AOL - Time Warner's Do-Not-Track List Project

Posted by adam on October 31, 2007 at 03:51 PM

This morning the New York Times posted an article entitled, "Online Marketers Joining Internet Privacy Efforts". This posting highlights AOL's push to create a website linking concerned surfers to participating advertising networks' do-not-track lists.

Some writers online are comparing these lists to the do-not-call lists. It's incorrect to compare do-not-call lists with do-not-track lists.

Do-not-track lists "do-not" prevent advertising networks from serving advertising to you while you surf the internet like do-not-call lists do for your phone line. Instead, opting out will ensure advertising will not be served based on the tracking of a surfer's web behavior. Ad quantity won't be reduced; however the ad relevance could suffer.

For those who would like to find a "do-not-call" list for online advertising while surfing, good luck. But the alternative is a great (free) add-on tool for Firefox called AdBlock. This tool allows the user to set preferences to only see desired advertising. Don't complain until you've tried it.

I find myself asking questions. As an online consumer, why wouldn't I prefer to see advertising that's highly targeted to my wants and needs rather than seeing untargeted advertising littering my screen?

I also find myself asking if the average internet user understands how targeted advertising works? Do they understand what data is collected by advertisers and which is ignored? Do users understand that their "personal identity" still remains anonymous to marketers?

My point is that most likely the average internet user doesn't understand what data is collected, why it's collected, or how behavioral targeting improves the user's advertising experience.

AOL is hoping to be able to persuade persons who opt-out using these lists to also voluntarily provide demographical information to further aid advertisers in improving ad relevance.

If the average user doesn't understand both sides of the coin, will these options AOL is providing ever become popular enough to make a significant impact on tracking? My opinion is no.

I'm looking for opinions. Will this help or hurt behavioral targeting initiatives in the future? Will the results be similar to that of DVR on TV advertising?

Grinch Lives In Shopping Comparison Engines

Posted by vern on October 30, 2007 at 03:25 PM

A service we offer our clients is management of their comparison shopping engine feeds. Recently, three shopping engines notified us that they are raising their rates by up to 25% for the holiday shopping season. The reason being - "Clicks in holiday season typically convert the best of the calendar year. We are adjusting rates based on the additional value we bring your marketing efforts."

What? Wait a second! Additional value? What about the clicks that don’t convert? Charge me 25% less, or better yet, nothing, because those clicks have no value - thanks very much!

These shopping engines are confused in the role they play. They’re in the lead generation business. They’re not salesmen for my clients and not entitled to what amounts to a commission on my client’s sales. They simply present a product listing that’s been submitted to them. They haven’t had any part in creating the listing, developing my client’s website, or funding their inventory purchases.

Could the old Yellow Pages have gotten away with a 25% bump in their December bill to advertisers? God forbid Google or Yahoo explicitly raises their rates by 25% over the holiday shopping season. The outcry would be deafening.

This practice discriminates against smaller advertisers who have limited marketing budgets and can’t spend an additional 25% on shopping engine generated clicks. They’ll reduce their bids by 25% and lose page position or cap their budget and lose 25% of their click volume and 25% of their business. Happy Holidays indeed!

The shopping engines can’t have it both ways and be compensated for generating a lead and taking a cut of the sale. If they want to be compensated for the conversion, a switch to a pricing model that is truly value-based is in order. A Pay-Per-Action system, the action being a sale, would reward the shopping engines for the ultimate value transaction.

Google & Nielsen Have a New Plan for Lab Rats

Posted by on October 29, 2007 at 04:14 PM

Growing up in Palm Desert, California had its perks, but with summer temperatures reaching into the 120's we didn’t spend much time outside. Instead of burning our feet on the pavement, the kids I babysat for and I would sit in front of the television for 9 hours a day flipping between the Price Is Right and Jerry Springer (Disclaimer: I only was paid $3.00 an hour, which is not enough money to include physical movement.)

All summer long our TV viewing choices were being recorded by a little box on top of their television set; I happened to baby-sit for a "Nielsen Family".

I hadn’t thought about the Nielsen Company in years, until Google announced its partnership with them last week. Google and the Nielsen Company are teaming up to monitor our every move as we flip through our favorite television programs.

Google will soon know, down to the second, which commercials you flipped channels during and which ads held your attention. This analysis will not only help commercial creators pinpoint where their creative work loses a viewer’s interest, but also measure the audience size.

Google’s endeavor with Nielsen is an attempt to better direct commercials to the proper audience.

The partnership is currently in beta testing, allowing only a restricted amount of advertisers to take part in the “spying‎ on our commercial viewing habits. Don’t worry if you’re not currently included in the beta testing, I’m sure Google will soon find a way to make it into all of our homes.

