With Kluster, Social Media Marketing Pays Big
Posted by carly on March 31, 2008 at 09:46 AM
The buzz surrounding the corporate monetization of social networking sites is enormous. It's constant, controversial and ultimately coming up short. Until now.
With a dash of brilliance, a dollop of attitude and the drive to change the way the world thinks about innovation - Ben Kaufman debuted Kluster in mid-February. Prior to launch, Kaufman's brilliance landed him an entire room at TED to demo his new social network to the great minds, celebs and deep pockets of the industry. Did I mention that he's 21?
As the CEO of Kluster, Ben got his start in the world of innovation three years prior with his start up, Mophie. As a product development outfit, Mophie creates iPod headphones and accessories - including the Bevy, which, if you're reading this blog Mr. Kaufman, is the coolest thing I've ever seen. If only I had a Shuffle. I actually considered buying one after hearing about the Bevy; just so that I had everything I needed in life on my key chain. My music, a bottle opener and my keys. Have you seen our Survival Guides? They tie in perfectly with the Bevy. Survival in the Web 2.0 world. The marketer in me just jumped way off track.
So what exactly is Kluster and just how does it work?
As Kaufman explains it, Kluster is a social networking site at its core. But keep reading, because it blows MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn and Wikipedia off the map when it comes to corporate participation and the ultimate purpose and benefit of social networking to the corporate world.
As we've all become accustomed to, Kluster of course allows you to create your profile (complete with the obligatory photo) and interact with other users. What sets the network apart is its purpose. When Mophie took off, Kaufman quickly recognized the power of collaboration and set out to create a way for people to get together, brainstorm and execute innovations ultimately deciding what the next "big thing" will be, rather than buying into the newest gizmo, cure, or plight to fight world hunger when someone else brings it to the attention of the world.
The genius behind this network being that it allows members to ultimately speak with and get direct feedback from future users, refine their innovation based on that feedback and execute. Did I mention membership is free? Complete with its own virtual economy, algorithms to accurately determine which ideas will prevail and the possibility of turning a great idea into real dollars - Kluster will accelerate corporate participation in the social networking scene. And ultimately, do a little good for the world if we're lucky.
Kluster will eliminate the perils of tapping into an elusive target audience with the standard and ignored survey and less than productive focus group. It provides the opportunity to present new ideas and creations to the world and to those who may not otherwise know where to start. It will allow companies to cast a tighter net around the illusive ROI by testing out marketing campaigns prior to spending millions on a media plan only to find out that no one in your target audience is actually responding to your message. It's genius.
And while you may be thinking, "Hello! Intellectual property nightmare." Kaufman has that part figured out too. 21 years old. Innovative. Out to change the way the world collaborates and setting the stage for companies across the globe to rejuvenate the development process. I can't wait to see what comes of this.
Update: This was our most popular blog post for the week of March 31st. Listen to the author discuss this topic on the StraightUpSearch Podcast.
Tags
Kluster
Social Networking
Oneupweb
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself in Higher Quality
Posted by tim on March 28, 2008 at 09:54 AM
We're turning on the YouTube this week to discuss the recent announcement that some YouTube videos can now be viewed in higher quality.
Keirsun and James join me in the studio to identify what is higher quality and how it affects video publishers and YouTube viewers.
Our discussion stems from Keirsun's recent StraightUpSearch blog post: YouTube Balances Higher Quality Videos with Usability, which was our most popular blog post last week.
Tags
StraightUpSearch
StraightUpSearch Podcast
Oneupweb
Transparency Takes Center Stage in SEM
Posted by luke on March 28, 2008 at 09:22 AM
When SEM first began to gain support among online marketers, the term "black box" often found its way into the various descriptions of the practice, pointing to the lack of transparency.
While the results were there, it was a mystery as to what occurred on the inside. Furthermore, any additional probing or questions from the advertiser were often blocked by the ad server (the search engine). The lack of answers to simple questions left online advertisers tense and uncertain as to the campaign's potential.
