then why the lazy reliance on brand? Why not show me something unique & original & world-changing?


Does brand affinity actually have a hard wired genetic component? Or is it that computers are stupid & brands have many obvious signals associated with them: one of which typically being a large ad budget. And why has Google's leading search engineer complained about the problem of "brand recognition" recently?


While Google is collecting your data and selling it off to marketers, they have also thought of other ways to monetize that data and deliver serendipity:



"One day we had a conversation where we figured we could just try and predict the stock market..." Eric Schmidt continues, "and then we decided it was illegal. So we stopped doing that."


Any guess how that product might have added value to the world? On down days (or days when you search for "debt help") would Google deliver more negatively biased ads & play off fears more, while on up days selling more euphoric ads? Might that serendipity put you on the wrong side of almost every trade you make? After all, that is how the big names in that space make money - telling you to take the losing side of a trade with bogus "research."


Eric Schmidt asks who you would rather give access to this data:



“All this information that you have about us: where does it go? Who has access to that?” (Google servers and Google employees, under careful rules, Schmidt said.) “Does that scare everyone in this room?” The questioner asked, to applause. “Would you prefer someone else?” Schmidt shot back – to laughter and even greater applause. “Is there a government that you would prefer to be in charge of this?”


That exchange helped John Gruber give Eric Schmidt the label Creep Executive Officer, while asking: "Maybe the question isn’t who should hold this information, but rather should anyone hold this information."


But Google has a moral conscience. They think quality score (AKA bid rigging) is illegal, except for when they are the ones doing it!



"I think judgement matters. If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," - Eric Schmidt




Which is why the blog of a certain mistress disappeared from the web. And, of course, since this post is on a blog, it doesn't matter:



If you're ever confused as to the value of newspaper editors, look at the blog world. That's all you need to see. - Eric Schmdit


Here is the thing I don't get about Google's rhetorical position on serendipity & moral authority: if they are to be trusted to recommend what you do, then why do they recommend illegal activities like pirating copyright works via warez, keygens, cracks & torrents?


Serendipity ho!


Subscribe to our blog via email or RSS to get more great posts like this one!


View the original article here

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Integrated Versus Interruptive Advertising

 By Michael Gray on September 16th, 2010
In Advertising  


When I was first starting in Internet marketing, one of the first books I read was Permissive Marketing by Seth Godin. The point of this book was that customers who give you permission to market to them are more valuable than those you have to interrupt, and you shouldn’t abuse that trust. One of the second lessons came from adsense, which showed how ads that were integrated into the copy always performed better than those placed outside of the copy.


While this is something I integrate into my projects, there are a lot of media companies that don’t. For example, here is a screen shot of the New York Times on the iPad. Notice the banner placed in the bottom of the page outside of the text.


 


What happens with the app: during your second story, an interstitial ad appears (which was never clicked on), getting in the way of reading the desired story. This, I’m sure, results in a low engagement. Last week, they made a change. Although the banner is still at the bottom and you still get the interstitial, they added a new format embedded in the text … And, even though I wasn’t the target market, I clicked the ad …


 


Interestingly, the ad directs you to an in app landing page with options…


 


…followed by a browser landing page where you could make a purchase.


 


So what is the takeaway from this?

Use a service like Crazyegg (disclosure: they are an advertiser) or Google multi variant testing to experiment with ad placement.Try placements inside of the content at the top, middle, or bottom.Stay away from advertising that interrupts or blocks users from getting to the content they really want. How to Integrate Advertising into Your Blog So you’ve been blogging for a while, your getting some...Off Topic Advertising If you are involved in selling text links or “know...Review of Text Link Advertising Services A few weeks ago Nick over on Threadwatch blogged about...Advertising and Usability As the web matures and begins to displace, replace, or...Social Media Advertising Bill Flitter, Pheedo Marc Schiller, ElectronicArtists Nicole Bogas, BlogAds First...Text Link Ads - New customers can get $100 in free text links.BOTW.org - Get a premier listing in the internet's oldest directory.Ezilon.com Regional Directory - Check to see if your website is listed!Page1Hosting - Class C IP Hosting starting at $2.99.Directory Journal - List your website in our growing web directory today.Majestic SEO - Competitive back link intellegence for SEO AnalysisContent Customs - Unique and high quality SEO writing services, providing webmasters with hundreds of SEO articles per weekGlass Whiteboards - For a professional durable white board with no ghosting, streaking or marker stains, see my Glass Whiteboard ReviewNeed an SEO Audit for your website, look at my SEO Consulting ServicesKnowEm - Protect your brand, product or company name with a continually growing list of social media sites.Scribe SEO Review find out how to better optimize your wordpress posts.TigerTech - Great Web Hosting service at a great price.Tagged as: Advertising, lancome, new york times, Seth godin


See my disclaimer about advertising and affiliate links


View the original article here

Monday, October 25, 2010

October's Linkscape Update

As many of you likely noticed, Linkscape updated its index on Thursday night. New data is now available in the SEOmoz Firefox and Google Chrome toolbars, Open Site Explorer, the classic Linkscape tool and many of our other SEO tools.


This update was, sadly, just over 2 weeks off schedule, primarily due to some hardware failures at Amazon's EC2 where we run processing on our large link graph to produce the metrics and views for the API.  Although we've encountered issues like this in the past, this was one of the larger failures and meant processing had to be restarted several times to update the index. You might be able to read more about the technical details in the near future on our nascent and geektacular Dev Blog.

Pages: 41,219,038,886 (41 Billion)Subdomains: 436,693,488 (436 Million)Root Domains: 99,649,652 (99 Million)Links: 402,521,240,277 (402 Billion)

 I made some graphs showing a few interesting trends over the past few months in the web's adoption/use of certain protocols.


 


The chart above shows how using rel="nofollow" on internal links is slowly becoming less popular (though it's still a majority of use).


 


This chart's telling us that rel canonical use has barely grown from June to October (as a percent). In this index, 5.42% of the pages we saw used rel=canonical tags. The datapoint from May (when rel=canonical was on 5.50% of pages we saw) is curious, but I suspect it has more to do with which pages we were choosing to crawl and index vs. an actual shift in usage. It's a good reminder, though, that unless we see large, sustained shifts across indices comprised of relatively similar URLs, we shouldn't jump to conclusions. 


The next scheduled update for Linkscape is Nov. 12th (see the Linkscape Calendar page on our API Wiki) and we hope to be in much better shape with hitting that deadline.


Linkscape is also undergoing some serious upgrades over the next 3 months. With our web app launched (and regular upgrades on track), 4 of our 10 engineering folks (Phil, Chas, Bryce & Ben) are going to be working to make Linkscape fresher, faster, more comprehensive and higher quality by January. Expect to see some incremental improvements between now and then, which we'll report here on the blog.


View the original article here

Sunday, October 24, 2010

What Is SEO, Really?

 


Lisa Barone wrote an interesting piece entitled "Are SEOs Responsible For Rankings Or Money?". At a recent SMX conference, Matt McGee posed the SEO myth "SEO is about rankings”. Lisa was relieved when the panel concluded that SEO was really all about the money.


I agree, but then all business activity is ultimately about money. We could say car racing is all about money, but it's also about engineering. It's about skill, excitement, and winning the game.


So what is SEO these days, anyway?


Back when SEO started, SEO wasn't called SEO. It was probably best described by those who did it as a form of hacking.


The first search engines weren't particularly clever, so it was relatively easy to figure out their sorting algorithms. There was a time when Infoseek's algorithm was almost entirely based on keyword density and keyword position.


Whilst this hacking was still ultimately about money, it was as much a game as anything else. I'm sure many old school SEOs remember those days with a sense of nostalgia. It was more of a pure technical pursuit back then.


As search engines got more sophisticated, and more money flowed online, the nature of the game changed. SEO moved beyond technical hacking to an exercise in making connections.


In Googles early days, you could buy a few high PR links - or beg for them - and that was enough to get you ranking top ten in most keyword areas. Buy a few more if you really wanted to go hard. Saturate the long tail with auto-gen, just like your competitors were doing, and it was game on. Some may say we haven't completely left this phase, but the sun is setting on this approach.


These days, a more holistic approach is required. The search engines, Google in particular, have become more and more oblique, which means systematic technical approaches are less effective than they once were. This begs the question - what is a client hiring an SEO to do, exactly?


BTW: For those who want to read deeper on a history of SEO, check out this excellent Danny Sullivan interview. He knows more than most about the history of SEO.


Ever had trouble explaining to people what you do?


I've worked out a succinct answer that is easy for non-technical people to understand. When people ask me what I do, I tell them "I'm a drug dealer".