Google TV Ads will run similarly to the well known Google AdWords program. Like internet advertisers, television advertisers will have the opportunity to buy and sell ad space. Television advertisers will now have a chance to pinpoint which channels and programs they want their ads to run during and analyze how viewers react to their commercials.

When my dad was completing his undergraduate degree he worked in a lab where they ran tests on mice. I’m starting to wonder if this is how the mice felt.

Please stay tuned: Google will soon be announcing its partnership with Pinky and the Brain to, "Try To Take Over The World."

Support Indie Search, While You Still Can

Posted by chip on October 26, 2007 at 02:58 PM

So last night my 6 year old nephew Berkeley called me at home to sell me some popcorn for his Cub Scout troop. Since he lives about 4 hours downstate, I asked what he thought would be the best way for me to make a purchase through him. He told me to go online to see what I wanted, and then just call him back to place the order. His exact response was perfect though:

Uncle Chip, just go to Google, and then go to Cub Scouts selling popcorn.

First of all, not a bad search query for a 6 year old. So good in fact, I decided to follow his advice to the letter. I have to admit, I found exactly what I needed. I was impressed. After all, I can't tell you how much traffic I see come into client sites that isn't nearly as focused.

Second, it made painfully clear to me that this 6 year old is representative of an ever growing percentage of the population that thinks Google=Search - or at least The Big 4=Search.

Given that, it should be no surprise that a couple more independent search options have fallen by the way-side, or at least took an un-reversible step in that direction.

RIP - WiseNut:

One of my all time favorite search engines, WiseNut, has closed up shop - and it went with what I would consider to be less than a whimper. In fact, a search for WiseNut in Google News returns absolutely no results for the past 30 days.

Can a search engine, however small, be taken down and have no one so much as mention it? Now I realize that very few people have the affection for WiseNut that I do, but we shouldn't ignore the contributions that the engine has made to the search landscape.

For example, how many people realize that WiseNut released a feature called "sneak-a-peek", which is basically Ask.com's binoculars, way back in 2001 - even before WiseNut was purchased by LookSmart?

Judy's Book - The Final Chapter:

Judy's Book, which has to be one of the more well known independent local shopping options, and which has received over $10.5 million dollars in venture capital since it was founded in 2004, has been forced to layoff nearly all of its 12 employees this week.

Reportedly struggling to adjust the company's business model, Andy Stack (the CEO) was quoted as saying, "It sucks…You don't start companies to get to this day. You start companies to get to a different day."

While I doubt Stack's lack of poetics had much of anything to do with the company's hardship, he has stated that he will stay on and look for a buyer - hoping not to close the doors unless a buyer does not surface in time.

Regardless of whether or not Judy's Book ends up closing up shop, or being bought out by a larger player, the world loses an independent search option either way.

Now it's not all gloom and doom for independent search, in fact more and more independent local search options seem to pop up each and every day. However, if we want any of them to stick around, and if we want to have options outside of the Google and Yahoo dominated landscape, we had better support them while we can.

Facebook Shakes the Money Tree

Posted by on October 25, 2007 at 02:30 PM

Earlier this week news broke about Microsoft's $240 million investment in Facebook, valuing the social-networking up-and-comer at around $15 billion. (Yeah, that's like 500 times Facebook's projected earnings for 2007)

The deal also guarantees Microsoft an exclusive third-party advertising platform partnership with Facebook. (I'll scratch your back if...)

But, back to the $15 billion. On the heels of that announcement comes today's news: supposedly a pair of unnamed New York Based hedge funds have anteed up another $250 million each for a piece of the Facebook pie.

For a three year-old company, this type of financial win-fall has the social media universe all a tingle with excitement. Well except, maybe, the folks at MySpace.

So, with nearly three-quarters of a billion in new financing, what's next for Facebook? An IPO? A sale? An acquisition? More growth?

Suffering from Search Fatigue?

Posted by Christopher on October 24, 2007 at 04:06 PM

Danny Sullivan's Search Engine Land recently highlighted a recent report issued by Autobytel that measured 1,001 U.S. adults and their interactions with search engines when searching for, specifically, automobiles.

I'll spare you the details (but do read the article and report), but the results show that "72.3 percent of Americans" experience "search engine fatigue" when researching online, and more than three quarters of those folks "always, usually, or sometimes" get up and leave without ever finding the object of their search.

While that's a somewhat alarming statistic, the more shocking discovery was that a significant group of these people expressed a desire that search engines be able to "read their minds."

Erm, gulp.

