Re-Thinking Link Building Commentary

Posted by Sage Lewis on 30 July 2009

There is little more gratifying in the blogging world than when people take the time to comment on something you've written. That's especially the case when the comments are kind and thoughtful.

I was fortunate enough to have that experience with my last column, "Re-Thinking Link Building." People took a great deal of time to offer their thoughts and opinions on what it means to be a link builder.

I'd like to highlight some of the thoughts that came out of the comments from that article.

On outsourced link building, Christine wrote:

Couldn't agree more -- leaving this important task to people who don't care about your business or your site is not a good idea. I tried it once -- what we got were 200 links of such poor quality I was so embarrassed that we were being linked to from such rubbish. That was the first and last time we tried something like that. And guess what? None of those links exist anymore! So not only is it not worth the links you get, they do not last either (because spammy, poor-quality sites don't stick around for the long haul). I would rather spend my time and effort getting 1 quality link than paying for 200 poor links. Be warned -- it is not worth the risk of being "associated" with poor quality sites.

I liked the point that the links don't exist anymore. The longevity of the work here definitely should play a role.

Gerry wrote about his experience with a link building contract:

I was disgusted with the quality of links being submitted to me, including sites whose link pages weren't even in Google's indexes.

If a page that you get a link on doesn't have any value in the eyes of the search engines, then you're really wasting your money.

Jim's view of outsourced link builders is this:

They are adept at buying up the expired domains of websites with page rank, uploading a free template and filling it full of links. In many cases if you view the cached page you will still see the original webpage of the expired site. In a number of cases they haven't even bothered to replace the 'Lorem ipsum ...' holding text from the template!

Arun Gangwar correctly pointed out that we can't blanket an entire country as universally bad:

Lewis, I totally agree with you, though I am India but I believe in each and every word of you. Companies are using interns for developing links. They are not contributing to our website. Some companies submit at 200 places with in day or two. Curse!

ldpk is a link builder and wrote:

I have tried unsuccessfully in the past to hire someone to help me link build, but the skill set is very unique and when done well actually requires a lot more creativity and skill than given credit for. I have been successful in competing with much larger companies, and much larger budgets by emphasizing quality, relevant links and applying best SEO practices on the sites themselves (good copy, clean sites)... It is MAJORLY time consuming.

He also pointed out that small companies simply can't afford this kind of detail.

Spencer Rose made a similar point saying:

Seems to me like much of the internet is losing its "field leveling" quality and link building is directly responsible for that. Are ldpk and Spencer correct in this? Does quality link building only get done for companies with big budgets?

Eric Ward, one of the leading, if not the leading link building expert, had a thought on this:

99 of every 100 clients I work with are little guys. Little guys are who I prefer to work with... the little sites are what make the web great, and the little sites are the ones that can change lives. Big brands rock, but small brands are how I roll :)

Eric offers a $1,000 linking strategy session, co-citation analysis, link analytics, and recommendations report. This includes competitive citation and linking analytics for your site and up to 20 competitor or industry sites, delivery of two custom link strategy reports created for your site, and two hours by phone with live screen sharing to personally go over findings and suggestions.

That might seem like a plug for Eric. I don't know him other than what I've followed of his online. The point: $1,000 isn't a lot of money for two hours on the phone and a custom report. All of his services actually seem quite reasonable and doable for a business of any size.

I'll give the last word to Eric, who focuses on merit-based link building:

Love it when others express that link building is public relations... I still call it link building because sadly that's still what everyone is looking for. The terminology may still be evolving, but a merit based approach never goes out of style, and is all I do, year after year. I suggest we all do.

Resources: http://searchenginewatch.com/3634566

45 Creative, Clever And Effective Blog Taglines

Posted by Adam Singer on Jul 27th, 2009

Taglines are perhaps the most underrated and underused elements of personal and business blogs, yet they serve a huge function.

The social web has conditioned us to move through content-based sites quickly, and if we reach a site with an unclear thesis we’re likely to click to the next thing. You also can’t count on visitors to read your “about” page. In a world that increasingly moves at 140 characters or less, having a hook such as a clever tagline can make all the difference.