It isn't true, of course, but I just figure it's easier for people to grasp. If pushed, I'll launch into a detailed explanation of SEO, internet advertising and web publishing models - an explanation which is universally guaranteed to be met with the response "huh"?.


Often, they'll conclude: "so you rank web sites in Google, then?".


To which my reply is "well, that's part of it". As I explain further, I'm still not sure I'm making any headway, so figure it's time everyone had another drink and talk about something else.


The SMX panel is right. SEO is not about just about ranking websites, it's about so much more. Some SEOs, myself included, use SEO as part of a business strategy, a strategy that is just as much about publishing, domain names, brand building, marketing and traffic acquisition. It involves metrics, tracking, conversions, split/run testing, adwords, adsense, writing, researching, managing and changing the light-bulb in the office when it blows. The commonality is that it is oriented around the search ecosystem. Except for the light-bulb.


Some SEOs focus on very specific areas. It is their job to take a site from nowhere in the search engines to achieving desirable rankings. Their job ends there. I suspect such a role is becoming less common as search companies like Google extend their tentacles into every corner of the web, and search consultants invariably follow.


Ask ten different SEOs what they do, and you'll probably get ten different answers. None of which the lay person will likely understand, unfortunately.


If you're starting out in SEO now, I don't envy your challenge. If you're reading this, and you're an SEO veteran, please feel free to add your comments below. What is your advice to those starting out?


Here's mine. ;)


It helps to understand the big picture first. The reason people engage in SEO is ultimately about making money. Even a non-profit may make money from SEO by saving money they would have spent on some other marketing channel.


They want people to find their web site. They want people to connect with them, rather than their competitors. They want people to do this so they can convert these people to buyers, of their goods, their services, or their ideas. If a site were only to rank - say, on keyword terms no-one searched for, or that weren't directly applicable to the objectives of the business, then the SEO work is largely useless. It matters not if a site appears in Google's index. If no one visits via a search in Google, then all that's happened is the bandwidth costs have increased i.e. Google's spider visits and digests pages, and the ROI for the SEO spend looks dire.


So SEO isn't about rankings.


The rankings must translate to something tangible. In most cases, this means gaining qualified visitor traffic. To get this traffic, a site must do more than rank, a site must appeal to visitors. A visitor who clicks back isn't really a visitor. To appeal to visitors, the SEO must first understand them. What do they want? What problem do they have?


Once the SEO understands visitor intent - and they can do this by getting clues from the search query itself, and testing pages against alternatives - they then direct that visitor around the site in order to turn the visitor into something else i.e. a buyer, a subscriber, a reader. Some might say this goes beyond the job description of an SEO, however whether an SEO works on this part or not, they do need to understand it. If the client doesn't see a positive benefit from an SEOs work, they are unlikely to keep paying for the services.


So, yes, SEO is about money. But it is also about the long process by which money is made.


Subscribe to our blog via email or RSS to get more great posts like this one!


View the original article here

Saturday, October 23, 2010

The Definitive Guide to Awesome Web Content

What is it we SEOs do? Most of our answers probably boil down to this; we help webpages rank higher at search engines by improving each of the three cornerstones of SEO. The first aspect; technical problems - like indexable content, meta robots tags and URL structures - has been cracked by SEOmoz’s awesome web app. Suddenly we can get a complete dashboard of errors to go and sort - easy.


Then of course, then there’s the “trust” issue. Getting authoritative and relevant links; and with Open Site Explorer where advanced link analysis and data is now only a click away. And with the a huge range of link building tips, strategies, and tactics here, it’s fair to say that we’ve got the SEO ninja skills to go and create “trust-worthy” websites.


 


So that leaves content…


Content is abstract. It’s irrational. It’s hard for CEOs, managers and influential decision-makers to get there heads around. It’s fantastic.


What's the point in what you read?


We consume content to solve problems, be entertained and to satisfy curiosity. Based on where you are in a decision making process, you can divide ‘content’ into four different categories. This post is all about defining each category.


In an age of tweetdeck, rss, five sentence emails and the internet making us stupid, supposedly, who on earth is hanging around to read meaningful stuff? I mean, it’s a bit over-rated when you’ve got to be checking your inbox every five minutes, keeping current with Twitter, and all these feeds, and then some...


IMAGE via: Geek and Poke


The reason such technology exists is so we can be on the edge of stuff.


We can see and read the latest ideas, news and commentary. We can connect with people who share common interests and start a conversation. That kind of ‘content’ is a) meaningless to those who aren’t in the know and b) not particularly relevant a week or so down the line.


This is what is making the web at the moment - current conversation. Everyone can chip-in on what other people have to say. We all have our own circles of influence where we can share and spread ideas. We’re all wittering away with our own little thoughts - it’s not cohesive and it’s unlikely to be useful to an outsider trying to figure it all out - at least on it’s own. I call this Blurb.


Blurb Content is conversation.


It’s two way. Blurb is exclusive in that it’s meaningless to those who don’t understand the community, who don’t know the secret handshake and who aren’t clued up on the topic - but for those who are “in the know”, blurb is where discussion, debates and drama define opinions and leads to decision making. Within the club, blurb is awesome.


We’re lucky on blogs like this to have really great conversations, fleshing out theories and the results from experiments; it attracts intelligent two-way conversation. It’s why you might tweet about it more, because there’s so much value in the conversation. It’s why you’re more likely to take action, because you’ve heard it thrashed out by a handful of the industry brains. It’s why you're more likely to come back for more conversation.


Equally, there’s pretty useless blurb. “Great post” “really enjoyed it” or “tldr” which has no real value to other visitors, and therefore no real value to search engines either. The real power of blurb and UGC is things like this (YOUmoz), Threadless and - dare I say it? - Wikipedia. People have been empowered to go and create their own awesome corner of the web.


The Rule of Blurb - Culture Valuable two-way Conversation.


Conversation is the fuel of the web; and with hundreds of millions of us online, that’s the potential for a big conversation. The problem we face, both as SEOs and marketers in general is initiating that conversation.


Who’s Gonna Break the Ice?


IMAGE: UrologyOnline



 


We can do this two ways:?


1) Create content and ask for conversation (tweet this, leave a comment, let’s connect on facebook)


2) Create a system where you encourage other people to initiate conversation


Which way do you think is harder to replicate, will be more scaleable and have more influence across the web in the long term? You said two, right? The question is - how. Let’s go back to the SEOmoz model (because most of us have had a good look around this site and know it well, so it’s doubly relevant):


What got you to the point of chipping into the conversation on here? What qualified you to know what you were talking about, and pitch in with something valuable? I bet that this blog post hasn’t taught you everything you know about SEO (and if it did, you’d probably reside to saying: “great post. really interesting stuff” anyways).


The reason why is because at some point in your SEO education, you’ve stumbled across someone or something with “the answers”. Something that answers your questions fully. Where somebody has simply communicated the concepts behind SEO to you in one or more pieces of content.

A good book...An awesome video...A seminar...

The fundamental difference is it’s a one-way conversation.


Consider this scenario; your lost in an foreign city - you were supposed to be in an office meeting fifteen minutes ago. What do you do? You ask a local. They tell you how to get there. You listen and do what they say. They’re the expert, so you listen.


Example two. You have a medical problem. You go to your doctor. Your doctor examines you and tells you your problem, and prescribes a cure. Sometimes you might be reluctant, but you trust their skills and expertise so you do exactly what they say.


You watch a talent show on TV and want to take up the guitar. You find a teacher and hang on their every word whilst trying to work out how to play chords. You may ask them to go over something again, but it’s still a one-way conversation.


This behaviour is typical of “newbies”. You’re mind is like a sponge, you're being entirely receptive to someone else's ideas and explanations and because of this you’ll be able to understand and talk about the problem and solution - i.e. you can engage in the conversation on the web. This kind of content focuses and concentrates attention on one specific problem.


This is called Definitive Content.


This brings up three things:

1) Definitive content cultures conversation and decision-making


Definitive Content educates people so, with their expanded knowledge can engage in conversation and make informed decisions. This content is educational. People who are searching for information have already identified that they’re not comfortable making uninformed decisions. They’re looking for “the answer”

2) Definitive content must be remarkable + awesome + white-paper-worthy.


In a world where attention is a scarce resource, your definitive content needs to stand out from the crowd and be worth the time spent consuming it. It must be remarkable in order to have conversation about it. It must also be jaw-droppingly awesome so reactions and remarks are positive. And it must be white-paper-worthy in order to address the problem fully without “selling” (that comes later).


