How Being a Spam Cop Would Melt Your Mind

Imagine if virtually everything you chose to trust eventually betrayed you. You try to create shifting rules and push your worldview to try to make it manageable, but even in your attempts to do so people call out the self serving nature of your suggestions. Every day thousands of people share free information about how to take advantage of you, and in return you wade through garbage and do everything you can to suppress it, but work for a company with policies that encourage information pollution. Even when you try to stop something, your company will still spread that message to anyone willing to look for it for a dollar or two a click, and affiliates quickly race to fill in the hole your hand edit created. You can't suppress them. You hand edited one company, but is it fair to leave their largest competitor? Will someone call you out on that today? Will it matter when they do?

As it gets less manageable your rule sets are disengaged with reality, and if you look close enough at just about anything you find what you would (or at least could) call spam. Everyone is a cheat. Or is that only in my mind?

Should you hand edit this result? Will anyone care if you do or do not? What does the legal team look like at the company behind this website? How large is their ad budget? How bad is this exploit? Should you write an algorithm that will close off this hole? If you do, what other holes does that open up?

How much longer can we trust links until we move on to usage data? Can we ever really trust usage data? Do our policies actually promote creating and sharing good content? How can we improve them without hurting our revenue numbers? Now the web is filling up with stupid garbage reminiscent of Idiocracy. How much of that am I responsible for? Would the web be cleaner if I just quit my job and let free market forces do as they may?

Running Threadwatch for a little over a year took me from being a fairly positive person to being cynical about everything. Could you imagine how bad it would be if your job was to fight spam day in and day out, especially if your employer sponsored the creation of most of it? Some days at SEO conferences Matt Cutts appears as a star, but could you imagine how demoralizing that job would be to do, looking at the worst parts of the web every day? No matter what you do tomorrow there is more spam waiting just for you.

Getting Too Greedy With Keywords

When a page or section is new and you are competing against older sites that have built authority for nearly a decade one of the easiest ways to gain traction is to pick a specific keyword phrase that is not that competitive and go after trying to rank for it.

Often I find myself making a page title relevant for a wide basket of related keywords, then when I check the rankings the page comes in at #12 or #16. My mom's blog currently ranks at #13 in Google for weight loss calculators and #4 for free weight loss calculators using the page title Free Diet, Calorie, & Weight Loss Calculators. The page also ranks #30 for diet calculators and is deep for calorie calculators.

The best thing to do here is to focus the title on the phrase closest to ranking at the top, and try to get it a few more links. If the page starts picking up organic traction after ranking and eventually grows into a self reinforcing authority status then I could help it get more traffic by including those related phrases that don't make much sense to highlight in the page title right now.

Internal Website Navigation & PageRank

If a site has 100 units of link equity and offers 10 sitewide categories then each category gets 10% of the link equity. If that same site limits its number of sitewide categories to 5 then each category gets 20%. By being a webmaster who tracks results one of your biggest advantages you have over webmaster who do not track results is you can limit your navigational selection to suit your financial goals. Is something hot this season? Rotate in the featured category or featured products. Is a category unprofitable or far beyond the authority needed to rank for it? Place less emphasis on it.

The nice thing about template sites with includes and dynamic websites are that it is easy to quickly change your weightings to place more focus where the revenue is. A few #6 or #10 ranking pages in the good section suddenly going to #1 might mean 3x to 5x the earnings.

Keywords or Key Words: Search Query Modification

I have been noticing with Google recently that if you search for something like seobook video that Google pulls in results for SEO Book video as well. They may have been doing this for a while, but if so it seems like it recently got more aggressive. If you are banking on targeting an unpopular version of a keyword you may actually end up having to compete with some of the most authoritative pages ranking for the alternate more authoritative version.

This feature, spell correction, and toolbar search suggestions eat away at some of the easiest portions of the organic SEO arbitrage market by helping search engines consolidate language usage patterns as best they can.