Number one, trust me on this, you wouldn't like it. Were I a billionaire the first thing I'd do is conduct a social experiment in which I cold call random people to offer them free money. I bet 72.3 percent of them would tell me to jam the phone someplace both uncomfortable and anatomically improbable.

But aren't I reading their minds? Who doesn't want free money? If someone called me right now and said "would you like some free money?" I'd probably, after telling him or her to shove the phone somewhere, be like "hey, are you reading my mind?"

All we need is to have Google develop Google Brain and fill our skulls full of paid eBay ads ("Looking for free money? You can find it and more on eBay!"). Do you even want the word "Yahoo!" in your head at all? Please, fellow citizens, let's watch what we wish for.

But that's beside my point. One of the commenters on Search Engine Land mentioned Barry Schwartz's The Paradox of Choice, which is certainly applicable here (Cliff's Notes: the more choices you're given, the harder it is to choose; repeat until subject is rendered cataleptic). Another, however, astutely mentioned that much of this confusion regarding how to search could be resolved if the search engines told you how to search.

Toward that end, I'd like to start things off with a few simple "How-Tos."

1. When searching, you're not talking to a person. Indeed, you're not talking at all. Although it has been tried there is not a search engine yet that can accurately answer the question "how do I change the freaking oil filter on this freaking car without freaking covering myself in freaking goop, for freak's sake?"*

   Even though that sort of search is kind of cute, in a "the computer is my friend" kind of way, pretend instead that you're speaking to Tarzan, or that you're Tarzan speaking to someone else. Bark orders. Take command. "Change oil filter" works pretty much across the board.

2. That said, don't go too far down that road: "change filter" doesn't help you out much, and "filter" on its own isn't of any use at all.
3. Don't think there's anything better after, say, the first three pages. There might be, but chances are you're going to find more of the same, become more and more frustrated, and 3/4 of you will probably get up and walk away.
4. If you're one of the remaining 1/4, you're venturing Lewis and Clark-like into the morass of the fourth page and beyond, and you've been pursuing the object of your search for two hours or more, you're either severely stricken with OCD or are convinced that you'll find the mythical diamond in the dirt. You won't. Why? Because companies that are serious about doing business online have taken steps to make themselves visible, and if they're not serious about doing business online, why are you trying to do business with them, online?

There, that's a start. I hope I've helped you, compatriots. Practice at home: write down a bunch of things you want to search for, cross out articles, prepositions, and conjunctions (the, a, for, of, and, but, etc.), pour yourself a refreshing beverage, take a deep breath, and thank whoever you worship that your greatest risk is search fatigue, and that you don't have some damn car salesman biting at your heels.**

*(FYI -- for this search, Google comes up with a bunch of blogs, none of which has anything to do with changing oil filters, many of which seemed kinda adult; Yahoo! couldn't find anything ("Yahoo!"); Live, who took second place, returned a few paid search ads that were pretty dang well on-topic; and Ask, surprisingly true to its moniker, not only brought back paid search ads but organic results that were remarkably close. Huh...)

**To help you completely get into the spirit of this endeavor, I've used LyricsFly.com (the song lyric search engine) and have come up with some music selections for your search-training mix tape: artists from Pennywise to Frank Sinatra to Mary J. Blige have all recorded songs called "Searching", and 22-Pistepirkko has a song called "Searching & Looking"; beware, however, of the Kinks ("Still Searching"), Alas ("Endlessly Searching"), and, above all, the Bad Cash Quartet ("Searching is Killing Me").

Maintaining Your Current CMS & Search Engine Presence

Posted by steve on October 23, 2007 at 12:13 PM

Is your site currently utilizing a Content Management System? Is there a possibility, even a slight one, that a CMS will be employed sometime in the future? If so, please continue reading - maintaining your current search engine presence may depend on it.

There are numerous advantages of Content Management Systems. A CMS allows for separation of content, structure and design, and facilitates the management and updates of thousands of site pages. The convenience of Content Management Systems, combined with the time and cost-saving capabilities they produce, makes them an extremely appealing solution to many webmasters.

From a search engine perspective, however, there are also a number of disadvantages which may result from the employment of Content Management Systems, which include an undesirable internal linking structure, duplicate content issues, limited design capabilities, as well as dynamic, lengthy URLs.

For today, though, rather than delving into each of the benefits and drawbacks of implementing a CMS, I want to focus on the importance of carefully analyzing each of the benefits and drawbacks of updating your current system.