3) Blurb is frustrating for learners becuase it isn’t definitive


That’s why bloggers teaching stuff bitterly frustrates me. Back to basics, a ‘web log’ was originally meant for journalism, commentary and personal tales, and yet the platform has been stretched over other uses. So people now create niche blogs and post about something specific, perhaps offering tips. So far, harmless blurb…


Then they try writing something “definitive”…


This doesn’t work for three main reasons:

Bloggers are afraid of completing the article – they thrive from the conversations that evolve from a good blog post which doesn’t quite close all the doors.Bloggers are afraid of forcing their readers to spend too much time reading for fear they’ll get bored. Bloggers are dependent on ‘little and often’ readership.Bloggers are possibly even afraid of spending extra time on “definitive content” for fear that they won’t be able to produce enough posts so readers will lose interest.

And what’s sad, is that after the first few days after the post is published, the traffic will drop down to a mere fraction of what it was, since your readership has simply “been there, done that”. Congratulations; you’re now in a business where your ‘product’ becomes worthless practically overnight.


Blogging is about the person, not the problem.


Blogging has it’s place creating blurb content, not definitive content (when you confuse the two, you have a personal problem). In fact, blogging could be considered a response to definitive content; it’s the ultimate example of user-generated content, or rather... user-generated conversation. The early days of SEOmoz saw Rand posting his commentary to SEO news.


Now, that’s not a stab at blogging - more a criticism of how people blog. Some of the best blogs about blogging use definitive content in order to bring newbies up to speed so their regular blurb is both relevant and newbies can talk about it. Darren Rowse’s Problogger is one of the biggest and best blogs about blogging, and even so Darren suggests buying the ProBlogger book in order to get all the details on starting up all in one place. And that makes sense, doesn’t it?


Everyone’s blogging like sheep, churning out loads of mediocre content. The world doesn’t need more content. It needs more remarkable, definitive content. Suddenly, those creating Definitive Content become somebody. Blogging has it’s place in it’s roots; a platform for commentary on news, personal affairs and creating conversation - not being manipulated out of place creating definitive pieces.


(There was a really interesting article about the Death of the Boring Blog Post which essentially outlines this problem from a design perspective. Apparently the answer is 'blogazines' - but this doesn't solve the fundamental problem of answering the problem people are typing in. Pretty is impressive but doesn't necessarily mean it's the best.)


Definitive content is the stuff which you reference, re-read, remember and in some cases - recite! Ever been in a position where you’ve been telling someone about an awesome book, or video that you’ve gotten a bit obsessed with? And what’s interesting, is even if it isn’t necessarily “current” or trending on Twitter, you’ll still reference it ‘cause it’s awesome. Hence, Definitive Content is evergreen - which means in the long run it’s a high effort-reward strategy.


Definitive Content Strategy


Step 1) Find an in-demand niche within a niche.
Step 2) Go be king.


In emerging industries, rarely have people launched with awesome definitive content. Instead, as the industry matures and begins to fragment - then the niche players can identify and distinguish themselves. A great example is looking at the search marketing industry:

Cindy Krum created Rank-Mobile.com ~2007; a website selling her mobile marketing consultancy services. She’s established herself by being the go to girl for all things to do with mobile. She’s enforced this by literally writing the book on Mobile Marketing, and then supplementing this with her blog commentary on industry news- her blurb.David Mihm is ‘local search guy’. His collaboration to create the Local Search Ranking Factors (currently in it’s third volume) with other top brains in the industry helps not only define the fundamentals of search but also positions him and his website as experts. On top of this, he blurbs about local search all around the SEO space.Perry Marshall wrote the book on Google Adwords in 2006 as businesses began to wake up to Adwords and the program really began to take off. He offer expensive consulting-based direct marketing products to his email list which he’s also built up by offering freebie definitive content for signing up (email courses, PDFs, mp3s etc.)SEOmoz! Countless Definitive Content pieces like the Beginners Guide to SEO or the Search Engine Ranking Factors articles which get referenced by hundreds of SEO blogs and professionals. This is then supplemented with an the SEOmoz and YOUmoz blogs with the weekly Definitive 'Whiteboard Friday' videos fueling the fire.

Timing is important with creating Definitive Content - I think there are two important factors:


All three of these people followed these two principles and suddenly you’ve got four excellent examples where ‘content is king’. No one’s anointed these people as experts - instead they’ve written their way to the top and they were first to do it.


Definitive content is all well and good, but if no one know’s about you and it, then it’s not going to be of much benefit. This is where my earlier question of creating content asking for conversation vs. creating a system that asks for conversation comes into play.


You’ve created your Definitive Content; now you’ve got to use your network, your social sphere of influence, your ‘leverage’ to promote it. Naturally, they use content - perhaps a review post, video, google ad - or even just a tweet - to introduce your Definitive Content. This is called Manifesto Content and this in itself is a behaviour search engines are also looking for.


Manifesto Content does the simple job of introducing the problem, introducing you, and introducing your way of answering that problem


It pre-sells your Definitive Content. Think about the weight of links in this context; the origin of your inbound links will contain content of some sort (at least to provide value to a visitor) - that content is Manifesto Content. It's kinda like a CV for the Definitive Content, and the better the Manifesto Content, the better your first impression - and first impressions count.


IMAGE: CartoonStock.com


 



Manifesto Content distribution is a better way to consider link building. Link building is a game about numbers; Manifesto Content distribution is about building unmeasurable things like trust and credibility - which shows up to search engines as “link getting”.

Do link directories offer great introductory content to you and your website with just a title, few lines of text and dozens of other pieces of similar content around them?Do guest posts or interviews for relevant related blogs offer great introductory content to you and your website?Does a Twitter ‘win a widget’ competition asking for retweets offer great introductory content?

As I said at the beginning, content is abstract, hence the philosophical-esque questions! However, this thinking is essential if you’re to come up with your own Manifesto Content   marketing strategy. Here’s a handful articles on getting your Manifesto Content shared:


The size, strength and distribution of your manifesto content will determine the overall strength of your web content, and of course good SEO practices of ensuring it gets indexed, it targets specific problem keywords and is “technically tidy” to ensure your Manifesto Content gets targeted traffic and click-throughs.


Great. Now Show Me the Money.


Now, you’ve been introduced as a credible source of information, you’ve educated them and cultured conversation-making abilities so they can engage in blurb. They’re now in an informed discussion about their problem, and likely, your solution if you target your blurb correctly - and all the while, you’ve been earning trust and credibility as someone who know’s what they’re talking about...

Why wouldn’t they consider your solution you’re selling?


This removes the need to “hard sell”. You don’t need to be a copywriting jedi because you’ve already built a level of equity that can’t be copied, even by the best copywriters - they’ve already know you and trust you. To hard sell would simply be a sign of insecurity and stupidity. That said, you need to be able to write sales copy with confidence so you don’t fudge the important bit! Luckily, the brains at Copyblogger will teach you how to ‘sell without selling’ - here’s their best definitive article on writing sales letters (with part 2 and part 3)


Roundup


That’s rather a lot to take in; so a quick roundup. The best way to illustrate how content strategy works is by comparing it to a jet engine.


A what...?!


Bare with me on this. A jet engine, at it’s most basic, has four parts. A front fan, a compressor, an ignition stage and the back turbine with a nozel - or very simply; suck, squeeze, bang, blow (excuse the innuendoes) - and these exactly map onto our four-part content funnel.


It’s essential that they all work together in order to produce results, like this:


 

Manifesto content is the Suck. It draws people into your content funnel.Definitive content is the Squeeze. It focuses attention and educates prospects.Blurb is the Bang. It’s where conversation and the magic happens.Copy is the Blow. It’s where decisions become actions and the whole thing moves forwards.

What I like particularly about this analogy, is that the actual physics matches the real life SEO analogy:

Most of the power of the engine comes from the front fan - the size, strength and distribution of your Manifesto Content will correlate to the overall output of your web content strategyWithout the compression stage, air doesn’t have nearly as much pressure for when it’s ignited - without Definitive Content, your content funnel doesn’t have nearly as much focus and attention to culture conversationThe burning reaction releases energy - conversation leads to decisions being made, opinions being formed and CHANGE.In a jet engine, “exploding” gas is only going to go backwards - highly targeted, focused prospects with a problem, who are educated about their options and are engaging in conversation about their problem - are likely to make decisions (and buy).The flow of fuel keeps the engine going round - the flow of conversation keeps the content funnel functioning and growing.

What this also helps explain is why guerilla-content SEO is so much better than ‘traditional’ advertising which is more like a rocket. Create a reaction of advertising bucks and “targeted” prospects and point it in some direction is complicated (it’s rocket science) and not sustainable without continued effort.