Taglines are your brand’s elevator pitch and help people get a quick snapshot of who you are. It’s your opportunity to be descriptive, catchy, memorable and create a unique brand for your blog. They also present a great opportunity for keyword inclusion, but not at the sacrifice of stickiness. Ideally you can combine something catchy and SEO friendly.

To help inspire you the next time you launch a blog – or any type of web publication – I pulled together what I think are some of the more creative, clever and effective taglines from around the blogosphere:

1. How To Change The World: A practical blog for impractical people

2. Successful Blog: You’re only a stranger once

3. Conversation Agent: Connecting ideas and people – how talk can change our lives

4. Sugarrae: Never mess with a woman who can pull rank

5. Boing Boing: A directory of wonderful things

6. PR Squared: It may be the future but you still gotta eat

7. The Consumerist: Shoppers bite back

8. Zen Habits: Simple Productivity

9. Yoast: Tweaking Websites

10. PR 2.0: The future of communication starts here

11. CopyBlogger: Copywriting tips for online marketing success

12. /Film: Blogging the reel world

13. Broadcasting Brain: Harvesting cognitive surplus for uncanny content

14. Psyblog: Understand your mind

15. Lifehacker: Tips and downloads for getting things done

16. Think Simple Now: Creativity, Clarity, Happiness

17. Violent Acres: Like you, but with poor impulse control

18. Bacon Today: Daily updates on the world of sweet, sweet bacon

19. Shoemoney: Skills to pay the bills

20. Techno Theory: Technical…Practical…Theoretically Interesting

21. Publishing 2.0: The (r)Evolution of media

22. Geek Sugar: Geek is chic.

23. Smashing Magazine: We smash you with the information that will make your life easier. Really.

24. A VC: Musings of a VC in NYC

25. Steve Pavlina: Personal development for smart people

26. Simply Fired: If you don’t laugh, you’ll cry.

27. So Good: An absurd look at the world of food

28. Get Rich Slowly: Personal finance that makes cents

29. Personal Branding Blog: Navigating YOU to future success

30. SEO Book: Learn. Rank. Dominate.

31. The Impulsive Buy: Putting the “ew” in product reviews

32. PluginID: Plugin to your identity

33. Kottke: Home of fine hypertext products

34. Freakonomics: The hidden side of everything (also a book, but a great tagline none-the-less)

35. Web Worker Daily: Rebooting the workforce

36. Online Marketer Blog: If Copyblogger and JaffeJuice had a bad-ass baby

37. Auto Blog: We obsessively cover the auto industry

38. Advergirl: …yeah, I have an opinion about that

39. TwiTip: Twitter tips in 140 characters or more

40. Duct Tape Marketing: Simple, effective and affordable small business marketing

41. Apartment Therapy: Saving the world, one room at a time

42. TechCult: Technology, Twisted

43. Illuminated Mind: The less boring side of personal development

44. Don’t Drink The Kool-aid: Join the conversations. Just don’t drink the Kool-aid.

45. Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that matters

A few quick observations noted while compiling this:

• It was easy to get quite a few of these as the catchier taglines are sticky enough to recall without even visiting the site
• Only a few of these taglines are conscious of SEO, but it is an opportunity
• Many taglines were part of the image instead of as HTML text on the page, so if you’re going to include keywords be sure that they are text-based or at a minimum, include them as alt text to the image
• Many blogs have no tagline at all, relying purely on their name to tell the story
• Strong taglines make a great first impression
• Descriptive taglines work just fine too if they match the content
• Taglines can work in conjunction with the name of the blog itself – the two support each other
• Simply reading the taglines of sites you already know can provide a mental image of the site
• For blogs with non-descriptive names, taglines become even more important

This is of course an incomplete list, so we’ll turn it over you. Share your favorite blog taglines in the comments that you think are creative, clever or effective.