Whether your CMS allows for the creation of static, search engine friendly URLs, or you are stuck with dynamic URLs with a multitude of parameters, depending on the length of time with which your CMS has been employed, those URLs have likely gained trust in the eyes of the search engines. In fact, site pages within your CMS may have established a significant amount of trust over a number of years, which has resulted in the generation of numerous inbound links and top search engine placement for several valuable, relevant keywords.

But now, several years after the implementation of your current Content Management System, a number of upgrades have been released and you are now able to manage your site more easily at less cost.

Enhanced management capabilities at less cost - these are two factors which are often the sole determinants in the final decision regarding whether or not a new and improved Content Management System should be purchased. They should not be the only two factors.

The invaluable search engine trust which has been established on current site URLs over the years is something which should be weighed heavily before making a final decision to change systems.

With a new CMS likely comes new site URLs, and in turn, a loss of search engine trust and presence. Inbound links are suddenly no longer as valuable. The internal linking structure may be unfavorably modified. Previously optimized on-page elements may be lost.

Updating to a new Content Management System often has its benefits, such as reduced management costs, enhanced usability capabilities, as well as increased flexibility. There are also, however, a number of detrimental effects which can result from doing so. If updating to a new CMS is done properly, and the correct safeguards are implemented beforehand, the loss of search engine trust and presence can be mitigated.

In the end, however, it will still likely be felt, at least temporarily.

Before choosing to upgrade to a new Content Management System, an in-depth analysis should be performed which takes into account each of the drawbacks, including a potential loss of search engine presence, to help determine whether or not they outweigh the benefits of doing so. After performing such an analysis, you may just discover that your current system and its middling capabilities are sufficient.

It's Almost Winter: Time to Search for a Shrink

Posted by on October 22, 2007 at 03:11 PM

Now about this time of year, I get a little panicky because in Northern Michigan, we enjoy less sunlight than the rest of you folks. Well, maybe not the folks reading this from the Arctic Circle.

Every year it occurs with increasing suddenness and ambushes me in an unprepared state: Hey, who turned the lights out? One day it's summer and the next it's just... dark.

To me this means six months of no sunlight, using Google's Universal Search to find pictures of my favorite Caribbean beach and thinking: "Again... why do I live here?" However, I know that in the spring, when the sun comes back, I'll remember the answer to that question. For now, I'll occupy myself with snowshoeing and cross country skiing.

So, being “in‎ this weekend with a nasty flu that has been going 'round our office, I was feeling the effects of cabin fever and sunlessness. Now mind you, I'm not a lunatic. (Well, not really.) But just in case I need something soothing (or ...pharmaceuticals) to carry me through the long dark winter, I thought I'd do a little search: Traverse City psychiatrists

Just in case, mind you.

What I found was interesting:

(Click Image to Enlarge)

Universal Search first turned up results for a few maps, one being a link to the site of Northern Lakes Community Mental Health. To me, this would be where you go when you a.) Do not have mental health insurance coverage, or b.) Want to sit down with a case worker who has 10,000 others and exactly 2.5 minutes to spare for your "issues." They're too busy and I do have coverage, so why take time from those who need it?

Unable to find a website for the Bay Area Psychiatric Clinic, I searched on the clinic's name and got a scare:

Zoinks! Maybe our local Bay Area Psychiatric Clinic could use a little awareness of how to handle Online Crisis Management, especially when it isn't your clinic undergoing a federal investigation. Indeed, if I was in a depressive fog, or just an inexperienced web searcher, and failed to notice the URL: www.californiahealthline.org? I might think something sinister was going on!

The next, Wedgewood, had faith on the menu with my Prozac, making me a little wary since I‘m not in the market for more religion than I already have.

The following results pertained to what we locals call "Building 50," which is the former State Mental Hospital which happens to be located here in Traverse City. I could take some photographs or eat unbelievably good food at Trattoria Stella. But if I'm depressed, it won't do me any good. (Actually, art, food and wine might do some good.)

A couple results from UCompare HealthCare actually require payment for "My Doctor Report," before the doctor's phone number can be divulged! Somehow this seems... wrong.

If what Google's results tell me is true, there are a few disturbing conclusions to be made about the options for clinically depressed people in northern Michigan:

1. This winter, if I need them, I'll have few pharmaceutical options; somebody please check on me around late February.
2. Psychiatrists in Northern Michigan need a friendlier web presence; if you're a psychiatrist, you might think about relocating to Traverse City.
3. My next search: SAD lamps full spectrum lighting



Socialize This Post




If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.




• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 



• Email
• Permalink
• Comments (2)

But Where are the People, Man?

Posted by tim on October 19, 2007 at 01:08 PM

I recently returned from this year's New Media Expo in Southern California.

