The European Commission, the same out-of-touch government agency that has been wasting Microsoft’s time and money for years, refused Tuesday to approve Google’s mega-billion dollar deal to buy DoubleClick, putting the entire deal on hold, possibly till March. The Commission is ordering a further review of the deal’s impact on the online advertising business, which will delay the $3.1 billion deal entirely until it is done, at the least.
It’s shocking how much of a disaster this deal has been for Google so far. Google announced the acquisition in April, and it’s now looking like it could take over a year before DoubleClick is part of Google. Meanwhile, Microsoft spent twice as much on aQuantive, announced the deal in May and completed it in under 90 days. Clearly, some very important people are looking at Google as the next big problem company, and they are only going to cause more trouble for the company in the future.
(via Blogoscoped)
Meanwhile, I keep getting PR emails from Performics, the SEO arm of DoubleClick that would be part of Google if this deal ever completed. They send me one press release about buying trends they’ve identified around the holiday shopping season, showing that the “Cyber Monday” crap we hear every year about the Monday after Thanksgiving is just inaccurate, with successive Mondays having far more shopping activity than “Cyber Monday”.
Apparently, the Mondays between Thanksgiving and Christmas are important, but successive Mondays are bigger than the first one. This year is a perfect storm, with an early Thanksgiving and Tuesday Christmas translating to five Mondays between the two holidays, more than we ever usually see, which could mean increased activity for online retailers above what is normally expected.
Performics also announced 52 new affiliate advertising clients in the third quarter, showing that Performics is growing strongly. I doubt Google would want to unload Performics once the deal is done, seeing how well it’s doing.
November 16th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
DoubleClick, Search Optimization, Controversy, Advertising |
2 comments
I got a link today from a Hebrew-language blog, and I decided to search Google for my first name in Hebrew. Turns out I rank sixth for “נתן“, despite having never actually written those letters here, which just makes me happy. So, I wonder if people have checked how they rank on Google in Hebrew, and if you rank at all in that language. I’m not sure how you’d find the Hebrew equivalent of your name, but give it a shot and let me know the results.
November 1st, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Search |
one comment
I normally don’t post about SEO contests, but in contacting me they also helped me fix a broken feature on the site, so I’ll pass this one along. Advice Network is running an article writing contest, soliciting articles on real estate, weddings and running a business. Besides the writers getting a backlink to their sites wherever the articles are printed, more importantly the best article wins its author a brand new MacBook, along with some free services.
If you’re interested, check it out here.
November 1st, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization |
one comment
I regularly research Google’s search engine result pages for keywords in our vertical. Along with monitoring our paid advertising, universal search results and organic rankings, I’m interested in keeping a watchful eye on the competition. Along with paying attention to anything smart their doing, I’m definitely on the prowl for sneakiness. Recently, I came across the following page one results on Google for the keywords Access Panels.
The first result, www.accesspanels.net, seemed suspicious. The description, coming from the site’s meta description, seemed a bit spammy, as the two sentences are nearly identical and little care has gone into fully utilizing this content to help searchers. Based on my experience with these keywords, it also surprised me that a .net domain extension had made it to the top spot. Also, I didn’t remember coming across this site before during general competitor research. The domain name was obviously a big plus, in that it mimicked the search, but it still didn’t pass the smell test.
Clicking through to the site gives the impression that it’s an affiliate or possibly a spammer. The appearance, organization and user interface leaves something to be desired. Not a lot of original quality content jumps out. Using a .net tld extension, along with other non .com extensions, on a domain made up of popular keywords is often employed by affiliates or spammers targeting those searches. The sites look and feel, as well as its architecture, hints toward a template application or a run-of-the-mill HTML editor. Another characteristic I noticed was that the information in the footer pertaining to copyright dates appears outdated. It doesn’t take much attention to maintain current dates in this area but an affiliate or spammer may be less inclined to spend their time keeping the boilerplate current.