Resources: http://www.toprankblog.com/2009/07/blog-taglines/

Top 10 Things the Microsoft/Yahoo! Deal Changes for SEO

Posted by randfish on July 29th, 2009

The search landscape is changing significantly this morning, and SEOs of all stripes need to pay close attention. I'm going to do my best to summarize the impact of these changes based on what we already know and interpret what's going to change for the field of search engine optimization and what we, as representatives of our clients and our companies, need to know and do.

Background on the Deal

First off, a few background snippets from several of the sources on this topic - SearchEngineLand's Live Blogging Coverage; TechCrunch; ReadWriteWeb; and the new MS/Yahoo! website Choice, Value, Innovation.

• The term of the agreement is 10 years
• Microsoft will acquire an exclusive 10 year license to Yahoo!'s core search technologies, and Microsoft will have the ability to integrate Yahoo! search technologies into its existing web search platforms
• Yahoo! will continue to syndicate its existing search affiliate partnerships.
• Microsoft's Bing will be the exclusive algorithmic search and paid search platform for Yahoo! sites. Yahoo! will continue to use its technology and data in other areas of its business such as enhancing display advertising technology.
• Each company will maintain its own separate display advertising business and sales force.
• Yahoo! will become the exclusive worldwide relationship sales force for both companies' premium search advertisers. Self-serve advertising for both companies will be fulfilled by Microsoft's AdCenter platform, and prices for all search ads will continue to be set by AdCenter's automated auction process.

In case that wasn't quite clear, the big takeaway is that Bing will now power search on Yahoo! and Yahoo!'s salesforce will sell the premium (non-self service) search advertising for Yahoo!/Bing. Bing also gets access to Yahoo!'s core search technology and can, at its option, leverage that to help create more relevant results.

• Google has 78% of market share of paid search (direct quote on SELand from Microsoft)
• Bartz: Yes there are many Yahoo search employees who will be asked to take jobs at Microsoft. There will also be search employees who we look to help us on the display side. And then unfortunately there will be some redundancy in Yahoo. (Just a quick note; if you work in Yahoo! search, please email me - rand@seomoz.org - we're hiring on the engineering team!)
• Bartz: Notes that when it comes to paid search, Panama is the provider in most international marketplaces for Microsoft already.

• Danny Sullivan: What happens to other things search like at Yahoo? What powered Yahoo News? What happens to the Yahoo Directory? Is Delicious search? And what happens to Yahoo paid inclusion?
  Bartz: We have full flexibility on what to do within our own sites. Paid inclusion, we’ll decide on that later.

• AdAge reports that ComScore shows Bing will now have a 28% market share when combined with Yahoo! search, though.
• ReadWriteWeb worried about this large list of services from Yahoo! that are under "search services." Yahoo! PR called them to say that "this is a consumer facing list of search-related services, like News Search and Map Search, but most of those are not or are no longer formally part of the Search Department." So, probably at least some of them are safe.

Resources: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/top-10-things-the-microsoftyahoo-deal-change-for-seo

Of PPC and PBJ: Combining PPC and SEO Effectively, Part 1

Posted by Herndon Hasty on 28 July 2009

The unattainable goal for many search campaigns is the ever-elusive melding of PPC and SEO tactics for bigger and better top-line results. Theoretically, the two should go together like peanut butter and jelly.

SEO's thick and salty "peanut butter" should form a strong base and combine well with PPC's more easily transplantable and sweet "grape jelly" to form an unstoppable search/sandwich force, right? Maybe, if you try to put them together in the right way.

Ensuring the two work together makes complete sense because the efforts target the same customer pool and utilize the same concepts of headline, body copy, and landing page. Heavy levels of research show that having both a natural and a paid listing result for a keyword drives more traffic, and even purchase intent.

Remember, however, that the primary ingredients of a perfect peanut butter and jelly sandwich come from different jars, are applied in very different ways, and sit on top of each other rather than directly mixing. Similarly, SEO and PPC call on very different disciplines, depend heavily on different teams, and create very different effects.