Well, it feels like recently, but I guess the show wrapped almost a month ago now. It's fitting though, because that kind of pace seems to just about fit perfectly with the world of new media that we're seeing right now.

Meeting with people at the show and just hearing about some of the ideas floating around, it's obvious that as the barriers to access keep getting lower and lower for people to live life in a mixed media world, the potential for excellent, creative content is basically limitless. Even watching the light come on for some long established companies about what's possible was really a lot of fun.

I have to ask the question though; how is this content going to get to the masses?

Now granted, a ton, and I mean a ton of user generated content is meant for the creator and their friends/family/facebook list, etc. No matter how big a list that is, it's clearly not intended for mass consumption.

Even the greatest Jimi Hendrix Air Guitar Maestro has a limited audience.

But what about the content that is intended for the masses? How do the masses find it? There is more and more new content to sift through everyday. Throwing your 'viral' (and I use that term almost dreamily) video into the World Wide Web hoping that people will come running is a bit naive, at best.

The scary truth of it is, if you want mass consumption, you have to market. That's never going to change. What changes is how you market, and who you market to.

There's a boatload of fantastic content producers working today, but before you go to the trouble of getting great content, make sure you know what you're plan for it really is.

You Know Where You Can Stick Your Keywords?

Posted by alex on October 18, 2007 at 04:00 PM

Right out of college I took a job at a newspaper. I signed on with full anticipation of using my English writing degree and fine tuned writing skills to move to the editorial department. Instead, I moved into advertising. I immediately enjoyed creating ads for local businesses, and figuring out which section of the paper that specific company would fit into best.

I worked at the paper a little over a year, but decided it was time to move on. I was hired at Oneupweb in September, the opportunity to write and learn gleaming in my near future. Needless to say, the atmosphere, wealth of knowledge I have learned, and process of helping clients is a little different than I experienced at the newspaper. However, the more I learn and become involved, certain aspects of website optimization and advertising are not as different as I originally thought.

My first encounter with keywords was a whirlwind of research, specifications, and thousands of words at my disposal. These words at first glance, didn't contain much meaning to me, but quickly became a force for the client's site. That got me thinking about the newspaper. It had never occurred to me, before my month at Oneupweb that words, when strategically placed could positively affect a company's success.

If I had the knowledge of targeted words then, that I do now, I am almost certain I could have become a genius advertiser, decorated for my sharp skills at targeted phrase placement. It makes very obvious sense to me now. Consumers are looking for certain things when they scan the ads in the Sunday newspaper. Whether it is groceries or events, there are things in an ad that jump out, and make them take a second look. At the paper, if I had known not only look at where to place an ad, but had also used the knowledge I have now to dig into the content, and find terms that consumers tend to gravitate toward, the effectiveness of the ad could have been hugely impacted.

Now, don't get me wrong, I am in no way, shape, or form looking to return to the newspaper and make a huge advertising success of myself. My current position has me more than happy. It just goes to show you that an old job, one you thought maybe had no relevance to your current situation, can pop up and surprise you.

The 2008 Presidential Race Online & Personal - A Preface

Posted by on October 17, 2007 at 08:58 AM

Oneupweb will soon put out the first installment of what will be an in-depth, ongoing look at the 2008 Presidential race and how it's being fought online.

We start with data at the end of September 2007 which will serve as the basis of our study, Presidential Campaign 2008 - Online Strategies, Tactics and Trends. It can be accessed (soon) free of charge from our website, Oneupweb.com.

The initial data indicates that candidates from both major parties were heavily immersed in social media by the end of September, but none had done any real work to optimize their websites and few had launched any serious paid online advertising. Our regular updates in the form of a blog, will be written here on Straight Up Search, by a lifelong political junkie - me.

But before that series of blogs begins, I thought I'd do something rare in the world of political commentary and blogdom - discuss credentials. With hundreds of white papers, articles, webinars and interviews throughout the company's 12 years in the field, and many more successful search campaigns completed, Oneupweb is an undisputed authority in online marketing.

Finding a consensus authority in politics is more difficult. Neither Rush Limbaugh nor the late newsman Peter Jennings finished college, nor passed a single class on the subject, but both spoke authoritatively to millions about the intricacies of American politics. (If the topic had been quantum physics, don't you think someone would have called them on it?)

I found after six years and two degrees at Syracuse's Maxwell School of Citizenship, a couple weeks of government-paid training at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, 8 years with the feds, and ten political campaigns as a paid consultant, I still can't walk into a bar and win a political argument. When it comes to politics, anyone with an opinion and the courage to express it is an "expert". If you're loud enough and know the right people, you're a "pundit." That's political reality in our democracy.