Finally, and most interestingly for this example, www.accesspanels.net doesn’t sell anything. The header logo and every product listing links out to another domain, www.ameraproducts.com, run by AmeraProducts, Inc. who seems to actually sell product online.
One of the first cursory checks I do while investigating for malicious activity is a “Select All” using CTRL + A. Although this technique won’t catch more sophisticated types of black hat spam, like links hidden in counters, it’s an easy, quick, and useful check to notice blatant hidden text right off the bat. Here is the same site after a CTRL + A.
As you can see, a bunch of hidden texts appears near the top of the site. A quick look at the page’s source code, shows the hidden text being manipulated by coloring it white and placing it in front of an almost all white background image.
Now, it’s one thing for a spammer, affiliate or otherwise, to build spammy sites with hidden text in order to rank well for popular keywords and then link out to a retailer. The retailer may not have any relationship with the spammer. The retailer likely has little, if any, control over the spammer. If the spammer is an affiliate via a third party network, like ShareASale, the retailer can stop paying commissions and report the affiliate to the network, but they can’t likely force the spammy affiliate to stop linking to them.
However, what’s happening here is much more fishy.
First, as you can see in the screenshot below, www.ameraproducts.com links back to the spam-filled www.accesspanels.net stating “visit an informational website about Access Panels & Doors at www.accesspanels.net”.
Second, both domains are registered to AmeraProducts, Inc. as shown in their WHOIS records.
Third, Both sites have the same logo in the header.
Fourth, the email address in the footer of the spam-filled www.accesspanels.net is webmaster@ameraproducts.com.
Fifth, the out of date boilerplate in the footer of www.accesspanels.net reads “© Copyright 1999-2004 AmeraProducts, Inc. All Right Reserved”.
It’s not a long stretch to assume that www.ameraproducts.com is associated with, if not behind, the Number 1 ranked, albeit spam-filled, www.accesspanels.net.
Examples like this offer internet retailers a sobering perspective on black hat competitors. A few issues bubble to the top:
- Honest, white hat retailers are put in a difficult position. If even the most diligent and honorable search engine optimization strategies can be thwarted by easy, simple, dirty tactics like this, retailers have a tough fight ahead. Every time a spammer is knocked down by the search engines, another can quickly rise up and take its place. Frustrated or impatient retailers may begin to wonder if they have a chance at the top rankings if they’re not practicing dirty tactics.
- Websites using hidden text, such as www.accesspanels.net, or practicing other spam techniques will eventually be caught by Google and other search engines. It may not be today, but over time Google’s algorithms, along with their human talent, will learn and grow and become more sophisticated at identifying and dealing with sneakiness. However, in the meantime, the honest e-commerce players lose valuable traffic and conversions.
- If you come across a website that is using hidden text, or other deplorable black hat SEO methods to acheive high organic rankings, take a moment to report the website to the Google Spam Report. With the help of retailers, Google can further improve their search results by removing spam which ultimately improves the experience for their, and your, users.
- Not only does a spammy website face the danger of being caught and reprimanded by Google, which may include being removed from their index, but websites such as those registered to AmeraProducts, Inc. face the harm of having their unethical tactics publicized and their company’s reputation damaged.
Ryan Douglas manages Paid Search and Comparison Shopping Engines for PlumberSurplus.com, an online retailer of home improvement products including Kitchen
Faucet, Access Door, and Sump Pump categories.
September 18th, 2007
Posted by
Ryan Douglas |
Search Optimization, Spam, Search |
one comment
Barry caught that Google amended its webmaster guidelines (the holy bible of not getting banned from the search engine), changing the wording on reciprocal linking schemes in a small but very significant way. Before, it said:
Examples of link schemes can include:
Link exchange and reciprocal links schemes (”Link to me and I’ll link to you.”)
Now it says (emphasis mine):
Examples of link schemes can include:
Excessive reciprocal links or excessive link exchanging (”Link to me and I’ll link to you.”)