Now, it seems transparency has taken center stage not only in search engine marketing, but marketing as a whole. Drug manufacturers must be straightforward in regards to potential side effects, car dealers up front with actual prices and so on.
Nowadays, advertisers and online marketers have the ability to draw deeper conclusions and make well-informed decisions based on an array of campaign metrics. "How am I doing?" is no longer a simple one word answer. The need to engage customers and increase online revenues has been further encouraged by the ability to capture customer data implicitly, both accurately and divorced of bias, in real-time and from multiple mediums.
The world of e-marketing today begins with the monthly web analytics report. Serving as the foundation to various online initiatives, the results allow for greater campaign efficiency and the insight gained is often used when developing additional campaigns whether paid search, email, banner, video, etc.
Ultimately, a greater transparency now exists within the world of search engine marketing. There is a sense of context for the advertiser when those monthly performance numbers are received.
When a client asks "How are we doing?" I can be sure that there's going to be fifteen consecutive "why's?" to follow if my response is simply "good."
Whether the beginner or the expert, Oneupweb offers a library full of search engine marketing resources, sharing thoughts, perspectives, solutions and strategies that all strive for providing a greater transparency.
A Month in Mobile Marketing
Posted by chip on March 27, 2008 at 09:20 AM
Well here we are, time for another mobile update. It's only been a month, but as you know new developments on the mobile front seem to happen at break-neck speed sometimes - this past month was no exception. In fact I tend to think that some of the news around the mobile web this month is as exciting as it comes. So let's get right into it.
IBM Lotus Expeditor 6.1.2
IBM has released a new version of their Lotus Expeditor software which aims to bring interactive Web 2.0 features, like social media and mash-up capabilities, to mobile devices. Not only will this help to enhance the mobile user experience by making it quicker and easier to navigate the mobile web with your smart phone, but it will also enable mobile application developers to create applications that combine information from multiple sources.
GoCelly - Take-Out by Text
Dallas, Texas based Celly Corp. is releasing a new service called GoCelly. Free to customers, GoCelly allows you to order and pay for your favorite take-out food with a simple text message. While this service may take a while to spread, starting April 25th you'll have the ability to create an account that contains your favorite local take-out meals tagged with code words. When you feel like ordering some take out, all you have to do is text your code word to GoCelly. They will place your order, pay for it with the card that you have on file and text you back with the time that your food will be ready to be picked up. It may take a while for this service to spread into your area, but if you just can't wait they have brochures that you can print from their site and take to your favorite take-out spots to help get them set up with the program.
StoreXperience
Mobile marketing comes to the brick and mortar storefront. I've often felt that there aren't enough companies thinking about the mobile marketing in a practical enough sense. If we can learn anything from the mobile marketing that has been going on in places like Japan, it's that mobile marketing doesn't have to be a channel solely for reaching people "out there" - wherever that is. Why can't we market through mobile channels to the customers right in our local community, or right in our stores for that matter? StoreXperience aims to change this with a pilot program for their interactive mobile e-tail platform called Easy Shopping.
Easy Shopping could be the platform that brings the future of mobile marketing into the present. Allowing consumers to quickly and easily find product information, customer reviews and even on the spot discounts and purchase incentives - all from their cell phone and while they're already in your store.
What if they aren't already in the store you ask? What if they're exposed to a product through an advertisement out on the street, in a store window, in a magazine or at a bus stop? In addition to the same useful information available to the in-store customer, a user searching for information on a specific product can also compare retailers by price and location, relative to where they are right at that moment.
I won't go into too much detail as to how it all works - that could be an entire post in itself, and maybe it should be - but take a look at the company's scenarios and I think you'll agree that Easy Shopping is an innovative mobile marketing opportunity that truly improves the customer experience. It makes me want to update my cell phone.
Google & the 700MHz Auction
Well I couldn't get through a mobile update this month without mentioning the 700MHz auction - you know, the spectrum that will become available to mobile networks as television moves over to digital signals in 2009. Leading up to this auction most of the talk, and all of the speculation, was centered on Google making a move to enter this space - after all, the search engine pledged to bid a minimum of $4.6 Billion for a portion of this spectrum almost a year before the auction.