So, I'll try to stick to the facts and leave the punditry to others. Stay tuned as Oneupweb follows the candidates' online marketing strategies in Presidential Campaign 2008.

Update: This series continues with our post: The 2008 Presidential Race Online & Personal.

Putting Mahalo to the Test

Posted by on October 16, 2007 at 01:48 PM

At the start of June, Jason Calcanis launched his newest project, Mahalo. The algorithm-free, human-guided search engine certainly represents a break from what we’ve come to expect in the industry. And, with four months under its belt, I figured it was time to put Mahalo to the test.

I know I’m a week late, but I also know that Radiohead’s new album is available for download. And, figuring that I can’t beat the price, I’d like to download it. Sadly, though, I can’t remember the album title.

So, a simple search at Mahalo.com – "radiohead":

(Click image to enlarge)

And it seems that the engine is reading my mind. The band name, big, blue, and bold, and, directly below it, a link to New Radiohead Album. Just what I’m looking for! So I click the link.

And, there it is, in the right corner, all the information I need, in a shaded "Guide Note" box. The record's called In Rainbows, and I can’t wait to get my virtual hands on it. How do I now recall that it’s called In Rainbows? The simple guide note, of course, right at the top of my “New Radiohead Album‎ search:

(Click image to enlarge)

You’ll notice, though, that Mahalo’s a little misleading here. Mahalo tells me that In Rainbows will be released beginning October 10. Thankfully, I know that happened a week ago, and this bit of mistaken tense doesn’t deter me.

Figuring that I just want the album already, I click on the title within the Guide Note. Sadly, still no download...just a new tracklisting:

(Click image to enlarge)

This is good information, I guess, but ultimately gets me no closer to the record.

So, I shift my eyes back left. Suggestions to click on links for Radiohead - but that’s where I started – or In Rainbows Review - but I don’t want those. I just want the album already.

My eyes scroll down. Seven "recent" headlines, the earliest coming September 30. Nothing I’m looking for here.

So I look down further and, finally, I find a link to InRainbows.com and, finally, what I’m looking for.

The verdict on Mahalo: Pretty unsatisfying. In my mind, a quick-developing, semi-breaking entertainment story is where an engine such as Mahalo should thrive. But the engine essentially misled me through the process. In fact, had I just clicked on the band’s official site, right atop The Mahalo Top 7, I would have gotten the album. Instead, though, I followed the engine’s seemingly convenient lead, and was left in a lurch.

Mahalo for nothing, Jason.

The Power of Social Networking

Posted by maureen on October 15, 2007 at 09:33 AM

It was a bleak day on the outskirts of London. The kind of day that envelopes the world in grey while rain spits on the dirty pavement and even a wool sweater can't protect you from the cold that seeps into your bones. I was missing home. And then I found Facebook.

From that day on Facebook closed the miles between my college friends and me. I could log-on, look at their profiles, see updated pictures of them and even read how they were feeling at that very instant.

Yet I never understood the true scope of the social networking site until I returned to my alma mater this past weekend for the Grand Valley State University homecoming festivities.

One of the hot spots for those who graduated circa 2003 is the Yellow Jacket Inn. It's not actually in Allendale, because at that time, there was literally nothing in Allendale. But I know that several of my friends, and their friends, and friends of their friends, would be stopping by for an infamous pink drink on Saturday. So I Googled it.

Local Business Results included Subway, Hungry Howie's, Beans to Brew and Burger King. I grumbled about today's spoiled students as I continued to search page after page of results. And then I found it. The Yellow Jacket Inn. I clicked. No website. All I found was a single review saying something about the all-you-can-eat buffet. Nothing about pink drinks.

Yet when I got to my destination on Saturday, it was packed. I couldn't move for the crush of people. I wondered how they had all found out about this place. Word of mouth is great, but not that great. How had I even known to meet there, for that matter?

Facebook, of course! My friends had posted messages on each other's walls about meeting up there. I had known within 30 seconds who was going to be at the Yellow Jacket Inn, simply by logging on to my own Facebook account.

In a recent article, the LA Times summarizes Mark Zuckerberg's explanation of his company's success:

Humans get their information from two places - from mainstream media or some other centralized organization such as a church, and from their network of family, friends, neighbors and colleagues. We've already digitized the first.

What Zuckerberg and Facebook are trying to do is digitize the second. With Facebook, word of mouth information is automatically pushed out to all of your friends, and to their friends. The word spreads almost instantaneously.