The change, especially because of the specificity of it, represents a change in policy by Google. While Google would like to ban all linking schemes, it has certainly lost the battle in that regard to all the hungry SEOs (and evil spammers), so it’s allowing the more innocent. Many SEOs say that there are certain supposedly “black hat” techniques that only an idiot wouldn’t use, since staying competitive is impossible without them, and Google is being a little more reasonable for the good guys.
(via EndGamePR)
Michael Gray took on Matt Cutts at SES last week, making a great case that Google’s fight against paid links is more greedy in nature. See, natural SEO benefits non-commercial sites, like blogs and other informational content, while commercial sites tend not to get links. By using paid links, commercial sites regain their positions in the search engines, and thus they no longer have to use Google AdWords.
It’s a compelling argument.
August 27th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Search, Advertising, General |
no comments
This SEO blog has a list of “known” Google filters, though many of these may be more superstition of the SEO community than actual Google search results filters. Still, if you’d like an idea of the myriad of filters SEOs are scared of every single day, it’s worth reading just for that.
The list includes:
Google -30 Filter
Google seems to apply the -30 filter to web sites that use spammy SEO methods. These spammy methods include use of invisible text, JavaScript redirects, doorway pages or other spam techniques. If this penalty applies to your website then your rankings will drop by 30 spots.
To get out of this filter immediately remove all spams methods you are using on site and offsite. This filter seems to be automated so after some time of removing spammy things you will see your site again on good ranking.
Google Duplicate Content Filter
This filter is applied to those sites having duplicate or same content. This filter results a drop in your sites index pages or even complete removal of your site except your homepage.
Problem is that If your site is much newer than some other sites who has domain age of two years and they steal your content than You have to suffer from this filter. Its sad but its true.
To get out of this filter use unique meta tags for each page and avoid use of duplicate content.
…
Too Many Pages At Once Filter
This filter applied to website have too many pages in a very short period of time. To avoid this filter don’t use content generator softwares or stop copying other sites content.
You know, you could make a pretty decent game with all these filters as penalty cards. Anyone up for it? “The Game of SEO”?
(via Digg)
August 16th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Search, General |
no comments
Answers.com is running a smart SEO contest that bloggers and webmasters can enter to win some money, or backlinks of your own. What they want you to do is write on your own blog or website a composition containing certain words of their choosing, linking those words to their respective page on Answers.com. It can be poetry, prose, fiction, essays or any other form of creative writing, under 750 words, and before July 31.
The words are:
ubiquitous
yo-yo
brown recluse spider
quixotic
abrogate
perfunctory
quid pro quo
Belize
for all intents and purposes
melissophobia
I love stretching myself, so I’m going to give this a shot. Top prize is a $100 Amazon gift certificate and link from Answers.com, second is a $50 gift certificate and a link, and third is just the link. Here’s my attempt at a story where each word is the name of a super hero, except the last one, which is the villain:
July 5th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Blogs, Humor, Advertising, General |
6 comments
Andy Beal has done a study of the 2008 U.S. presidential election in search engines, seeing how 18 announced candidates appear to searchers on Yahoo and Google. Andy examined the top 20 results for each name and tabulated the number of positive, negative, and neutral websites listed in the search engines.
Of all candidates, Ron Paul had the highest percentage of positive pages, no doubt due to a rabid internet fanbase that has been skewing internet polls for months. Of all mainstream candidates (those receiving 10% of the vote in any recent major poll), only Hillary Clinton has over 50% positive results. The most positive, in order, are:
Clinton - 52.5%
Romney - 47.5%
Obama - 47.5%
Giuliani - 42.5%
Edwards - 32.5%
McCain - 27.5%
The most negative, in order, are:
McCain - 10%
Edwards - 10%
Clinton - 10%
Guiliani - 7.5%
Romney - 2.5%
Obama - 0%
Clinton’s strong internet presence has significantly helped her campaign rank well in the search engines, while McCain and Edwards have their work cut out for them. While no candidate has a significant number of negative results, a lack of positive results indicates poor online outreach that will hurt that candidate in the long and short term.