This compares to the Manifesto > Definitive > Blurb > Copy content strategy which is “evergreen” once you’ve created it. A ‘definitive’ piece of content will always be there, as will the articles linking to it. What it means is your web content strategy (including search) is dependent on how you culture conversation. Let me introduce the concept of Tribes -  Tribes are created when you connect people around a cause


Seth’s talk on TED explains...


(If you haven’t come across Seth Godin before, you’re in for a treat Everyone who I’ve worked with who I’ve asked to watch this video has viewed it all the way through said it was awesome. Net result? We’ve both gotten more done.


So take just 17 minutes out and watch Seth’s talk to understand why Tribes will shape our future. If you really don’t have time now, keep this tab open and watch it over lunch or something.)



Finished the video?


This is what I see SEO as - getting in the problem solving business... and not just solving your problems. “I’m not ranking number 1 - I’ll go and build some links”. Put that in context on Tribal SEO. “I’m not ranking number 1 - I’ll go and promote manifesto content”. Creating a tribe will drive your content. Tribes need to connect via blogs, online communities, social networks - in any case you need to be at the helm and leading.


We have the responsibility to create awesomeness.



You’ve heard the ‘Voice of Google’, Matt Cutts, bangs on and on about creating content for visitors vs. creating content for search engines. He’s absolutely right - if you’re trying to make crummy content and webpages rank, just like trying to sell crummy products and services, then shame on you!


I’m gonna end with a couple of questions and an apology. I've broken one of the cardinal unwritten rules of blogging (keep it short, stupid!) and you've probably spent waaaay too much time reading and watching all this. Whoops...


But then again, does Defintive Content need a cap on the length. Shouldn't it be as long as it needs to be? Which begs the question, how would you classify this post based on the scale I’ve talked about?

Is it Manifesto Content? Does it introduce you to new problems, people and answers?Is it Definitive Content? Sure, I introduce a few ideas and articulate them in a way you’ve perhaps not seen before - but I haven’t “written the book” on Tribal SEO so to speak. Heck, I’m just a kid - why would you share and bookmark this? So far this is just a hypothesis - I need to enlist help in defining and proving these principles, which leads me to...Blurb. Is this merely a topic for discussion, something that’ll be todays topic of conversation and yet will be forgotten by this time tomorrow?Or is it copy? Me, shamelessly trying to promote myself or the Mozzers in a bid for private gain!

Secondly, how do you see this Manifesto > Definitive > Blurb > Copy content cycle fit in with this Whiteboard Friday concept of ‘The Path to Conversion’ and your business?


And finally, do you think that ‘Tribes’ make an effective long-term SEO strategy in your business, or any other business that springs to mind?


Let’s chat.


View the original article here

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

URL Shortener Bit.ly Now Generates QR Codes, Too

URL shortening service bit.ly announced Tuesday that users can now automatically generate QR codes that, when scanned with a mobile QR code reader, automatically direct users to shortened links.


To create a QR code, visit bit.lybit.ly, write or paste in a URL address, click “Shorten,” and add .qr to the end of the generated bit.ly link (like so: http://bit.ly/9STstv.qr). Next, copy the modified bit.ly link into a new browser window to view the QR code, which you can then print out, send to your friends via e-mail, post on your blog, etc. I’ve included a QR code that links to my MashableMashable author page in the right-hand corner of this post.


To scan the code, you’ll need an app like QR Scanner [iTunes link] for the iPhone and iPod touch, or ShopSavvy for AndroidAndroid devices.


The new QR code feature arrives just 12 days after GoogleGoogleGoogle released its public URL shortener goo.gl to the public, which includes the ability to instantly generate QR codes in the same fashion as bit.ly.


While the ability to create QR codes via URL shortening services isn’t revolutionary in any sense, it’s a fun feature that should increase interest and familiarity with QR codes, which continue to grow in popularity among marketers in the U.S.


[via TheNextWeb]


View the original article here

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

How to Diagnose and Improve Website Crawling

 By Michael Gray on October 7th, 2010
In Featured, SEO  


When you are reviewing a website, whether for your own projects or for a client project, one of the important areas to review is crawlability. In this post I’d like to talk about some of the ways you can look for and diagnose crawling issues.

If your important pages aren’t within 2-3 pages of linking hubs on your website, you will have problems …The first step to diagnosing a crawling problem is to use a simple [site:example.com] search and compare how many pages you really have with how many Google thinks you have. Now, bear in mind that this number is an estimate. What you are trying to do is get a rough estimate of how many pages Google knows about, as Matt Cutts recently discussed in a Webmaster Central Video:

 

If you have several hundred or thousand pages but Google only shows 100, then you have a problem. Depending on how large the site is, anywhere from 10-30% accuracy would be a good rule of thumb.


The second thing you would want to look at would be Webmaster Central. If you submit a sitemap, Google tells you how many URLs you submitted and how many are in the index. The closer those numbers are, the better. Don’t worry if it’s not a 100% match because sometimes you include pages in your sitemap that get blocked at the page level with a robots meta tag. At this point, you are just concerned with gross numbers.

Sitemap Statistics


If things are radically out of whack, you can download a table of pages in the index from webmaster central and diagnose on a page by page level to see what is or or isn’t in the index.


Next, you want to try and do a full crawl of the website using something like Xenu. While it’s usually used to check for broken links, in the process it does crawl the website. If you have a large website, you are going to want to limit the crawling.


Another product that I like to use is Website Auditor. One of the interesting things about using Website Auditor is that you can specify crawling depth, which is  how deep you want a crawl to go. Start at the homepage and go only one level. Run it again, this time with 2 levels, then 3. Additionally use your Webmaster Central report on most linked pages (think of them as link hubs). If your important pages aren’t within 2-3 pages of linking hubs on your website, you will have problems. IMHO it’s more important than ever to cultivate deep linking and to use that deep linking to spread your link equity, inbound trust, and authority wisely around your website.


In recent years Google has done away with the term/classification “supplemental index.” IMHO this was more of a public relations move, as they just grew tired of hearing from people who were upset that any part of their site was in the supplemental index–but I digress. There are certain parts of your website that aren’t as important as others or, as in the case of say a privacy policy, are important to people but not for rankings. To help you understand what pages Google thinks are important, you need to look at last crawl date in the Google Cache.


Pages that have the most links are going to get crawled more frequently. Pages that have the most trust and authority are going to get crawled most often. Pages that are linked to from those linking hubs, or trusted and authoritative hubs, will get crawled next most frequently. At each step away from the linking hubs, or authority points, crawl frequency will decrease–think of it like a classic pagerank model.


Ideally, what you want to do is get a sample of pages from different levels and determine their crawl frequency rates. Programs like Website Auditor will do this for you; however, you are probably very likely to trip up the Google automated query blocker, which means that, if you are going to use it, you’ll have to have someone sit there and do captcha’s for a few hours. A secondary method is to use an outsourcing service (I use ODesk) and have them do it for you. Send them several hundred URLs in a spreadsheet and explain to them how to check the cache date and enter it in the spreadsheet. You should do some spot checking when it comes back and try to find a handful of people you can trust. Use them on a regular basis.


So how do you know you’re in trouble? Do your important pages have crawl dates older than 60 days? Are there entire sections that you think are important that aren’t getting crawled as frequently as you want?


If you find that the site you are working on has crawling issues, look for ways to flatten out the site hierarchy. I talked about this in How do You Archive Posts on a High Volume Website. Look at your pages that are linking hubs: are you using them wisely by interlinking to other content? I talked about this in How to Silo Your Website: The Content and breadcrumbs are another key tactic for interlinking. Look into ways to rotate some of that older content onto your homepage (see how to make your homepage more dynamic). Lastly, look for ways to better use your link equity by performing a content audit and killing/removing/updating old, outdated, or unimportant sections.