And I, for one, can't wait to see what that means for the future.

comScore Reports 61 Billion Searches in August

Posted by duncan on October 11, 2007 at 09:42 AM

Today I want to thank comScore (via CNNMoney.com) for posting some incredible looking numbers regarding search activities on the Internet. I invite you to take a moment to head over to the article I read for more insight into comScore's methodology: 61 Billion Searches Conducted Worldwide in August.

You just have to be impressed by some of these numbers. I mean wow. There were at least 61,000,000,000 searches in one month! That's a lot of zeros.

Clearly people are relying more and more on the Internet to help guide them to everything from health information, to finding new friends, to finding old car parts, and almost anything else you can think of.

I wasn't too surprised to see the Latin America audience conducted the most searches per searcher in August. I had recently talked with a business colleague who lives in Belize. He was going on and on about how reliant he and his family are on online shopping. They simply can't buy a large variety of things locally.

According to the comScore report there were 206,278,000 unique North American searchers in August. We North Americans accounted for an average of about 77 searches per month. This number seems low to me. I noticed that the study did not include traffic from public computers such as Internet cafes or access from mobile phones. Surely these sectors add many more searches.

Driving to work today I listened to a National Public Radio piece on how many people are going online to find health information. You can read or listen to that story by going to NPR - Searching Online for Healthcare Information.

Given the numbers, search marketers can rest assured there is a need for their services. The traffic is out there and the best advertisers will find a way to cut through the clutter.

Warning! Paid Links Sold Here

Posted by teal on October 10, 2007 at 02:52 PM

Months of debate have preceded (and surely will follow) the recent article by Danny Sullivan, "Official: Selling Paid Links Can Hurt Your PageRank Or Rankings On Google" at Search Engine Land.

Since April, conversations of whether selling paid links will get your site penalized in Google have been brewing. Well, according to Danny's article, selling links can cause your site to drop in Page Rank or in Google's search results. From his article, Danny states,

[In the past,] if spotted, in most cases all Google would do is prevent links from a site or pages in a site from passing PageRank. Now that's changing. If you sell links, Google might indeed penalize your site plus drop the PageRank score that shows for it.

To validate this suspicion, Google has confirmed that they have in fact started to penalize, or drop sites selling links from the search results, or their index all together.

I pinged Google, and they confirmed that PageRank scores are being lowered for some sites that sell links.

In addition, Google said that some sites that are selling links may indeed end up being dropped from its search engine or have penalties attached to prevent them from ranking well.

But what if your site doesn't sell links, but buys them. What does this mean for you? In general, there are two ways you can look at this. First from a link popularity perspective, or from a traffic perspective.

Link Popularity:
Since Google isn't viewing paid links as quality links, and is going as far as penalizing sites that sell them, you can expect that any purchased links will not pass any PR or link popularity to your site. So even if the page your site is linked from has a PR 8, you will likely not receive any PR benefit from this link.

Traffic:
Is the site you are purchasing a link from a well-known resource in your industry? Do many users use this site as a reference? Checking your log files to see how much referral traffic you gain from this site is a good start. But keep in mind that as Google continues to crack down on sites selling links, your great referral site may lose positions, thus lose traffic which could very well effect the amount of traffic to your site from this source.

As always, keep an eye on where you are getting links from. Monitoring all of your paid links and the sites you're linked from is important. Also, for linking purposes, it's important to continue garnering quality, on-topic natural links as they are extremely important in improving search engine positioning and will benefit your site in much more significant ways (algorithmically) than paid links.

YouTube Videos Start Making (Ad)Sense

Posted by keirsun on October 09, 2007 at 09:56 AM

Are you one of the few who has managed to avoid wasted hours of tube-surfing on Google's popular video sharing site, more commonly known as YouTube?

If so, you likely won't be video-free for much longer. Last night, Google introduced video units.

Essentially, video units allow Google AdSense publishers to display video content from YouTube on their website(s). So if you want something a little more eye-catching than those old AdSense text ads, Google is giving you, the site owner, "a new way to enrich your site with quality, relevant video content."

In addition, Google says:

You can choose categories of video to target to your site, select content from individual YouTube partners, or have video automatically targeted to your site content. Companion and text overlay ads are relevant and non-intrusive.

Unfamiliar with Google's AdSense program? If you have ever been looking at a website and noticed links that look similar to those on the right, then you're more or less familiar with AdSense.

Site owners who sign up for AdSense allow Google to display automated, contextual ads on their site. The site owner then gets to split the profits with Google from visitor click-throughs on the ads.

Now with video content being thrown into the AdSense mix, site publishers (and Google) can make money from companion ads within the video player and text overlay ads that run across the bottom of the video itself.