Curiously, Andy left out Fred Thompson, who figures high in Republican polls. I’ve taken the liberty of tabulating the top 20 for “Fred Thompson”
On Google:
1: Neutral
2: Positive
3: Neutral (IMDB)
4: Neutral
5: Neutral
6: Neutral
7: Positive
8: Positive
9: Neutral
10: Positive
11: Positive
12: Positive
13: Positive
14: Positive
15: Positive
16: Neutral
17: Neutral
18: Positive
19: Neutral
20: Positive
So, that’s 55% positive, 45% neutral, and 0% negative, at least on Google. Those are the best numbers of any candidate of any party.
Check out Andy’s public Google Spreadsheet for the full chart.
June 28th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Search, General |
2 comments
Via ThreadWatch, this study of where Wikipedia pages appear in Google results for a search for that phrase, and found that in about 580 out of 600 randomly chosen Wikipedia pages, the Wikipedia page appeared in Google’s top 10. That’s just incredible, a number we can pretty much point to and show how much power Wikipedia has in Google, with 96.66% of those pages surveyed making it into the top 10. The only ones that didn’t make it:
- Veil of Darkness
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission
- Group key
- Tacca leontopetaloides
- American Culinary Federation
- WCTI-LP
- Eric Marshall
- YAF
- Line by Line
- Tolleson Union High School
- Ken Kocher
- Riskbase
- Rae Valentine
- Fire Prevention Week
- Win My Soul
- Chewy Granola Bars
- United Nations Security Council Resolution 31
- A Single
- Jean Étienne Bercé
- Isaac Fraser
- FICA (disambiguation)
- Lance Broadway
- Victoriana
- UC San Diego School of Medicine
- Gordon
- Whipped Cream & Other Delights
- With This Ring
- Spinsterhood
June 27th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Search, General |
one comment
This Friday, after three years, SEO community site ThreadWatch is closing down. ThreadWatch’s owner and operator, Aaron Wall (of SEOBook) made the announcement, saying that the site just wasn’t working out for a variety of reasons, including a lack of respect and credibility, an increase in Digg-spam and other shady practices by members, and the decreasing need of the site due to better coverage by mainstream media, big blogs, and other community sites.
I’m sad to see ThreadWatch go. As long as I’ve been blogging, it’s been there, and while it was never a place I hung out, it was always worth checking out, usually with some good commentary you didn’t get anywhere else, and more edgy and adult than other sites dared be.
As you can see in the Alexa graph, after Aaron took over ThreadWatch in late 2005, traffic seemed to have increased, but this year has been a particularly bad one for the site. I wonder if that had a lot to do with Aaron’s decision, and if he’d be interested in sharing some site stats now that it’s over.
Hopefully, there’s some exit strategy for ThreadWatch. Certainly, a website with a lot of backlinks and community is worth something, even if just sold off to someone who wants to use it as a link farm. I’d love to see a new owner keep the site as a community, but give it the support to help it grow again. As one farewell comment said:
Another site that dared to be unique gets unplugged.
June 26th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Blogs, General |
one comment
A popular Google employee, Vanessa Fox, has left the building. Fox, who was a frequent conference speaker and enjoyed a high profile while working on the Webmaster Central team, leaves the Goog for the confines of Zillow, a real estate startup that has been enjoying some healthy buzz. Fox, who was popular among the SEO community, leaves Google with one less voice towards its most vocal constituency, and she will be missed.
Question: Why are SEOs so much more vocal than all the other people who have to work with/against Google? Even AdWords advertisers, AdSense publishers and mashup developers don’t push for as many answers from Google and create mini-celebrities out of Google conference speakers. If everyone was like the SEO community, Joel Webber would have legions of fans, or something.
June 19th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Googleplex, Search Optimization, Culture, General |
no comments
Google updated the program policies for AdSense, with two noticeable changes:
- AdSense publishers must now comply with the spirit of the AdWords high page quality guidelines. Google doesn’t want AdSense ads placed on low quality pages, because that hurts the return on investment (ROI) for the advertiser, which makes them less likely to buy ads next time. That means distinguishing advertising from content, not tricking users into clicking ads, having actual and unique content, clearly defined website purposes, not collecting and abusing user information, and making your site easy to navigate.