Well, whether the auction got too rich for their blood (blocks selling for between $6 & $9 Billion each), or they never really had an interest in entering this space at all, Google didn't come away with any of the spectrum. That's not to say they didn't get exactly what they wanted though. The FCC embraced Google's idea to open this spectrum to third party devices ensuring that the Google backed Android platform will have a home when it's released even if none of the major carriers decide to offer it. From the very start Google has made no secret that this was one of their main objectives. I tend to think they have to be pretty happy about accomplishing this - and without spending billions of dollars in the process.
So I know I've skipped some mobile marketing items this month - I always do - please feel free to comment if I left out any of your favorite mobile moments.
Update: This was our most popular blog post for the week of March 24th. Listen to the author discuss this topic on the StraightUpSearch Podcast.
Tags
Mobile
IBM
GoCelly
StoreXperience
Oneupweb
Safari 3.1 - A New Player to the Windows Browser Mix
Posted by steve on March 26, 2008 at 11:21 AM
A new contender may be emerging into the Windows web browser arena. After making a number of much-needed updates to Safari 3.0 beta, Apple has begun pushing users to install Safari 3.1 for Windows. This push has been welcoming for some, but somewhat of an annoyance for others.
As with a lot of the pushback that is sparked when companies try to force updates on users, as was the case with Facebook Beacon, Apple's push of Safari 3.1 has been in the form of a default opt-in update. For those running iTunes, Apple has begun prompting users to install Safari 3.1 for Windows as part of their Software Update, even though it is not applicable to improving the functionality or security of iTunes itself.
While many people are disgruntled by the tactic employed by Apple to induce involuntary download, there are others who can't wait to test their new browser.
Apple has made a number of improvements to Safari, which include standards compliance enhancements, increased speed, and a more efficient use of memory. And after initial tests, a number of users are claiming that Safari 3.1 will rival Internet Explorer and Firefox, and that certain features of Apple's new browser surpass those of browsers put out by Microsoft and Mozilla.
According to W3Schools statistics, just 2% of users browsed the Web using Safari last month. Internet Explorer still maintains the bulk of usage at over 50%, and Firefox has now captured over 36% of the overall browser usage market share. We can expect to see Safari's market share increase a bit in the months to come, but only time will tell whether or not Apple will differentiate its browser enough to break the current browsing habits of a significant number of users.
For webmasters, this could soon mean site compatibility testing in yet another browser.
Google To Prohibit Bidding On Competitor Names?
Posted by vern on March 25, 2008 at 11:41 AM
You may have noticed a recent addition to the organic search results in Google when searching on a brand name or brand URL. A search for www.bestbuy.com serves as a great example. See the search box in the organic listing labeled Best Buy? The button next to the search box invites me to "Search bestbuy.com". The addition of this search box has created quite a stir in the eCommerce community. Working through a likely search scenario demonstrates the cause for concern.
Say I'm in the market for a battery for my HP laptop. I shop Best Buy often and I enter www.bestbuy.com in the Google search box. A search for "Best Buy" works as well. I then enter "hp laptop battery" in the search box in this organic listing and click the accompanying button. Whoa! Instead of going to the Best Buy site, I'm served a SERP loaded with PPC ads. The top result is an ad for "HP Official Store'. There are two more PPC ads positioned atop the page. Chances are very good that I'll click on the top ad, and possibly all three PPC ads in the upper left before scanning the page for an organic result from Best Buy.
If I'm Best Buy, I'm losing a potential customer to the PPC ads on this second SERP. My reaction? Buy the top spot for "hp laptop battery" to counter the competition. The result? Bid competition for "hp laptop battery" heats up, and advertisers on that keyword phrase pay higher CPC's. The benefit to Google is obvious, as is the detriment to Best Buy.
Why Google has added this feature is speculation, but two scenarios come to mind. The first being, Google is phasing out the ability to bid on competitor brand names. Yahoo! and Microsoft adCenter don't allow bidding on competitor names. If Google follows suit they lose a ton of click income. The new organic listing search box helps replace that lost income.