Should Google Penalize Companies for Their Official Brand Names?

Sometimes when a Google engineer decides he is pissed off at a site he or she may penalize the site in a way that the company does not rank in the top 30 results for any search query, including branded navigational queries. Imagine if you search for SeoBook and couldn't find this site? How is that a good user experience for searchers using Google? It is their index, so I think it is fair if Google nukes sites that they dislike for non-brand queries, but when they do it for brand related queries too, they make their search results irrelevant and provide a bad user experience. What makes the situation worse than it needs to be?

  • the definition of relevancy changes depending on Google's business interests

  • the definition of spam changes depending on Google's business interests
  • Google is unpredictable in their hand editing
  • if Google does not like a particular market they may hand edit the leading company while leaving competitors ranking at the top of the search results for the competitor's brand. in some cases they penalize the cleanest services while leaving dirtier market players easily accessible
  • even if a site is deemed as spam and penalized they can still buy ads on Google, which makes it seem as though it is only spam if Google isn't getting paid

If Google wants to become the default way we access all information can they continue to penalize brands for their official brand names?

Free Search Traffic: Add Keyword Rich Content to Authoritative Pages

Many authoritative tool pages have gobs of link equity, but rank for few keywords beyond their official name because they offer little background information. Providing no background information not only wastes ranking opportunities, but also makes it hard for some people to use the tool. In some cases it makes sense to keep documentation separated from the conversion process, especially if the tool is a for sale item, and especially if you are selling to people looking for an instant autopilot wealth generation system. But if your offering is of value and free, there is no need for the mystery card. You can make the download and/or usage instructions clear at the top of the landing page, and then get deeper into features and benefits as you go further down the page.

Since placing mint code on my tools page about a week ago hundreds of unique search queries landed about a thousand searchers on my keyword suggestion tool. About 10% of that traffic was from core terms, while the rest was long tail.

I could have paid Google $500 for that traffic, but I am fine with getting it for free. :)

I Hate Spreading Misinformation

One of the things you struggle with when you gain some amount of authority is that people quote you out of context or infer things based on your actions or inaction. Sometimes people sell you as being much smarter than you actually are, while other times they cite you with stuff that is inconsistent with your views.

Here is an example of me sending the wrong message:
After I read that, I remembered how Aaron Wall has his SeoBook blog structured. His permalinks look like this: http://www.seobook.com/archives/002447.shtml Aaron Wall is the most respected SEO expert that I know of. So if meaningless numbers in permalinks are good enough for him, then I guess they're good enough for me.

When I initially put numbers in my URLs back in 2003 it was because it was the default setup. I left it that way because I wanted to get in Google News. After seeing what happened to Threadwatch when it was listed in Google News (it was pulled out the same day), I realized that my site was a touch too honest and crass to make it into Google News, even if I were to comply with all of their other guidelines.

Why haven't I changed my URLs since then? I was thinking about changing content management systems at some point and figured I would do it after I changed my CMS platform. I just changed the CMS but am seeing how well it works for a while before I consider changing my older URLs.

The reasons descriptive URLs are important are

  • some people link to pages using the URL as the anchor text, thus giving you more nice anchor text if your file names are descriptive
  • A descriptive filename is more likely to be clicked on than a URL which lends no information to the listing.

The closest analogy I can think for a filename is the URL. When I see ads for junky arbitrage sites like e-mail-marketing.name in Gmail I know that they are relying on the URL as a large part of what allows them to beat Google's quality scores.

Google Gobbles up News Vertical

Late on Friday afternoon is a brilliant time for Google to announce a major change with their news service if they do not want people to talk about much. With their AP, Agence France-Presse, The Press Association in the United Kingdom and The Canadian Press syndication deals, Google claims they are improving duplicate detection, increasing listing variety, and as a net result they are sending MORE traffic to the people they signed syndication deals with.