- Publishers may now place three link ad units on a page, up from just one.
Google also updated the Webmaster Guidelines, making them clearer with links to examples of dishonest pages. Here’s that section:
Quality guidelines - specific guidelines
June 12th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Spam, Search Optimization, AdSense, AdWords, Advertising, General |
no comments
SEOMoz has an analysis of the various 2008 Presidential contenders, looking at how good their SEO is for their campaign websites. John McCain is the worst, with poorly optimized pages on his campaign site (no unique title tags and descriptions) and all navigation in forms Google can’t access, and his (well-ranked) old campaign site not redirecting to his new one. As a result, McCain appears all the way down at #68 on Google, outranked by Technorati, MySpace, every news organization on the planet, CafePress, YouTube, TechCrunch, Snopes, Digg, and a number of Anti-McCain websites.
Here’s how much scrolling you have to do to get to him:
John, there are fixes here! Do something about it.
May 11th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, General |
no comments
Performics changed their logo today, rebranding as DoubleClick Performics:
Yeah, they’re scrambling. The new logo is meant to inspire confidence, and to say that Performics is a part of DoubleClick and isn’t going anywhere. They must be getting flooded with emails wondering if they are going to be shut down or sold off. I’m not sure if the logo’s message is genuine (a true confidence boosted would be if it were rebranded “Google Performics”), but it gives you an idea of where their heads are at.
Caught by Pranav. DoubleClick made the change official with this statement:
Almost two weeks ago we announced that Google agreed to acquire DoubleClick and therefore, DoubleClick Performics; so, why re-brand now? We have been working on the new brand identity for almost a year. As part of the research and brand audit we conducted, we heard from our clients and the industry about our strengths and their expectations for the company. We are moving forward with the launch of our brand for two reasons: (1) we have every intention of meeting and exceeding our client’s expectations, and (2) the five key values and attributes of integration, insight, investment, implementation and innovation, will continue to drive DoubleClick Performics. In addition, the acquisition is not complete and, until it is, we continue to operate as an independent company.
The rest of the statement is here.
(via Digg)
April 24th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, General |
no comments
Kris Jones, CEO of PepperJam, received an email from Stuart Frankel, president of Performics, regarding a blog post he had made speculating that Google would shut down Performics, an SEO firm acquired along with DoubleClick. Apparently, Performics is scared that all the speculation about what Google has in store for them is going to cost them clients:
RESPONSE FROM: Stuart Frankel, President, Performics
I am writing in response to your recent post speculating that Performics is in the process of dissolving the company and terminating it’s employees. Your comments are false and are potentially damaging to Performics’ business and its employees. Since the announcement on April 13, 2007 that Google and DoubleClick have entered into an definitive agreement whereby Google has agreed to purchase DoubleClick, we have consistently and repeatedly communicated to our clients, publishers and employees that it is business as usual at Performics. Let me make this absolutely clear. We are not dissolving or shutting down or significantly altering the Performics business. To the contrary, we continue to actively build our core affiliate and search business units. In fact, we are currently recruiting for 25 open positions across all areas of Performics. In particular, our affiliate business has seen dramatic growth in 2007 and as a result, DoubleClick has accelerated its investment in this area of its business. We are a large supporter and participant in industry forums and we support an open and active dialogue regarding the affiliate marketing industry. Your comments are irresponsible and therefore I am requesting that you immediately retract them. We are proud of what we have accomplished thus far at Performics and look forward to aggressively and responsibly continuing to run and grow our business.
Stuart Frankel
President
Performics
All bolded text is mine. Several pretty strong words in there from Performics, the sort of emotionally charged response that you can usually count on as honest, so I’d trust him at his word. Likely, Google has already told the Performics folks its plans for them, and those plans don’t include shutting down Performics.