The second, and more likely reason, is to generate more PPC ad clicks outright. Clicking on a standard organic listing doesn't bring any click income to Google. The new search box enabled organic listings facilitate the possibility of generating a second SERP filled with PPC ads - a second opportunity for Google to charge for a click on a PPC ad.
This organic listing search box will certainly impact PPC account management. Look for more aggressive bidding on branded terms. Budget allocations for branded terms will increase as managers ensure their client's PPC ads will compete with the organic listings 100% of the time. Any way you slice and dice this, Google generates more paid clicks. Brilliant!
Google's Demographic Bidding - New Features from the Advertising Giant
Posted by mike k on March 24, 2008 at 10:27 AM
Two short months after announcing the demographic bidding beta, Google has announced that the feature is now ready for prime time and open to the public at large. Here is how Google explains the new feature:
What is demographic bidding? It's a feature that helps you target your ads to users of a particular age group (such as ages 18-24), by gender, or to combinations of those groups. You can use demographic bidding whether you are using contextual or placement targeting and with both CPC and CPM bidding. You can refine your reach based on users' gender and age on certain sites in the Google content network such as MySpace and Friendster, whose users provide that information about themselves.
Reading a bit further into the announcement you will find that there are currently only 32 sites that are participating in demographics bidding. While some advertisers might find the feature useful I know that many B2B clients will use it as a tool to exclude traffic rather than target it. Unless your target market includes people that frequent HotorNot.com, RateMyBody.com and Myspace then this feature will be of little use in the short-term.
Have you had any success using the demographic bidding feature? Post your comments here and let us know.
Let's Make A DoubleClick Deal
Posted by keirsun on March 21, 2008 at 09:01 AM
Tim pulls double duty this week as interviewer and 3rd party voice of reason.
The topic of discussion is Keirsun's (our solo guest and yours truly) blog post from last week that examined Google's recent purchase of DoubleClick and why it presents a conflict of interest to Google and to search engine marketers everywhere.
Enjoy another installment of the StraightUpSearch Podcast and join us again next Friday.
Tags
StraightUpSearch
StraightUpSearch Podcast
Oneupweb
The Tortoise Didn't Win the AdWords Quality Score Race
Posted by rod on March 21, 2008 at 08:12 AM
Is it true that another aspect is going to be implemented into the mysterious Google Quality Score?
As of this exact second a quality score is assumed to be determined by:
- Click Through Rate
- Historical Account Performance
- Relevance of Keyword to Ad
- Relevance of Keyword to Ad Group
- Landing Page Quality
As we set sail into the future of PPC marketing, there is a new determinate of AdWords quality score seen on the horizon. Google has confirmed that a landing page's load time will aid in determining a quality score.
Why is Google doing this?
According to Google, it's all about the 'user experience'. A faster load time equals a better user experience. A better user experience will generate more qualified leads for a business translating into more money earned for the business.
What does this mean for PPC campaigns?
It means that we must watch our landing pages and make sure they are properly loading (as if this isn't already done). A slow landing page typically means a user will be discouraged and go elsewhere. The consideration of landing pages affecting quality score seems scary at first, but after you wade through the murk you realize slow landing pages are not beneficial at anytime.
No one wants to click on a link to wait 30 seconds before the landing page appears. This discourages the user and the user will ultimately go elsewhere. The purpose to a successful PPC advertisement is to get people to click on a link to be directed to a page that fulfills their internet needs.
And now for the definitive question: What is considered slow?
The answer to this is still up in the air. Google has not yet released what they consider a slow load time. Without knowing what slow is, how can we improve our load time before Google lays the iron fist down?
What happens when (and it will happen) a site has a server issue and Google decides to audit that site at that exact moment? Will this impact the quality score of the PPC campaign until another audit sails into town?
