Feb
12th

Oneupweb : Get More Customers By Setting Aside Your Search Bias

Posted by Starr on February 12, 2010 at 10:35 am

21210_googlebloxAccording to Barrons Tech Trader Daily blogger Eric Savitz, “Bing’s search share could surpass Yahoo’s in about a year.”

Compared to Google’s marginal year-over-year increase of roughly two percent, this month’s Comscore data looks impressive for Bing. With an 8.5 percent year-over-year increase and Microsoft’s license to use Yahoo’s core search technology for ten years, Savitz may have a point.

Whether you side with Google loyalists who doubt Microsoft can break their habits, or your love for all things Microsoft clouds your judgment, great SEO means claiming your portion of the search space. All four of the major search engines—Google, Yahoo!, Bing and ASK—represent an opportunity to introduce your business to potential clients. Can you really afford to let your search bias influence that introduction?

All too often, search marketing strategies are one-sided, caring only about traffic from Google. It’s important to remember that depending on your industry and target demographic, you may find additional qualified traffic from Yahoo! or Bing.

Don’t just show up somewhere in Google—dominate the digital landscape. Be visible everywhere your customers are looking. You can start by learning more about Oneupweb. Our integrated marketing services combine strategy and creativity that will ultimately increase your return on investment.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Jan
25th

Food For Thought: Bing Goes “Bam!”?

Posted by Kathryn on January 25, 2010 at 11:35 am

12510_spamA pinch of salt, a little bit of pepper and don’t forget the essence—BAM! Okay, now turn your speakers up and try typing your favorite food, like beets, into a Bing search query. Bing? Well, it’s not quite Emeril, and I guess you didn’t need your speakers on. But, you may have noticed recipes for a Lemon-Basil Beet Salad and a Beet and Apple Soup from Delish.com in the prime SERP real-estate.

Bing is now dishing up recipe results for food searches. This is part of the ongoing battle in the search world to deliver the most “relevant” and “personalized” search results. But is this just a lot of sizzle without the bacon?

From a self-described foodie wannabe, here’s my beef with Bing’s recipe results:

  • Discriminatory tastes. Supposedly Bing selects the most popular recipes from sites like delish.com, MyRecipes.com, and epicurious.com. But what about brussels sprouts? Or Spam? For some reason, not all foods generate recipe results. And before you disregard this omission as a computer algorithm’s personal bias against the small cabbage-like vegetable, try this recipe.
  • Limited options. Sometimes consistency is a good thing. It’s comforting to know that whether you go to New York City or Paris, Kentucky, you can always count on the same steamy burger from your favorite fast food burger joint. But if I go online for a recipe, will Bing always serve up the same four recommendations—or do the results change over time?
  • Quality of recipes. Collaboration and sharing is a good thing (I’m sure Martha would agree). But not all recipes are created equal. User-submitted recipes aren’t always reliable—or safe. Safe-handling of foods like chicken and beef aren’t always described. And under-cooking food, like chicken, can happen if the recipe doesn’t indicate whether or not to use raw or pre-cooked chicken. Of course, Bing doesn’t test their recommended recipes, but they do seem to be generated from credible sources.

No Spam, Just Search
There are different methods for quickly and easily finding recipe ideas. Google doesn’t offer recipe results, but when you enter, say, “chocolate chip cookies,” the search engine’s autofill feature does give you the option to search for “chocolate chip cookie recipes.” Likewise, Bing’s autofill feature also recommends searching for “Spam recipes,” even though this term doesn’t generate recommended recipes on its own.

Search is about helping us, the users, more easily find relevant information. Search engines, like Google and Bing, work relentlessly to deliver results that are both meaningful and satisfying to us. And both of these search engines are smart enough to know that if we blurt out “Parsnips!” we are probably interested in eating parsnips. A search engine is probably better at guessing what you want from a one or two word phrase than your significant other. But are Bing’s recipe recommendations really making our culinary lives better? There is more than one way to cook brussels sprouts and search for a recipe online. And the ongoing evolution of search engines is about giving you what you want, even if that is 101 ways to cook Spam.

As a business, you want to make sure that you can connect with the people that are searching for your product or services. That’s where Oneupweb comes in. We’re like digital marketing chefs, whipping up a unique mix of search, social and creative services. It’s the house special.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Oct
22nd

Google Hot on the Heels of Bing Twitter

Posted by admin on October 22, 2009 at 12:03 pm

102209_googlebingShortly after Bing revealed its new Twitter search engine, which fully integrates tweets into Bing search results and incorporates Facebook data as well, Google’s Marissa Mayer announced that they will be launching a new Google product called Social Search.

Not only does this announcement follow right behind Bing’s announcement, but it also (interestingly enough) falls right in line with an additional announcement of a recent Google/Twitter deal. At this time, the two have not really been linked, but the deal couldn’t hurt, right?

While there are still very limited details available, Marissa Mayer’s Web 2.0 Summit announcement did include a few tasty morsels. Google’s new Social Search will be launching in Google Labs over the next few weeks with a plan to integrate results from people in your social network. This will function primarily using your Google profile, where you will fill out the social networks that you are a member of, like FriendFeed. Google will then (I’m assuming) scan who you are connected to and return results based on those people. A key ingredient in this process is local information and image searches, according to Mayer as reported on TechCrunch. This would also hold true for Twitter as Mayer also mentioned that tweets would be integrated into regular results as well.