So what are the takeaways from this post:

Take a quick estimate of how well crawled your site isLook at the pages in the index using webmaster centralIdentify link hubs on your websiteTry test crawling to different depthsCheck cache dates across a section of URLs for your websiteIdentify trouble spots, flatten site architecture, improve interlinking, and trim down unimportant pages/sections Deep Crawling a Mini Site Part II After correcting some “errors” in my mini-site architecture (see Deep...How To Figure Out What Parts of Your Website Aren’t Being Crawled When Google took away the supplemental index last year, they...Superficial Crawling SEO Strategies On WebmasterWorld people are discussing big daddy strategies, and on...6 Tools & Tips to Help You Improve Your Blog Posts I was having a a few conversations on twitter last...How To Silo Your Website: The Breadcrumb Trail In Part 1 we looked at How To Silo Your...Text Link Ads - New customers can get $100 in free text links.BOTW.org - Get a premier listing in the internet's oldest directory.Ezilon.com Regional Directory - Check to see if your website is listed!Page1Hosting - Class C IP Hosting starting at $2.99.Directory Journal - List your website in our growing web directory today.Majestic SEO - Competitive back link intellegence for SEO AnalysisContent Customs - Unique and high quality SEO writing services, providing webmasters with hundreds of SEO articles per weekGlass Whiteboards - For a professional durable white board with no ghosting, streaking or marker stains, see my Glass Whiteboard ReviewNeed an SEO Audit for your website, look at my SEO Consulting ServicesKnowEm - Protect your brand, product or company name with a continually growing list of social media sites.Scribe SEO Review find out how to better optimize your wordpress posts.TigerTech - Great Web Hosting service at a great price.Tagged as: crawling, SEO, technical seo


See my disclaimer about advertising and affiliate links


View the original article here

Monday, October 11, 2010

4 Valuable Link Building Services (Zemanta, MyBlogGuest, EightfoldLogic & Whitespark)

In the last year, there's been a plethora of entrants to the field of link building services outside the traditional software basis of reversing competitors' backlinks (like our Link Intersect, LAA or Open Site Explorer tools) and consulting/direct purchase. In this post, I'll try to cover some of the interesting major new services, as well as present some long-standing options that some SEOs may not have discovered.


I've segmented the services below into unique sections to help differentiate the types of link building they offer. Some are more service-based, others are pure-software and the first section is more visibility-based than direct link  acquisition.


One of the unique offerings in the last few years, Zemanta lets publishers submit a feed of content or images to them, which then appear in front of bloggers in the "composition" window (while they write their posts). These are labeled as "related posts" and have multiple benefits:

They can improve branding amongst a blogging audience (as bloggers will see your site/brand name while they write)They can draw in direct links (if the blogger chooses to link to your work in the post or as a "related post" at the bottom - or through links from image references)They can attract direct traffic from the bloggers themselves, who are likely to click on links/content that appears to be interesting


You can try Zemanta's service via a demo on their site


Zemanta has (according to their team) been approved by Google's search quality folks as a white-hat service (which makes sense since all they're doing is showing advertising content to writers, who then determine if they want to link or not) and is now included in Wordpress and Blogger.


SEOmoz has been using them for over a year now (we started with a trial and continued on) and we've seen good results - we tend to get a half dozen or so links to our content (the blog and YOUmoz) each month which can be seen through their reporting system (which has some upgrades in the works).


*Other than our paid use of the service, SEOmoz does not have any affiliations with Zemanta or its founders.


Founded by Ann Smarty, MyBlogGuest provides a platform for those seeking to write and receive guest posts. The service is relatively simple, but potentially quite powerful. If a reasonable number of quality blogs and sites participate in the marketplace, the opportunities for providing great posts and receiving traffic and links back are tremendous (as are the opportunities for those seeking more content and relationships).


Blogging is an inherently social field and while the links may be a primary driver for many interested in the site, Ann has made it clear that she hopes deeper relationships will emerge from the connections. The site's layout and signup process are impressive and compelling, though driving action once inside the platform could still use a bit more polish.



The marketplace is currently based on a forum connections system


You can read more about the project in SearchEngineLand's interview with Ann from February.


I'll be surprised if some Silicon Valley style startups don't pop up to copy this model. Hopefully Ann can stay far enough ahead of the game through a network effect to remain competitive. It's a terrific idea that needs only enough branding and awareness in the space to take off.


*SEOmoz does not have an affiliation with this site, though we have contracted Ann, personally, to do projects for us in the past.


Originally known as Enquisite, EightFoldLogic, a software company with offices in Victoria BC and San Francisco has recently launched a marketplace of their own for website owners of all stripes called "Linker." The premise is similar to MyBlogGuest, but the audience is wider and the interface more customized for creating one-to-one, private connections.



Linker enables the creation of "criteria" much like personal ads for linking connections



Within a day of signing up in a single category, I had four potential "matches"


Linker's goal is to connect sites and marketers interested in partnerships or link relationships with one another. Since their service ends at the time of connection, the method of obtaining the link is up to the parties involved. This means plenty of white hat options, but also potential gray hat ones - however, EightFoldLogic's Richard Zwicky and the audience they've traditionally attracted lean white hat, so I expect this won't be an issue unless the audience changes substantially.


The concept of marketplaces for link acquisition and connecting to site owners interested in links is a compelling one, but the key, as with MyBlogGuest above, will be achieving the critical mass of users necessary to make the service valuable. To that end, Linker's made their product completely free for the next couple months - you can sign up here.


*SEOmoz provides link data via our API to EightFoldLogic but does not have a financial stake in the company or this product.


A few months ago, I wrote a blog post about a tactic to grow your Google local/maps rankings that involved a similar principle to the automated tool built by Whitespark and Ontolo.


The concept is to find sites that are included in Google Local's "sources" for maps and local review data that link to or reference multiple sites that rank in the local results. It's a simple idea, but well executed and incredibly useful for those seeking to optimize their local listings. You can try the Local Citation Finder here - results take just a few minutes to be returned.



Enter some data about your site/goals and the citation finder will email you potential sources for listings


As the local results grow in importance and competition, and as the value of having these consistent, multiple listings rises, I suspect this tool will be incredibly popular. I'd love to see further productization around showing more data about the importance/value of particular local listing sites, and some opportunities to help control and manage those listings, but this first version is pretty exciting on its own.


*SEOmoz does not have a financial or product relationship with either WhiteSpark or Ontolo, though we have been talking to the latter about use of our API in other products.


---------------


Although there are dozens of other services I'd love to cover, these are some of the most interesting to me, personally. As always, looking forward to your thoughts and recommendations, too!


View the original article here

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Why Most Conference Presentations Suck

The author's posts are entirely his or her own (excluding the unlikely event of hypnosis) and may not always reflect the views of SEOmoz, Inc.

Normally, I tend towards the uncontroversial when I write. I haven't been the author of many posts that have caused debate.


But I've had enough. I need to speak up.


There. I said it.


I remember being amazed (and, back then, pretty heartened) when I went to my first SEO conference and realised I already knew most of what was being said. Amazement turned to disappointment at my second conference, which was billed as "Advanced" and where the same old basics were trotted out by too many of the speakers.


Since then, I've been to hundreds of presentations. I've learnt a lot, but from a surprisingly small proportion of them. (Thank you to those speakers who consistently turn out the excellent stuff!).


This is as much a criticism of myself as anyone else. Looking back, there are some presentations I've given that make me cringe now (especially early ones). Early on in my speaking career, it wasn't necessarily that I phoned them in. I was suitably scared / motivated to do a good job - I think I just didn't know how. More recently, I think it's probably happened when I agreed to talk on a subject I didn't really know enough about. I'm definitely trying to learn that lesson.


So before I go any further, if you've had to sit through one of my presentations and learnt nothing, I'm sorry.


If it happens in future, email me and tell me (my contact details are easy to find and always on my last slide).


I'm a strong believer in the idea that you should praise in public and criticise in private so I'm not asking you to tear presentations apart on Twitter. I'd love it if we saw more strong praise of great presentations, and more honest private feedback to speakers and organisers when they haven't delivered the goods.


Before I go any further, I wanted to point out that I am often called upon to give "SEO 101" type presentations and these wouldn't teach any of you anything. I hope this doesn't mean that they are bad presentations. It's all about knowing the level of the audience I guess. This rant is squarely aimed at "advanced" presentations of one form or another.


If you start googling "how to give a great presentation", you'll find masses of advice on slide design, how to speak at the right speed, the kind of opening line to use, what to wear etc. All of this stuff can help, but I would urge implore you to work harder on the other axis. Make the content kick-ass and I'll listen to you even if you mumble at your feet in a monotone looking like a scarecrow. (Yes, I know I talk too quickly when I present. One day I'll fix that).


 


I do like listening to great speakers and entertaining presentation does improve things, but there are better places than SEO conferences to go for stand-up comedy, so generally, I'm there to learn things. You can get away with slightly weaker content if your delivery is awesome but please remember this highly scientific chart:


 


And you know what? I don't even care if it's a sales pitch if you are teaching me stuff. It sets the bar higher and I'm more likely to criticise you if you pitch your own stuff without teaching me anything, but if you do teach me stuff, you can bet I'm going to check out whatever you're hawking.


In the past, just to avoid embarrassing myself, I have:

Learnt new things (this was about how to do first touch tracking in Google Analytics):

 

Carried out research (this slide shows a correlation I established between search volume for the 2006 world cup and the 2010 world cup before this year's competition started - it was part of a methodology for forecasting search volumes that haven't happened yet):

 

And published data (this is actually one of Tom's slides):

 


That's what Google is for. Give me the ideas and the data that I couldn't get anywhere else. If there's terminology I'm not familiar with or you skip over something too quickly, I can easily do my own research. But please don't spend half an hour telling a room full of experts what Google Insights is.