Tags
Google
Quality Score
Oneupweb
Google Japan Uses Tabs, Plays Catch-Up to Yahoo! Japan
Posted by drew on March 20, 2008 at 08:06 AM
A new Google Japan homepage was released yesterday with tabs to popular Google features, such as Image Search, YouTube, Picasa, Blogger, and more.
Although Google has regional localized homepages that look different and behave in different ways than Google.com does, this seems to be a step in a different direction from Universal Search by dividing the content before the user even searches. But, this may not be what it seems.
I have yet to find any information stating that Universal Search was accepted by Google Japan, as each regional area seems to have the option to use it or not. If there isn't Universal Search in place, then this could be a new initiative to make the Japanese public aware of Google's services. This would make sense, as Yahoo! Japan actually had more search market share than Google Japan did in July, 2007. Even though they increased their share significantly from 2006 to 2007, Google needed to change their tactics to increase market share.
Rightfully so. Yahoo! Japan was a powerhouse, being worth an estimated $29 billion. With the recent Microsoft offer to buy and subsequent refusal by Yahoo!, it was rumored that Yahoo! Japan could purchase Yahoo!, although this is unlikely with Microsoft's capital clout. But Yahoo! Japan has proven it can stand up to the GooGiant, which is exactly what Yahoo! needs right now.
Google Japan's tabs could be the answer they've been looking for to overcome Yahoo! Japan. If Google Japan does get on top, you can forget your yin-yang balance of power.
Tags
Google Japan
Yahoo Japan
Oneupweb
Sports Illustrated's Vault Rekindles Ghosts of March Madness' Past
Posted by andrew on March 19, 2008 at 08:13 AM
In 1987, Keith Smart hit a baseline jumper as time was winding down to send the Indiana Hoosiers to a 74-73 victory over Syracuse and Bob Knight's last national championship. ESPN.com wasn't there to cover it.
In 1983, Coach Jim Valvano sprinted around the floor looking for someone to hug as North Carolina State pulled an upset for the ages over Houston in the National Championship. Yahoo! Sports didn't send a beat writer.
In 1966, Coach Don Haskins and Texas Western scored a victory against racism - and the University of Kentucky - as his Miners team started five African American players and defeated Adolph Rupp's all-white Wildcats squad. Nobody, not even Deadspin, live-blogged the game.
Sports Illustrated was there, though. Sports Illustrated has been there since 1954 and, starting with the opening of the NCAA Tournament on Thursday, Sports Illustrated will have the online archives to prove it.
On Thursday, Sports Illustrated launches The Vault, a new section of SI.com that will contain a full archive of every article the magazine has ever published, in a fully-searchable database. Certainly, it's a nice feature for a longtime subscriber such as myself, a chance to read the classic articles of George Plimpton and Frank Deford and to experience first-hand accounts of historical events as captured by the national sports publication of record. Sports Illustrated, after all, was there.
Just as important, though, is the impact that The Vault will have on search engines. By publishing this content in a searchable, non-password protected form, Sports Illustrated increases its overall relevance.
Today, the first page of a Google search on the name of baseball great Willie Mays currently shows, among other things, a Wikipedia entry, a few baseball almanac stats records, a YouTube video of The Catch and, yes, an ESPN.com retrospective article. Not a single reference to Sports Illustrated, who actually covered The Catch as it happened.
The Vault should change this, of course, as decades of content are opened to potential search traffic. Michael Jordan appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated 49 times (and counting?). According to Google, Sports Illustrated is completely irrelevant.
Sports Illustrated projects that The Vault could add up to five million monthly readers to the site's traffic. And where eyes go, advertising revenue follows.
(It is a nice coincidence that this story has been most-robustly covered by The New York Times. As documented by my colleague Steve six months ago, the Times adjusted its own tactics only recently, abandoning the success of its subscription-based TimesSelect service to open the entirety of its content to search.)
Mining the archives is a great way for any publication that existed in the pre-Internet era to increase content, relevance and, therefore, search traffic. If you are a content publisher, consider whether you have back articles worthy of posting online. (Hint: It's all worthy.) In most cases, this content likely exists in some form on a hard drive somewhere; it is merely a matter of taking the effort to post it in a user-friendly, spider-able fashion.