(via Digg)
UPDATE: Kevin Newcomb of SEW writes that Google has changed the DoubleClick aquisition FAQ. It now reads:
Q. What will Google do with Performics?
A. They have built a strong business that is valued by their clients, and we will be evaluating all strategic alternatives for this business. We are committed to continuing to meet the needs of Performics clients, and we expect no interruption in service during this transition. Google has many important agency, SEM, and other partner relationships, and we continue to value those relationships.
Previously, it had read:
Q. What will Google do with Performics?
A. Performics is part of DoubleClick, and we are acquiring it as part of the transaction. We have no plans to dispose of it at this time.
Clearly, Performics is being threatened with or worried about a client exodus, and is scrambling to get the word out that things are fine. If Performics loses customers, it certainly won’t survive the transition, and they and Google are doing what they can to hold it back.
April 23rd, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, General |
no comments
The Fortune 500 has been updated, with Wal-Mart overtaking Exxon Mobil for the #1 spot. The real big news you might be interested in, though, is that Google shot up more than 100 spots, taking #241 on the list, which made Google the biggest mover on the list. Google, with $10.6 billion in revenue and $3.1 billion in profits, is just below Amazon (#237, $10.7, $190 million) and just above Echostar (252, $9.81, $608 million).
Microsoft is in 44th place, with $44.2 billion revenue and $12.6 billion profits.
April 18th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Stock Market, General |
no comments
Stephan Spencer points out that, thanks to its purchase of DoubleClick, Google now owns a Search Engine Optimization/Marketing firm. Performics, a division of DoubleClick, offers SEO, paid consulting, SEM, affiliate marketing and other programs that would probably be considered a conflict of interest as part of the world’s most popular search engine.
Stephan lists several possibile actions Google can take, including selling off Performics, cutting it loose, or keeping it, but demanding it be so “white hat” that it has trouble competing. I wonder if Google even considered Performics in the deal, or it’s such a small part of DoubleClick’s business that it was overlooked, and will have to be considered after the deal closes. All I know is, if I were working in the Performics office, I’d be pacing back and forth, worrying about my job security.
UPDATE: Danny Sullivan looked around in the acquisition FAQ PDF and found that Performics is addressed. It says:
Q. What will Google do with Performics?
A. Performics is part of DoubleClick, and we are acquiring it as part of the transaction. We have no plans to dispose of it at this time.
That’s a shocker. I’d be surprised that Google thinks it won’t be accused of conflicts of interest if Performics becomes a serious moneymaker, but then again, Google doesn’t care what anyone else thinks, does it?
Another perspective on the DoubleClick deal: an unidentified source told the TimesOnline that Microsoft matched Google’s $3.1 billion offer, but was snubbed, Frankly, I don’t believe it, since Microsfot claims it was way outbid, and Google bid so high I can’t imagine Microsoft being willing to go there. However, were the report true, it would severely hurt Microsoft’s claim that Google is being anticompetitive.
src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
April 17th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Search Marketing, Blogs, General |
7 comments
cross-posted with InsideMicrosoft
SES blog SEO panel Hosted on
ZooomrStephan Spencer, Founder and President, Netconcepts
Rick Klau, Vice President of Publisher Services, Feedburner
Sally Falkow, President, Expansion Plus
Greg Jarboe, President and Co-Founder, SEO-PR
SES blog SEO panel - netconcepts Hosted on
ZooomrFirst up is Stephan, who talks about RSS. Says you want to go full-text, embed tracking bugs so you know how many readers you have. Notes that most blogs have a ton of feeds, ones for posts, comments, categories, comments on posts, all sorts of things, and you should definitely make sure users know you have that. Says you should make sure to customize things in the feed, especially the description of the blog (otherwise it might be “Just another WordPress blog”).
Make sure your blog is optimized. Use tags so that your blog software will have a page for that tag and rank in search engines for that tag. You should try to have a cool title, but an SEO-perfect title tag. There’s an “SEO Title Tag” plugin for WordPress that lets you customize those, which is great (must install!), you can assign any unique URL a unique title tag.