So am I going to run right out and sign up for a Google profile so that I can see results from my tweeple and socially savvy friends? Unfortunately not. Mainly because my “friends” typically post about how cute their dogs are or how the weather is really crappy today—not exactly the most useful information.

However, if you connect to other people outside your social circle, like journalists for example, this product could be more useful, as searching for journalism related queries will not only bring back posts and comments but “regular” related results as well.

In the past, some people in the industry have debated over whether or not search results could potentially be influenced by people and friends in general. Do I think my friends are going to take search results by storm? Not really (no offense guys), but I do think that it will be interesting to see just how these search results will become integrated and what the impact will be.

As for more specific details on how the product works, what impacts it will have, how it will be integrated, etc… I apologize, but things are still pretty fresh off the press right now. I speculate either way that this product will be pretty neat, and that the integration of Twitter, Facebook and other social networks is inevitable—especially since it is already happening.

What do you think? Would having tweets and real-time posts show up in your search results be helpful, or a chaotic mess of cute puppy posts and irrelevant agendas?

Stay tuned to StraightUpSearch.com for more details as they become available!

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Oct
21st

Tweets in Bing Search Results: Good News?

Posted by Nick on October 21, 2009 at 4:56 pm

Today,  Microsoft announced that it is “fully integrating posts from Twitter into the search results of Bing.” In addition to this, they are also planning on integrating Facebook status updates into Bing results. A beta version has since launched.

The big question: Is this really a good idea? My answer: Sure, as long as we’re seeing valuable results.

102109_bing

At this time the beta version is entirely separate from normal natural search results; similar to if you select the option to search for only images or videos. There’s a tag cloud and lists of hot topics with popular tweets. Digging deeper into the ‘See more Tweets” option, we are presented with a laundry list of results for whatever topic you are searching for, which Bing states are ranked by the number of followers the tweeter has.

This setup seems okay for the time being. It gives those using these popular social media tools the chance to get their messages out to even more people, which is great. But what if, as I suspect, these Twitter and status updates are integrated as a regular part of the natural SERPs?

In the interest of natural results, will searchers really be served up the most relevant/informative tweets to their search query? Does the number of followers actually dictate the value of the tweet? Maybe most of the time, but I would bet not always. So will searchers actually see tweets that will improve their search experience if this new feature is indeed made a part of Bing’s normal SERP?

I’m not saying all this because I’m trying to prevent Twitter and Facebook updates from appearing in Bing’s SERPs. Contrary to what all the tabloids say, I don’t have that kind of power.  What I’m talking about is maintaining the purpose of search, that is, presenting users with results that are relevant for their search topic. Sure, seeing tweets from a business notifying me about their sweet deals or finding other people’s 140 character reviews of those businesses will certainly influence my decision making process. Why? Because it’s helpful. What I don’t need is to perform a search for ‘auto repair services’ and be returned “Any1 know of good auto repair in Detroit? My car is busted dude!” That is not helpful.

I would hope, and am sure, that the Bingster has taken more than the number of followers into account when assigning relevance for the tweets being displayed. Because I do see promise in this newest venture into the realm of real-time search. I just hope to see it done correctly and in a way that will benefit us all.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Oct
9th

Some Ado About, Well, Almost Nothing: Meta Keyword Tags

Posted by Christopher on October 9, 2009 at 12:59 pm

100909_googlegingerbreadmanOK, so, big deal. Google came out and said “no, we don’t take meta keywords into consideration for ranking (so stop trying to sue us over them).” Then Yahoo!, at SMX on October 6th, said “hey, neither do we.” Big surprise, that. (Does Yahoo! even really care about search anymore is a bigger question. Hey Y!ou – make up your friggin’ mind!)

Then, in the same brief Search Engine Land article announcing Yahoo’s meta keyword news, Barry Schwartz said “Bing doesn’t support the tag.” Really? That’s not what Bing says. A July blog post from the Bing Webmaster Center Team says that while the ” tag’s keyword attribute is not the page rank panacea it once was…” webmasters should still take the opportunity to “score keyword credit.”

It’s almost the opposite of a shock to hear that meta keywords carry negligible weight in the major engines. Long gone are the days when you pop open the code of, say, a free credit report site and see: meta name=”keywords” content=”free credit report free credit report free credit report free credit report britney spears britney spears britney spears free credit report free” etc. infinity.

Ah, web nostalgia – I almost choked up a little bit.

Regardless, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that sort of meta spam is an unsustainable practice. Google didn’t get where it is today by being stupid. Just evil.

Just kidding.

Here’s the thing – meta keywords tags don’t take much time. Nor do they take much thought. Some in the industry feel that if that they do nothing, or next to nothing, you shouldn’t use them because they give your competitors insight into your important keywords. But I think if your competitors are relying on your meta keywords tags to figure out your strategy, they’re hardly competitors. Further, if you’re worried about giving away competitive information, and your competitors are that bush league, and meta keywords do nothing, why not just fill that tag with a zesty word salad (meta name=”keywords” content=”monkey senility, chimp rampage, chihuahua apocalypse, drew barrymore roller derby)? That’ll show ‘em.

Organic optimization is both an act of major revision and a matter of degrees, of deluges and drops in the bucket. Why use meta keywords if they probably don’t matter? If there’s still an “if” attached to “meta keywords matter,” if there’s still a “probably,” and if they do no harm and, importantly, if there’s the potential they’ll pull some weight in the service of your or your client’s site, well, why not?

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

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