As a longtime Sports Illustrated reader, I applaud Time-Warner for its decision and look forward to devouring decades of history.
As a search marketer, I anticipate following the impact that The Vault will have on Sports Illustrated's online traffic.
And as a longtime college hoops dork, I anoint Tennessee as the official pick of StraightUpSearch. Over Texas. In the orange-est National Championship game ever.
Tags
Sports Illustrated
The Vault
Oneupweb
YouTube Balances Higher Quality Videos with Usability
Posted by keirsun on March 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM
YouTube has announced that some of its videos can now be viewed in higher quality. In addition, more and more YouTube videos are expected to be available in higher quality over time.
What is higher quality video you ask? According to YouTube's Help Center:
The ability to upload higher quality videos means improved sharpness and visual clarity for many YouTube videos. The difference is especially noticeable in videos that contain text or fast movement and in full-screen mode.
How do you watch YouTube videos in higher quality? The YouTube Team says to look for a link directly below the video player that let's users choose between normal and higher quality viewing options. I spent a few minutes browsing YouTube this morning, but the only video I found with this link was the YouTube Is Now HD?? video that accompanies the YouTube Videos in High Quality blog announcement.
Recently, YouTube has taken flack for its poor video quality, and the YouTube Team admits that its community of video publishers "have been requesting this feature for some time."
While YouTube recommends uploading at 640x480 resolution, other video sharing sites such as Vimeo have pushed forward with high definition video uploads that can be viewed at an eye-catching, HD video resolution of 1280x720.
But as the YouTube Team points out, usability is its key influencer:
Our general philosophy is to make sure that as many people as possible can access YouTube and that videos start quickly and play smoothly. That's one reason why you don't see us racing to call this "Super Duper YouTube HD," because most people don't want to wait a long time for videos to play.
In my opinion, keeping with this philosophy is the main reason YouTube continues to be number 1 in its space. Load time is a make-or-break factor for any website, especially one that served up 3.25 billion videos in the first month of 2008.
Regardless, YouTube continues to be an excellent distribution outlet for companies that want to expand their audience/clients via video. And don't forget, you're likely to see your videos showing up in Google's search results.
Update: This was our most popular blog post for the week of March 17th. Listen to the author discuss this topic on the StraightUpSearch Podcast.
Tags
YouTube
HD Video
Oneupweb
Obama, Hillary, McCain & Spitzer Step Aside: It's Time to Discuss Our Online Rights
Posted by maureen on March 17, 2008 at 08:52 AM
In the midst of packing lunches for work Friday morning, a clip on CNN caught my attention. It probably stood out because it wasn't the normal talk about Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, rising gas prices or the Spitzer scandal. Instead, it was about a college website called JuicyCampus. What I heard sent a chill down my spine, and the soothsayer's warning crept into my thoughts: Beware the Ides of March.
I put down the mustard and turned my full attention to the story on the news.
Apparently, JuicyCampus is a college website that allows people to post pretty much whatever they want about whomever or whatever they want. And the site lets them do it anonymously. The site's About Us page contains four sentences, simply stating that its sole mission is to enable online anonymous free speech on college campuses. It even gives tips on IP-cloaking (i.e. hiding) on its Privacy & Tracking Policy page.
While people who post to JuicyCampus remain anonymous, those that they post about do not. First names, last names, even pictures of classmates and professors are put on this site for the world to find.
Campus leaders across the nation are asking people to turn a blind eye, in the hopes that by ignoring it, it will die out and go away. But what about all those other websites, news blogs, even personal blogs that take the right to free speech to extremes, or say mean or hurtful things to others?
Often times it is hard to turn a blind eye. People can be and are deeply affected by what is being said about them online, all under the guise of free speech. Yet, many bloggers and anonymous posters feel that they can and should say what they want. And they are protected under the First Amendment.
But what protects you?