Sounds like Google has found a way to compensate itself for YouTube's $1.65 billion price tag.

You can find more info about AdSense video units here.

Don't Click Here - The Ultimate Anchor Text Link

Posted by on October 08, 2007 at 12:47 PM

Marketing Sherpa just came out with an interesting report which found that a simple word change in a hyperlink can raise conversions by 8.53%. Of the three scenarios presented, "Click to Continue" resulted in the highest increase in conversions (over "Continue to Article" or "Read More").

This article piqued my interest for a number of reasons, the first of which is that while it centers on the intricacies of anchor text from a conversion standpoint, it fails to take into account certain SEO components.

As an SEO professional, I cringe when I see any of the above instances, used in Marketing Sherpa's case study, on a client's site. We SEO's are constantly battling the use of "Read More" and "Click Here". But that doesn't mean I don't also respect the extraordinary power of anchor text to improve CTR and conversions.

Why is anchor text important for SEO? Here's a relevant example: Do a search on Google on the text "click here", and who comes up? Adobe.

Do you think Adobe optimized their site for the words "click here"? Hell no. However, thousands of pages across the internet are indirectly helping Adobe position by telling their users to click here to download Adobe's software.

This just goes to show how incredibly powerful anchor text can be. I would also like to clarify that this pertains not only to external anchor text, but to internal anchor text as well.

This recent article from the talented folks at FutureNow on how to write persuasive links implies that the best formula is:
imperative verb + implied benefit

I would take this one step further to suggest that the best formula is:
imperative verb + implied benefit + relevant keyword (if ya can work it in)

Let's try this theory out:

Search over 10,000 Halloween costumes to find the perfect outfit at the perfect price.

But wait a minute- is there so much text that we are diluting relevance? Maybe we should try a different approach, like this:

Search over 10,000 Halloween costumes to find the perfect outfit at the perfect price.

I can tell you right now which one is better from an SEO standpoint (it's the one with less anchor text). As far as converting traffic goes- only A/B/ or multivariate testing will tell us for sure which is most effective from a usability standpoint.

What do you think? Any other suggestions for the ultimate anchor text link? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Widgets Brew

Posted by amy on October 04, 2007 at 02:12 PM

For three years of law school, the word “widget‎ had an entirely different and often unpleasant meaning for me. An utterance of the word triggered a frenzy of sales transaction theories, the monstrous Uniform Commercial Code, and a haunting image of my contracts professor who was a dead ringer for Colonel Sanders. So, when Newsweek referred to 2007 as the Year of the Widget just days before the New Year, I was less than ecstatic. Despite my lack of enthusiasm, widgets had an online audience of 87.1 million people in the US by June. I’ve begun to adjust to the new meaning of the word “widget‎ and no longer crave fried chicken and nerve pills at its mere mention.

Other than a trigger for law school flashbacks, what is a widget?

Widgets look like a small window on a person’s web page, social networking profile, blog or desktop. These little windows can contain just about anything; graphics, videos, quizzes, coupons, links, and so on. Where widgets are found and what they can do depends on the type of widget. There are two basic types of widget:

• Desktop Widgets — These are downloaded to and run constantly on the user’s desktop, even when the user is not online. Desktop widgets let marketers appear around the clock on a person’s desktop - a great branding opportunity - and allow marketers to communicate without the help of another website. The downside to the desktop widgets is that they are only seen by the user and it can be tricky to get users to download them.

• Web Widgets — The web widget has been the topic of most of the widget buzz this year. Web widgets are posted to social networking profiles, blogs, and other social media sites and can be seen by everyone who visits the site. The challenge with web widgets can be providing new or updated content often enough to keep site visitors happy.

What can widgets do for online marketers?

Widgets, particularly web widgets, are an easy way to build your brand, communicate with consumers, and boost social media and SEO efforts. Widgets are easy for users to post on their sites. The code can be copied and pasted to easily and quickly post your widget to blogs, social networking profiles, and other online communities.

A widget can include graphics, video, product information, coupons or special offers and give users a way to instantly click through to your site. In the case of a web widget, any visitor to the blog or social networking profile where the widget is posted can click through.

In terms of optimization, widgets can help in developing valuable backlinks. Creating a widget that offers valuable content to bloggers or social network users will not only get others clicking through to your site, but bloggers and members of online communities will often post links to where a good widget can be downloaded.

Widgets are nothing to fear.

I no longer hear the shrill voice of the colonel demanding to know if the merchant can sell the widgets. That memory has been replaced by the vision of cute little interactive online tools and online marketers smiling. A small, complex little tool, the widget can be a valuable addition to an online marketing strategy.