Does this mean that they can't be combined effectively? Of course not -- it's just a question of drawing on the strengths of each and using them to chase the whole, rather than merely looking at the sum of their parts.

The Basics: Keywords

The ultimate goal of your paid and natural campaigns, outside of the resulting traffic/revenue/smiting of enemies, is ranking at the ideal spot for the right keywords. The best selection of keywords, however, varies from brand to brand and site to site -- even within the tightest of competitors.

Given that it takes a lot of effort to change SEO keyword strategies, and buying less-than-ideal keywords for search ads can quickly eat up your non-brand budgets for less-than-ideal returns, how can you make sure you're making the most of your opportunities?

Enter your keyword reports.

Depending on which program is more advanced, go through the natural or paid keywords that are producing the most traffic and, especially, the most revenue and frequent conversions. Go beyond the head terms of the campaign (men's shoes), and look at tail terms like descriptors (designer men's shoes vs. fashion men's shoes), superlatives (best men's shoes vs. popular men's shoes) and actions (buy men's shoes vs. shop men's shoes).

In the case of paid keywords, also be sure to focus in on exact match terms, or use Google's Search Query report so that you're looking at the exact keywords that people are using to trigger sales, rather than their phrase or broad match versions.

As your natural campaign progresses, keep your paid team up-to-date on keywords that your site is now ranking higher for (and thus might be able to help support a higher paid spend for an even better net effect) and keyword patterns that emerge as unexpected traffic and revenue drivers.

It's a tough choice between which to lean on: Natural search will tend to have the longest history but, without advanced optimization work involved, might not involve results from a full scope of keywords. PPC data depends completely on when you start and what keywords you're buying, but is more ideally suited to testing.

The Advanced: Testing and Applying

As an SEO higher-up, I see natural search as the answer to everything from "how do I drive more traffic in a recession?" to "what condiments are best to offer at a business-casual dinner party?" What it most certainly is not, however, is an ideal testing ground, given the time it can take for crawlers to even identify and apply changes to an indexed page -- let alone show it's of any value.

Your PPC campaign, however, can move in and out of keyword segments with ease, and has message testing built right into the interface. Even though you're limited to 70 characters in your ads, you can use your ad copy to test the gambit of copy approaches, from broad copy concepts (i.e. brand-centric copy vs. keyword-rich vs. arty and expressive) to specific messaging (price point vs. value) to the nitty-gritty (different calls to action, numerals and symbols vs. spelling out). You can then apply what you've learned to your natural campaign via meta descriptions (which function much like ad copy), title tags, and on-page copy.

You can also use it to test the effectiveness of landing pages, keyword sets, and even URL structures and apply it to natural search efforts.

The Aftermath: Measuring and Adjusting with the Total Effect in Mind

Your natural search just took a dive last week on your biggest brand terms. You just changed out your meta description, which alters how the page appears in the index. The two must be connected, right?

You need to stop your development team and have them scrap that change right away, right? Possibly, until you remember that you just started buying those keywords last week, too.

To some, this may sound simple and overdramatic, but it happens to the best and most attentive of us unless we have all the data in front of us. Integrating your paid and natural results for all parties involved can be just as important as integrating your actions, as it can prevent hasty and painful decisions that could easily be avoided.

Resources: http://searchenginewatch.com/3634537

What Makes an SEO

Posted by randfish on July 28th, 2009

There are lots of standardized definitions of SEO (see define query), but few that exist to define or distill the qualities that make a person a professional SEO. The way I see it, there are three ways a professional can be categorized and assigned - technical, self-constructed and peer validated.

Technical: An SEO is one who practices search engine optimization.

Self-Constructed: I practice search engine optimization as a significant portion of the professional work I undertake and am, therefore, an SEO.

Peer Validated: A community of peers in the SEO field has recognized this individual's achievement and views them as qualified for the title.

In the SEO world, these are very informal and anyone is technically allowed to call themselves what they like (and though I'll quibble later in the post with some self-titling, I don't believe any regulation should exist). However, in many other fields, primarily those with a long-established history (lawyer, doctor, law enforcement, engineer, politician), external requirements are a neccessity.