I'm curious to hear your thoughts. How far should we go to protect anonymous free speech online, and at what expense to others? What do you think your rights are online as an individual and/or as a company? What do you think they should be?
Tags
Free Speech
First Amendment
Oneupweb
The Balancing Act
Posted by tim on March 14, 2008 at 08:59 AM
A little Yin for your Yang this week as Tim sits down with Adam and Geoff to talk about balancing paid search with natural optimization.
The seed for this week's podcast was Geoff's post from last week, The Natural Balance of Things.
Enjoy the show and we'll talk to you again next week.
Tags
StraightUpSearch
StraightUpSearch Podcast
Oneupweb
Power to the Plural?
Posted by nick on March 14, 2008 at 08:22 AM
When it comes time to choose which keywords you wish to target for your latest search engine optimization project, you may want to stop and consider how the use of plural verses singular terms will impact search traffic.
A recent post by Robin Goad of Hitwise suggests that in many cases, plural keywords drive more traffic to retail websites than singular versions of the same word.
The post compares search volume and percentages of searchers who ended up on retail or shopping sites, as they relate to a list of singular and plural keywords such as laptop(s), mobile phone(s), dvd(s), and six others. The results favored plural keywords in a 6-3 victory.
Does this mean we should alter our primary focus and only target keywords with that extra s, -es, or whatever their plural variation might be? With the above information, you may be quick to favor this idea instead of going with singular terms. However, Goad does tell us that we shouldn't abandon singular terms just yet.
In response to his results, Goad states,
Of course, this isn't to say that 'laptops' is a better term than 'laptop', just that the plural and singular searches display different behaviors. Indeed, if you are looking to sell accessories rather than computers then it would be much better to optimize for terms containing 'laptop'.
So where does this quick bit of research leave us? Which type of keyword should we target? Plural? Singular? It all depends on the products being offered.
The variation in which keywords drive the most relevant traffic is simply one more thing to keep in mind when optimizing your content. Though it seems in the majority of searches, the plural wins the traffic battle, singular terms still have their niche. When in doubt and when you can, it doesn't hurt to target both.
Tags
Keywords
Search Engine Optimization
Oneupweb
Online Video - Are You Sure People Are Listening?
Posted by sarah on March 13, 2008 at 01:54 PM
Hello everyone. My name is Sarah. I'm a natural search project manager at Oneupweb, and I wear hearing aids. I'm not totally deaf or anything, but I'm just hearing impaired enough to make life interesting ("What did you say? There's a unicorn in the parking lot?").
Just the other day, I was talking with my lovely co-worker Christopher, and I asked him if he could find any documentation online about search engines not being able to follow links in drop-down lists that use option tags.
He found this video from Matt Cutts, which (allegedly) explains that search engine spiders will have a tough time following those links because they link to pages like this:
<option value="page-name.html"> Link </option>
Instead of like this:
<a href="page-name.html"> Link </a>
Of course, Christopher had to listen to the video for me. In cases like these, where you're just looking for a quick answer, the use of video bothers me for a number of reasons:
1. Video is hard to hear.
2. Video is time-consuming to digest.
3. Your desk either suddenly becomes the noisiest spot in the office, or you have to put on headphones.
In fact, the time-consuming part annoys me almost more than the fact that videos can be so hard to hear and interpret. You can't scan videos in an instant like an online article. You can't go back and instantly re-read a paragraph a few days later. I have to wade through an entire video in order to figure this out? I really don't have the time.
Don't get me wrong: I love how video is revolutionizing the web. But there's a time and a place to use it. Video should complement other existing data already available on your site, whether it's a separate article, or even a verbatim transcript.
One analogy is that if you utilize image ALT attributes for your visually impaired users, you should also accommodate the hearing impaired. Not to mention that both alternatives are best practices for search engine optimization as well (search engine spiders can't "see" images or "listen" to videos either).
Tags
Online Video
Video Transcript
Oneupweb
Google Snags SEO Services & SEMPO Seat in DoubleClick Deal
Posted by keirsun on March 12, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Well, it's official. Google has acquired DoubleClick, a digital marketing company, for $3.1 billion. In the process of this acquisition, Google has also become the proud owner of its very own SEO/SEM company: DoubleClick Performics.