At the Seattle mozinar, I gave a presentation on "how to pitch SEO". One of my core themes was that the best way to win business is to avoid competitive pitches by giving yourself an unfair advantage. Being known for being smart is one of those advantages. If people get to know you through learning from your presentations, you will find yourself in a disproportionate number of uncompetitive pitches... Just sayin'.


At Distilled, I have been thrilled to see great first-time presentations from our guys - this isn't something that only comes with experience. For example, Sam's Advanced Keyword Research presentation at SMX London was more highly rated than those of many more experienced speakers including mine. In advance of the show, Sam asked Tom and I to run through our secret recipe. It's actually pretty simple - just follow these steps:

Only agree to speak if you actually know the subject and have something new to sayAsk yourself what you can give away in your talk that will be new for the majority of the audienceWhat action can people take as a result of your talk?Be prepared to do work / research to discover or demonstrate your new stuffUnless you are an incredibly gifted public speaker, practice before the event. There's a huge difference between preparing the slides and giving a great talk. Although I truly believe that content > delivery, it's worth working on the delivery at least a bit! Check out Lisa Barone's post last week about How To Rock Your Presentation for more great presentation delivery recommendations.

If you need a little bit more incentive to be awesome, I've found that having a head to head competition and then a vote at the end of your session (thanks Rand!) is a good way to make you up your game.


This rant is mainly aimed at speakers, who I think are the primary culprits, but for organisers, while I realise that larger conferences especially don't want to micro-manage every session the way Rand and I have been for the Pro training seminars, can I beg for one small thing?

Don't invite speakers back if they didn't add value last time

Everyone runs those follow-up surveys and knows which speakers were loved by the audiences and who phoned it in. Please stop inviting people back if they don't want to teach things to the attendees. [Rand wrote a whole post a while back with his thoughts on this from an organiser's perspective].


[UPDATE: following a bunch of conversations in the comments and offline, I wanted to clarify two things here:

I was probably too harsh with my statement above - if everyone took that literally, there's a good chance I wouldn't still be speaking at shows today. I want to encourage new speakers and with that goes a lot of mentoring, feedback and encouragement. Do give people a second chance, do give them support and feedback and definitely do encourage new and unknown speakers. Rephrased, I think I mean "don't invite speakers back if they repeatedly fail to add value and don't invite them back at all unless you are prepared to coach them"This isn't a new discovery - ironically, this whole post is more of a rant than it is likely to tell people things they didn't know - and there are many shows that take this seriously. This post is really aimed at speakers not organisers]

Rand and I actually tend to harangue our speakers with instructions a little bit like those above asking them to bring their 'A' games. Beyond a certain point, it hopefully gathers momentum because no-one wants to be the guy giving the sales pitch when everyone else's presentation is rocking. At the beginning of September (almost two months before the show), I had a call with every speaker for the London Pro seminar to help shape what they were going to talk about and make sure that they are bringing their secrets. It's not too late to get in on the action and see the result of all that hard work:


It's lucky that we have a bigger venue this year. We passed last year's total (sold out) sales a few weeks ago and unfortunately all the VIP breakfast tickets are gone, but there are still tickets left at the time of writing. Like last year, we anticipate that there will be a rush of bookings as the date approaches so it is likely that we will sell out. If you are wanting to come and see me put my money where my mouth is (yes, I'm feeling the pressure a little bit after writing this) don't leave it too late to book:


The Details:
Where: The Congress Centre in London's West End
When: October 25th and 26th
Price: £699 +VAT
Book: now!


If you are an SEOmoz PRO member, you can get access to special pricing by using the code in the discount store - making it a steal at £499 +VAT / person.


You can read a sneak preview of the event that I wrote a few weeks ago to get an idea of the kinds of things that you will see there.


View the original article here

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Replace Yahoo Linkdomain with Google Custom Search Engine

The author's posts are entirely his or her own (excluding the unlikely event of hypnosis) and may not always reflect the views of SEOmoz, Inc.

Hey everyone! My name is Justin Briggs, and I'm an SEO consultant at Distilled. A few weeks ago, I packed up and moved across the country to come to Seattle. Some of you might know me better as "seozombie" on Twitter. This is my first post on SEOmoz, but you can expect to see more from me here and on our blog at Distilled.


With the transition of Yahoo! to Microsoft’s Bing backend, webmasters have lost the ability to perform advanced searches using the link: and linkdomain: parameters. Rand Fishkin wrote a post about replacing the Yahoo! linkdomain: data with other data sources. Although Linkscape and Open Site Explorer provide a great data source, there is some functionality that Yahoo! had that isn't present in other tools yet. The primary functionality I missed was the ability to perform searches against page content; not just page title, URL, and anchor text.


These link searches can help you identify link opportunities from other websites' (such as competitors) backlinks.


To solve this problem, I setup a Google Custom Search Engine using data from Open Site Explorer. There are two exports of data you can use, which are links and linking domains. I’ll briefly go over the pros and cons of each as a data source in GCSE.


Linking URLs


Pros

Only search content that has linksLess noise

Cons

Limited to top linksLimited to 25 URLs per domainMultiple links per domain reduces domain diversityLimited content (5,000 annotations = 5,000 URLS)

Linking Domains


Pros

Search all indexed content on a linking domainFind linking sources not included in OSE exportGreater domain diversityMore content (5,000 annotations = 5,000 domains of content)

Cons

More noiseLarge linking domains like Wordpress.com and Blogger.com have subdomains (lots of noise)Results that don’t have link

Setup of your custom search engine is very easy. For this example, I’m going to use linking domains from OSE.


1) Perform search in Open Site Explorer


 


2) Pull linking domains for all pages on the root domain,  export to CSV


 


3) Get list from Excel


 


I used Find & Replace to add a * to the end of all URLs, for matching. You can sort by DA or linking domains. Google Custom Search Engine only allows 5,000 annotations, so only copy up to 5,000 domains.


4) Create Custom Search Engine


Go to Google Custom Search Engine.


 


5) Perform your searches


So here are the pages on domains that link to distilled.co.uk, that include “link building” in the content and “resources” in the title.


 


This solution gives you a new way to mine for backlinks opportunities using your competitor's backlinks. You can also include linking domains from multiple competitors at the same time. However, you can only include up to 5,000 annotations at a time, so you might want to use some Excel filters to remove noise and duplicate entries.


Here are a few quick tips to speed things up.

Remove massive domains – Large domains like wordpress.com and blogspot.com can produce a lot of noise.Use the –site:  search to reduce noise – If a particular domain is creating a lot of noise in your search, use a negative site search to remove it.Search brand mentions – A search for the brand can help find the linking pages on these domains.Search top anchors from OSE – Find the pages that include the anchors the site is targeting.

"powered by wordpress" "distilled"


Find pages that mention the brand “Distilled” and include “Powered by Wordpress”. This is an easy way to find the blogs linking to Distilled.


“guest blogger” OR “guest post” OR “guest article” OR “guest column” -site:blogspot.com -site:wordpress.com -wordpress.org


Find guest blogging opportunities, but filter out domains that may create a significant amount of noise.


"powered by vbulletin" AND seo


Find vBulletin powered forums mentioning SEO.


“link building” intitle:resources


Find link building resource pages.


A few queries to try:
"top seo tools"
“link building” intitle:resources
"open site explorer" "powered by wordpress"
allinurl:seomoz


Go ahead, try it, you know you want to!


I removed linking domains with a DA greater than 90, just to remove some noise from larger domains. (Selecting this value to filter by was completely arbitrary and is just to make the example easier to use.)


Long List of Link Searches (SEOmoz)


21 Link Builders Share Advanced Link Building Queries


74 B2B Link Building Queries


106 Sponsorship-Based Link Building Queries


I hope this helps everyone replace some of the functionality of the Yahoo! linkdomain command. If you've got more link searches or ideas to add, please share.


View the original article here

Friday, October 8, 2010

How to Do A Content Audit of Your Website

 By Michael Gray on September 28th, 2010
In Featured, SEO  


If you have a website that’s been around for a few years and you’re looking for ways to make some improvements, one of the tactics I recommend is doing a content audit. 


When you do a content audit you have a few goals in mind:

Get rid of any low quality or unimportant pagesLook for pages or sections that can be improved or updatedImprove your rankings by more effectively using your link equity, internal anchor text, and interlinking your contentyour inbound link equity can only support a certain number of pages …The first thing you need to do is to get an understanding of where your website currently stands. You’ll need a list of the pages of your website, the number of inbound links, and amount of visitors your page receives. If you are using Webmaster central, you can export a spreadsheet of all the pages with the number of links. The next thing you have to do is add a column for page views. I like to use a timeframe between a year and year and half.