That said, the SEO community appears to be growing in its formalization. Events, organizations, and external recognition, along with the growing value and importance of the practice seem, to me, to be the driving forces at work. I love this community and always have - it's inspired me, carried me and given me so much that I can never repay enough, but I'd like to add a brief editorialization. It is my personal opinion that unless an individual has these three qualities, I would not personally peer-validate them as an SEO and would hope to be cast out should I not personally exhibit these:

1. Knowledgable in the Basics of Search Engine Operations (not just SEO, but the fundamentals of how search engines work)
2. Actively Practicing SEO by Influencing Change to Websites & Pages and Measuring the Impact
3. Consistently Formulating & Testing Theories About Metrics/Variables that Influence Search Engine Results

I've been a bit frustrated of late by the demeaning of our profession by those who do not take the practice seriously nor apply the craft with the respect it's due. And, furthermore, I'm conflicted about those who'd suggest that our field or our practice should not embrace the principles above. It seems disingenuous, even intellecutally dishonest, to claim to "optimize" for search engines, and yet be lacking in knowledge, not actively practicing (and measuring!), or refrain from critical thinking, brainstorming, forming hypotheses and testing.

Am I too harsh? Should I be more lenient? Or, do we, as a community, want to apply some standards in peer validating those who claim the title of SEO? If so... Are these the right ones?

Resources: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/what-makes-an-seo

How to Analyze and Rate Keyword Difficulty in Google

Posted by Codex-M

You may have thought about the keywords for which you want your site to rank well in the search engines, but do you have any idea how difficult it will be to rank for those words? Just how many sites are competing for visitors with phrases like "dog training" or "mortgage broker"? If you're not sure, keep reading; this article will explain the factors you must consider when trying to learn how difficult it will be to rank for your chosen keywords.

In any search engine optimization activities, keyword research is the most important element. This is because the content placed on any page of a website with the intention to get good rankings in Google depends on the targeted keywords.

Most website owners fail to realize the importance of analyzing the difficulty of the keywords they are targeting. As a result, their search engine optimization campaign is very difficult and costly.

When the campaign is difficult, it's hard to climb up the rankings. This leads to a higher campaign cost because you'll need a larger amount of resources to get feasible results. More expensive campaigns tend to give a lower return of investment for the business.

This is one of the big reasons there are a lot of websites that are not making money due to the wrong choice of keywords.

This article dissects the mystery of keyword difficulty in Google to come up with a process of analyzing and rating of keywords to target.

Using this methodology will minimize campaign difficulty while attaining a good conversion rate for your website. As a result, you will gain a good return of investment for your online business.

This article will discuss each factor defining the difficulty of keywords in Google, and then propose a method for rating the keywords so that you can easily see which keyword or key phrase is the best to target.

Resources: http://www.seochat.com/c/a/Google-Optimization-Help/How-to-Analyze-and-Rate-Keyword-Difficulty-in-Google/

Google Certified SEOs = Top Contributors / Bionic Posters?

One person posted a rant in the Google Webmaster Help forums about the "Top Contributors / Bionic Posters" in that forum. In short, Top Contributors / Bionic Posters are given the title by Googlers, who believe that these people are smart enough, experienced enough, skilled enough and helpful enough to be giving answered at Googler levels. But this person felt the Top Contributors / Bionic Posters were not helpful.

The interesting part of this thread is that Googler, JohnMu, does the right thing and backs up the Top Contributors / Bionic Posters with a really nice post. The post, kind of leads me to see that Google may (maybe stretching it here) consider the Top Contributors / Bionic Posters as "certified Google SEOs," if there is such a thing. Google does have certified AdWords professionals, Ad Manager pros, Google Apps, etc, but not Google SEOs, simply because it is something that would be considered very controversial on many levels. But in a sense, these Top Contributors / Bionic Posters are Google Certified SEOs.

Resources: http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/020451.html