What was that? Google owns a search marketing company? That can't be right.
Oh, but it's all too true.
I can't help make a comparison to Daffy Duck in the hands of the Abominable Snowman. Will Google make Performics its play-toy, tampering with its very own search results to please its new SEO clients? Or how about giving its newly acquired PPC clients preferred pricing on highly competitive terms? Obviously, you can see where the conflict of interest lies.
But like Daffy, DoubleClick may be in for a bumpy ride. In his acquisition announcement, Google CEO Eric Schmidt alludes to job cuts:
As with most mergers, there may be reductions in headcount. We expect these to take place in the U.S. and possibly in other regions as well. We know that DoubleClick is built on the strength of its people. For this reason we'll strive to minimize the impact of this process on all of our clients and employees.
As of this posting, Google hasn't issued any further statements on job cuts resulting from the purchase.
As an employee of an online marketing company, I agree with Danny Sullivan; Google should drop Performics like the problem stepchild it will become. This relationship will tarnish Google's reputation in so many ways that Googlers will find themselves constantly digging out of PR holes, without the aid of a shovel.
In addition, the DoubleClick acquisition has bought Google a board seat in the Search Engine Marketing Professional Organization. Does SEMPO expect to continually serve the interests of search engine marketers with Google riding shotgun? One could argue that the relationship will help advance the industry's growth. But I would prefer the industry to advance on its own free will, minus the weighty influences of a search engine company that wants to play for both teams.
Let's hope the Abominable Snowman does the right thing and lets Daffy loose.
Update: This was our most popular blog post for the week of March 10th. Listen to the author discuss this topic on the StraightUpSearch Podcast.
Tags
Google
DoubleClick
Performics
Oneupweb
Hulu.com - See your Favorite Shows Online!
Posted by teal on March 12, 2008 at 08:33 AM
Today media giants Fox and NBC Universal are publicly launching their joint online video venture, Hulu.
It's been a long time coming... much awaited... and much criticized, but the online video/television show resource is scheduled to finally launch today. Dubbed "online video on demand" with available video sharing technology, Hulu has partnered with AOL, Comcast, MSN, MySpace, and Yahoo! to provide video content to users. Intended to offer online access to shows like The Office, The Simpsons, Nip Tuck, My Name is Earl and much more, as well as full length movies, Hulu has big plans to add even more video content in the future.
According to the recent New York Times article Testing Over, Hulu.com to Open Its TV and Film Offerings This Week:
Hulu has so far failed to recruit two major television networks, ABC, a division of Walt Disney, and CBS. [However] Jason Kilar, Hulu's chief executive, said that he was still having regular conversations with executives at the two networks.
With high hopes of offering users a lot of everything, Hulu's video sharing and embedding technology takes things one step further by offering users the option of using an entire video or just select scenes. It's also reported that Hulu achieves higher video quality than YouTube although their streaming technology is already in question. As far as how successful Hulu is going to be with a quite astute social media and video sharing audience, there are mixed feelings out there. Some believe that Hulu is going to be a flash in the pan; others think Fox and NBC are on to something and that Hulu is already an interesting prospect for those looking for some new opportunities in video content sharing.
Click Screenshot to Enlarge
Hey, this looks cool!
Having only been able to investigate the public portion of the beta site, I am impressed. Beyond catching up on episodes of missed television shows, most of the feedback I have read about their video sharing and embedding capabilities is very positive. In fact, I plan to use the service soon (I missed an episode of Nip Tuck and hope to catch up on Julia's recent brush with death).
As far as NBC and Fox's entry into the digital and social media world, I think it's an appropriate move. With a large portion of advertising and promotion occurring online, it's an important place for companies to be. Moreover, by connecting their "version" of video sharing to the simplicity of TV, however offering some additional features (like editing, scene selection, embedding, emailing and more) Hulu is positioning itself as a reputable and useful competitor in this space.