Already, most useful SES session I’ve ever attended.
You can create tag conjunction pages, combining multiple tags for great SEO. Says you should do what ProBlogger does, putting featured posts in blocks at the top of the page. Don’t use “permalink” to link to your post, use the title (unless you want to rank well for permalink, dope). Try sticky posts, which always appear at the top of your category page to introduce it (WordPress plugin: Adhesive).
Says this is effective, his 15-year old daughter got up to the first page on Neopets related terms in just a few weeks, just by listening to her dad’s tips.
SES blog SEO panel - feedburner Hosted on
ZooomrNext up is Rick from FeedBurner. He talks about redirects, which are important because search engines are now consuming feeds, too. Auto-discovery must be well-implemented on your site so readers can find it. Says that Feedburner lets publishers style their feeds in spite of the browser trying to do so. Mentions Yahoo Pipes, which lets you mix feeds.
Talks about Feedburner using clickthrough URLs to track feed actions. Also, Feedburner lets you choose the kinds of redirects you use for your feeds, a 302 or 301. They recommend you don’t use a 301 permanent redirect, in case you don’t like them (honest guy), and that Feedburner will actually 301 the feed back to you if you ask.
Talks about how feeds are coming from more than just blogs; they’re coming from stores/retailers, search engines, many broad ways. Says full-text vs. excerpt should not be an issue of publishers vs. readers, but just a question of usefulness. If you have an excerpt feed, TechMeme can’t see what posts are linking to others, and you might not get on TechMeme. Says we will only see more sites like TechMeme in the future, and keeping them out will hurt you.
If you don’t want to see your feed in search engine, the noindex tag will be honored by Google and Yahoo, and Feedburner includes an option for that. Rick says you need to effectively advertise your feed, which is easy, and so many people do it wrong. Not including an autodiscovery tag is stupid. Point to all relevant feeds. Pinging is important, because waiting for spiders to get to your site can take a long time.
Adding rich media to the feed is important, especially if you are producing podcast/video blogs. And for gods sake, give the show a title and notes, not just an episode number, or else no one is going to find your podcast in a search engine.
SES blog SEO panel - expansion plus Hosted on
ZooomrNext up comes Sally from ExpansionPlus. She talks about how producing content about a topic/brand, making sure it has a feed, and submitting it to feed search engines, it will be found by interested people and get you traffic and awareness. Ultimately, you will get to good positions for your top terms, and lots of terms you deal with and didn’t even realize you were targeting.
SES blog SEO panel - seopr Hosted on
ZooomrLast up is Greg Jarboe of SEO-PR, and he asks how many bloggers started a blog and started seeing it in the search engines relatively quickly. They did SEO for StubHub, a ticket marketplace, creating 15 blogs around the categories they deal tickets in. Few people want to read a blog talking about your company; they want a blog about news, and you need to use your companies position to create blogs you have an expertise in.
Focusing on the content builds a relationship with readers, turning you into a publisher that happens to drive customers, but you don’t shove it down their throats. You give the consumer useful, actionable information they can’t get anywhere else. In StubHub’s case, they have info from their marketplace that is of interest to all fans, even those not buying.
They targeted terms fans would use, as opposed to terms a ticket buyer would be interested in. They would up with posts about hot tickets. You don’t want unimportant blogs linking to you; you want real people caring about your real information, and that gets you real links.
SEO-PR is beta testing a tool called Buzz Logic, showing you who the top bloggers are, but also who they are using for sources, and who uses them for sources. This identifies the real opinion makers, and they added them to their blogrolls. Mentions the recent patent applications for Google Blog Search, which includes analyzing blogrolls.
Says that the way blogs work is that you need rankings before you get visitors. Interesting theory, could be absolutely right.
April 11th, 2007
Posted by
Nathan Weinberg |
Search Optimization, Blogs, General |
3 comments