Depending on the number of pages your website has, it could take a while to get all this data. This is the perfect task for an intern or outsourced labor from a place like ODesk. I recently performed this task on a website that has 1800 URL’s. It cost me $75, and I had the data back in just over 24 hours.


The two primary factors I like to look at are how many links does a post/page have and how much traffic did it generate in the past 18 months. Any page that generated less than 100 page views is a candidate for deletion. Additionally, any page that generated less than 25 links is also a candidate for deletion.


At this point you’ll have a list of pages that generated minimal links and/or traffic and are therefore candidates for deletion or revision. This is where it requires some decision making. If a page generated a lot of links but not much traffic, I’m probably going to keep it intact. The same is true for pages with high traffic but a low number of links. When pages are low on links and low on traffic, you have to use your judgment. In some cases, the post was a throwaway post–important at the time but not important now. Those are easy to justify deleting. In other cases, you’ll want to keep them.


At the very least I would suggest looking at the pages to see if you can improve them. In some cases the information is outdated and needs a complete rewrite. In other cases it just requires a little updating. One of the tools I’ve found to be helpful is Scribe SEO (see my  Scribe SEO review). It gives you a quick overview and can sometimes make a few quick easy suggestions to improve a page. A third option is creating a living URL style page. When you rewrite or revise pages you really want to look for ways to maximize your internal anchor text and linkage whenever possible.


When I talk about this practice, a lot of people wonder why would you bother deleting pages. After all, there’s no harm in keeping them around and you’ve already spent the time and energy having them created. For the answer, we need to look at the concept of link equity. Each website only has a certain amount of links, trust, and authority coming into it … this concept is called link equity. That link equity can only support a certain number of pages. For example a brand new website with few links won’t be able to have thousands of pages in the index: the search engines simply don’t have enough signals of quality to support anything more than superficial crawling.  Additionally IMHO ever since the “mayday update” the days of “infinite websites” have come to an end.


When I mention deleting old posts, sometimes bloggers look like they are going to break down in tears, as if I asked them to abandon a puppy with no food or water outside in a freezing snowstorm. If you’re the type of person who has a deep emotional attachment to your posts, you aren’t running a business website. You are creating Aunt Millie’s Christmas Letter.


Before you delete a single post make sure you have multiple backups of all of your posts. You want the ability to bring your posts back if you delete one by accident. If you use WordPress, you can trash a page/post and it’s deleted from public view, but it lingers in limbo for 30 days and is easy to bring back. If any of the pages have more than a handful of links you should set up a redirection. Try to redirect to a similar-themed post or revised post if possible. If not then the homepage, the sitemap, or archives page. A controversial step is to redirect to a different commercial page or to create a link hub somewhere else. Let your conscience be your guide to your approach.


Lastly, you want to trap for 404 errors and redirect anything you might have missed. Again, if you use WordPress, the redirection plugin takes care of the 404 and redirections in one spot.


What are the takeaways in this post:


Make a list of all your pages with inbound links and traffic stats from the past yearIdentify and isolate the worst performing pagesSubdivide the list into pages to delete or pages to revise/rewriteBackup pages before deletingSet up redirections for any pages that are deletedMonitor 404 errors for any deletions or redirections you missed


 How to Silo Your Website: The Content The following is part of the series How To Silo...Putting a Content Based Website Together We’ve covered long term content and short term content, information...How Do You Archive Pages on a High Post Volume Website Today’s post is an answer to a question I took...How To Silo Your Website:The Sidebar The following post is part of a series on How...How To Figure Out What Parts of Your Website Aren’t Being Crawled When Google took away the supplemental index last year, they...Text Link Ads - New customers can get $100 in free text links.BOTW.org - Get a premier listing in the internet's oldest directory.Ezilon.com Regional Directory - Check to see if your website is listed!Page1Hosting - Class C IP Hosting starting at $2.99.Directory Journal - List your website in our growing web directory today.Majestic SEO - Competitive back link intellegence for SEO AnalysisContent Customs - Unique and high quality SEO writing services, providing webmasters with hundreds of SEO articles per weekGlass Whiteboards - For a professional durable white board with no ghosting, streaking or marker stains, see my Glass Whiteboard ReviewNeed an SEO Audit for your website, look at my SEO Consulting ServicesKnowEm - Protect your brand, product or company name with a continually growing list of social media sites.Scribe SEO Review find out how to better optimize your wordpress posts.TigerTech - Great Web Hosting service at a great price.Tagged as: content, SEO



See my disclaimer about advertising and affiliate links


View the original article here

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Google Instant: Fewer Changes to SEO than the Average Algo Update

Ugh... Part of me just wants to link to this old blog post and leave it at that.


But, since there's actually a bit of data to share helping to show that (at least so far) Google Instant changes less than your average algorithmic rankings update, let's share.


Conductor released some nice research from anonymized data of sites on their software platform making a compelling case:


Search Term Keyword Length for Visits Post-Google-Instant
If Conductor keeps putting out this kind of stuff, they'll be a "must-read" in no time


Hmm... Looks pretty darn similar to me. A tiny increase in 4, 5 and 6 word phrases would seem to go against many of the prognostications and fears that this move would decimate the long tail (though, to be fair, plenty of savvier search folks predicted a slight increase as Google's "Suggest" function would be more obvious/visible to searchers and push them to perform more specific queries).


Matt Bennett at MEC blogged some data from 5 sites in his purvue representing about 10,000 searches. He shared this excellent graph (similar to the one above):


 


That's more evidence to suggest this is a very subtle change (if there's any at all) in keyword demand.


While I don't have as much data to share as Conductor, I can show you some tidbits from SEOmoz.


Here's SEOmoz.org's traffic from Google in the past week compared to the week prior:


 


And here's a similar look at OpenSiteExplorer's Google traffic:


 


There's a suspiciously small amount of change in the keyword demand, and although these are certainly un-representative of the broader web, we can be relatively confident that lots and lots of folks in our industry, performing queries that might lead them to these two sites, have awareness of and are using Google Instant.


One change that did catch my eye (thanks to some Tweets on the topic) is that Google's Suggest itself seems to have changed a bit:


 


Hard to complain about that :-)


I was a bit dismayed to see so many in the SEO field taking this as a serious threat or even touting the massive "changes" that would be coming soon to SEO best practices or even search query demand. We're usually pretty good about shrugging off Google's pressbait around technical changes that don't have much of an impact, but this one seemed to have more legs than usual.


That said, there are a few pieces I think warrant a read-through (or at least, knowledge of):


Very much looking forward to the discussion, but I'm leaving for Social Media Week Milan and will be hard pressed to contribute at normal levels until my return next week. Until then - Buona notte!


p.s. If you have data to share on how Instant has or hasn't impacted your traffic-driving queries, that would be awesome. If you blog/upload it, we'll be happy to update the post with links.


View the original article here

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Universal Truth Of Selling On The Web: Easy & Simple Wins

The following is a guest post by Jim Kukral.

Google knows this. Now you do as well. Easy always wins. Take a moment and picture your website or your blog or your product or service in your head right now. Now, think of Google’s. Which one is easier? No, you're not a search engine, you're probably a small business owner with a variety of products services, entrepreneur with a business idea, or blogger . But the comparison remains because regardless of what it is you do easy will always win.

So keep thinking about your Web business. Is what you’re selling easy to buy? By that I mean; when somebody comes to buy from you, or to simply get information from you like a phone number or to download a white paper… is it easy to do? Or are you making it too hard?

Picture Google.com again in your head. It's pretty darn easy, no? There's a logo and a big input box underneath it. You put in what you're looking to find, and hit search and boom, you find it. Easy. Google understands that customers use them for one reason, to have a problem solved, and therefore, that’s what they deliver, without all the frills that other search portals like Aol or Yahoo! try to offer.

Your opportunity right now is to figure out the main one or two reasons people visit your website, because despite what you might think, your customers probably have only those one or two things on their mind when they visit you.

If you visit the home page of Orbtiz.com, you’re probably there to do one of a few things only. Book a flight, find a car, or make a hotel reservation. Possibly all three at once. But honestly, that’s pretty much it, right? I would bet that 99% of their traffic is trying to do one of those things. The same goes for you and your website, blog, membership site or anything you produce online.

What exactly are your customers looking for? You need to find out and find out right now! Check your analytics (I recommend Google Analytics, it's free! www.Google.com/Analytics) to find out things like the most viewed pages of your website, as well as the most exited pages too. You may find out that 90% of your visitors are focusing on the free white paper download page and ignoring the other pages you thought were important. That’s great news! Now, you at least know what your customers want. And now you can make it easier for them to get it. You may also find out that a large percentage of your visitors always leave your website on one specific page, giving you the insight that perhaps they aren't finding what they're looking for, getting frustrated, and surfing away. That's bad.

So what should you do with that knowledge to make things easier for your visitor, and better for your business? If you're getting a lot of traffic to your free white paper download, go ahead and take that download information and make it stand out on your home page. If done right, you'll make it as easy as possible for your visitors to get what they were looking for, and you’ll see even more downloads, and happier visitors because you didn’t make them work so hard.

Now, you may also find out that the page you really wanted your visitors to see is not being viewed enough. This could be the specials page on your e-commerce site, or the packages page on your consulting site or maybe your customer support contact information page. Whatever it may be, once you know what it is, that page obviously needs to be viewed more, and while you can’t force it down your visitors digital throats, you can redesign your page so that it limits the other choices that can distract your visitor.

Make it easy and simple, then win!

For over 15-years, Jim Kukral has helped small businesses and large companies like Fedex, Sherwin Williams, Ernst & Young and Progressive Auto Insurance understand how find success on the Web. Jim is the author of the book, "Attention! This Book Will Make You Money", as well as a professional speaker, blogger and Web business consultant. Find out more by visiting www.JimKukral.com. You can also follow Jim on Twitter @JimKukral.

Subscribe to our blog via email or RSS to get more great posts like this one!


View the original article here

Saturday, October 2, 2010

The Danger of Overdoing SEO

During my first few years in the SEO field, half of the sites I'd visit - those my SEO brethren in the forums or over email owned - were what today we'd probably call "over-optimized." They tended to have features like:

Keyword after keyword stuffed into the title element of every pageOverly-lengthy and keyword rich URL stringsPage filled with "SEO'd" content that was never intended to be a focus for visitorsBacklink profiles that lacked a single high-quality, "editorial" link

At its best, our profession is about making amazing things that people are asking to see (via their search queries in the engines) and then marketing it in the most optimal ways. At its worst (excluding the crap-hat junk that doesn't even deserve to be called "SEO"), it looks like this:


 


There's a gigantic gap between this type of "SEO" and the industry's best practices, but the individual recommendations and changes are so subtle that it's not surprising many practitioners go a bit overboard. After all, the process of starting SEO often looks like:

Week 1: Notice in your analytics that search sends awesome traffic and start optimizing some meta tags (since you heard that's what SEO is about) by putting more keywords in themWeek 2: See that those changes have had no effect, so begin doing some light reading on the topicWeek 3: After you've glossed over a few SEO resources (perhaps not necessarily the best ones), start "optimizing" pages by filling the tags you've heard were important with your keywords, changing your internal links to be keyword-rich, placing more keywords on your pages in every conceivable tag and location, maybe even optimizing for some wholly bunk metric like the average keyword density of the top 10 ranking pagesWeek 4: Possibly see a bump in some rankings and, tragically, inheriting confirmation bias, convincing yourself that the strategy has worked and that it needs to be repeated.Week 5-20: Struggle with and eventually give up on SEO, or skate by on the fringes with equally poor quality linking practices that get many/most of your pages penalized but maintain rankings on a few

This pattern (or some similar variation) has played itself out in 9/10 stories I hear about folks who've jumped into the waters of SEO haphazardly - and honestly, it's hard to blame them. The engines provide just enough information to keep webmasters curious but unsatisfied. Many of the sites and pages that rank well do actually employ pretty spammy SEO tactics, making it hard for those trying to learn SEO by reversing their competition's success (temporary though it may be).


This doesn't just apply in the on-page world.


If you haven't yet read it, this thread from Reddit - My Job Was to Game Digg - and this one on Hacker News about it, are excellent examples of the perception problem that social media pushes for SEO have caused. This comment, in particular, stood out to me:


 


As you can see, the web's social voters and contributors have a passing tolerance for the "right" kinds of optimization, but a zealous abhorrence for those that violate their sense of propriety. Even if Google doesn't worry about "off-topic" linkbait, linkbaiters themselves should have cause for concern.


The engines aren't going to take it.


More and more, though, the engines are fighting back against this through changes like the Vince update (and subsequent focusing on brands as a way to sort out the web's "cesspool"). We've also recently seen a dramatic increase in the aggressiveness with which Google will change your titles, descriptions and negatively alter the rankings/visibility of sites that step over this line.


In the long run, it's hard to imagine Google allowing poor results to flourish - especially those who garnered rankings through manipulation. Those sites and pages that follow every single optimization tactic, from internal links to massive keyword focus to "perfect" anchor text in their off-site link building are going to stand out like sore thumbs to the engines. Sites that build pages designed to attract links with little to no relation to the host site will struggle against the biases in the social media world.


And sites/pages that abuse these practices (both on and off-page) are going to have a terrifically hard time earning "natural" links. The organic sectors of the web tend not to link out to those types of sites/pages if they can help it.


It might sound ironic, but there's an art to under-"optimizing" in order to achieve true "optimization."


p.s. Some folks noted they were hoping for a link to some good "best practices for on-page optimization" - here you go!


View the original article here

Friday, October 1, 2010

How To Silo Your Website: The Footer

 By Michael Gray on September 7th, 2010
In Featured, SEO  


This post is part of a series on How to Silo Your Website. The other parts in the series are: How to Silo Your Website: The Masthead, How to Silo Your Website, The Breadcrumb , How to Silo Your Website: The Content, and How to Silo Your Website: The Sidebar. For this last part, we’ll be looking at the footer.

Another strategy I’ve seen used that often has good results is the dynamic footer …Ah…the website footer. Aside from meta keywords and descriptions, it’s hard to think of an area that’s been more abused. A common spot for selling run of site links, turning into a link brothel (looks in the direction of you Lendingtree), or for stuffing content below the copyright information that you can’t even argue is for bots not humans (looks at you Match.com).

It’s hard to resist the temptation to abuse the footer, which IMHO is why links in the footer possess so little value compared to links in the sidebar, masthead, and content sections. So how can a site owner use the footer to their advantage?


First, let’s look at usability. All of those service links that I said you should remove from the masthead and sidebar: this is where they should go. Over the years, people have learned to look here if they need information. However, sometimes the amount of links can make the area look … well … excessively linky. If that’s a problem, I suggest checking out this post on beautiful footers to get some ideas about how to keep it looking good and easy to use.


Another strategy I’ve seen used that often has good results is the dynamic footer, first popularized by Weblogs Inc (the company Jason Calacanis sold to AOL for 25 million). The basic concept is to keep the links in the footer changing and pointing to new or updated content (for Weblogs Inc it was used to show links to new posts all from multiple sites across the network. See divester for an example). While this tactic isn’t as effective as it once was, keeping the footer dynamic is still a good idea worth trying (see How to Make Your Homepage More Dynamic for tips on how and what to include).


So what are the takeaways from this post:

Put all of the service links you removed from other sections here.Look for ways to keep it usable and visually appealing.Try to include as much dynamic content as possible.

While there are still some subtleties to siloing a website, hopefully this series has pointed you in the right direction. If you have any questions or followup posts you would like to see, drop me a tweet and let me know @Graywolf.
Creative Commons License photo credit: twicepix

How To Silo Your Website:The Sidebar The following post is part of a series on How...How To Silo Your Website: The Masthead One of the more powerful tools an SEO can use...How To Silo Your Website: The Breadcrumb Trail In Part 1 we looked at How To Silo Your...How to Silo Your Website: The Content The following is part of the series How To Silo...Tip for the Keyword & Link Footer Stuffers If you’re going to stuff your footer with #EEFFFF (very...Text Link Ads - New customers can get $100 in free text links.BOTW.org - Get a premier listing in the internet's oldest directory.Ezilon.com Regional Directory - Check to see if your website is listed!Page1Hosting - Class C IP Hosting starting at $2.99.Directory Journal - List your website in our growing web directory today.Majestic SEO - Competitive back link intellegence for SEO AnalysisContent Customs - Unique and high quality SEO writing services, providing webmasters with hundreds of SEO articles per weekGlass Whiteboards - For a professional durable white board with no ghosting, streaking or marker stains, see my Glass Whiteboard ReviewNeed an SEO Audit for your website, look at my SEO Consulting ServicesKnowEm - Protect your brand, product or company name with a continually growing list of social media sites.Scribe SEO Review find out how to better optimize your wordpress posts.TigerTech - Great Web Hosting service at a great price.Tagged as: information architecture, SEO, siloing


See my disclaimer about advertising and affiliate links


View the original article here