Danny stated:

Google's going beyond just hosted news articles as part of this release. The company also says it will be doing a better job of duplicate detection overall, so that if there's the same article from wire agencies it doesn't have agreements with, such as Reuters, it should be more likely to point to the Reuters site than someone running Reuters material.

Google's market position allows them to address relevancy issues as needed, in order to suit their business agendas. They were lax on duplicate news content for nearly a decade because they wanted to spread their public relations spin through the media and get ad deals with many of the media outlets. After Google secured their CNN partnership, now it is time to solve the news syndication duplicate content problem and send traffic to the international news agencies.

A year or two down the road Google News will likely shift from temporarily archiving news to permanently doing so, and news will be yet another content vertical they own, along with search, ads, analytics, video, and books.

Look mom, newspaper ad revenue shrunk 8.6% year on year and Google is getting those ad dollars. With improved duplicate content filters you can look for those numbers to fall further. I wonder if this is the end of Google's successful public relations campaigns in the mainstream media.

They use coersion to control traffic, and then sell it to you as a feature you wanted. Those guys are soooo good at business!

The Immeasurable ROI of Improved Organization, Communication, & Usability

When you have scarcity you have price control. But the web makes most forms of scarcity a farce. That is why so many marketers place arbitrary limits on their offerings (like sales price ends today or we are only letting in x more customers), to make it seem as though their information is bound by some limits. Just about every idea worth selling is accessible for free if you spend enough time to sort through it all, and just about everything ends up bootlegged on eBay and Limewire.

If everything is available for free then how can we sell anything?

Is Anything Really Free?

The truth is nothing is free. The stuff that is pitched as free is usually an ad, or wrapped in ads. You don't know if someone is getting paid for their words, you don't know their qualifications or motives, and you don't know if they have philosophical interests setting their goals for how your opinions and worldviews should be shaped.

How Good Information Stays Hidden

Beyond that unknown ad / bias / other influence, the other problem with free information is that it is often hard to find the best parts.

  • Some sectors of the web are entirely invisible. A friend has published a great blog for months now, which has 0 traction because without marketing nobody can find her site or subscribe to it.

  • Sometimes garbage information is easily accessible because of high affiliate payout schemes, manipulative public relations budgets, authoritative websites cashing in publishing junk content, or because the self reinforcing nature of authority (especially on the web).
  • As forums grow in popularity they become a sea of noise. How do you rate the best threads? How do you keep them separate from the noise and make them easy to find?
  • Old blogs do the same as their information ages AND much of the information becomes inaccessible due to depth and breadth of information coupled with poor information architecture and comment systems that place great comments next to junk. It sometimes takes me a half hour to find stuff I posted, and I am a good searcher with a great memory.

The link graph solves part of this problem by making it easy to locate what is popular, but popularity and quality are not one and the same. Popularity is more aligned with brand strength, marketing budget, who came to market early, and who is controversial than it is with information quality.

Onsite vs Offsite Marketing Spend Mismatch

Given that many people are selling the same ideas and similar products, packaging and formatting are key to maintaining profit margins.

How much does Google make? We spend a near endless sum of money bring people to our sites, but how much do we spend on ensuring our sites are easy to use and convert well? Usually there is a big miss-match between onsite and offsite spending. If we optimize the on site experience we have a higher visitor value and can afford to pay more for advertising, thus gaining a larger marketshare or allowing us to raise our rates to filter out the low end of the market.

Optimizing On Site User Experience

Imagine if someone recommends my site to a friend. That friend comes to the homepage and immediately jumps into the latest post. Is that an optimal experience for people new to my brand? Most likely not. It was a good idea for building the authority and mindshare of this blog in 2003, but I have done that about as well as I can with this format, and most likely there is a better way to introduce people to this site.

For over a year my tools page was worthless from a usability perspective. It was imposing, unorganized, and cluttered. Pathetic on just about every level possible. Compare the old to the new. Which looks more appealing to you? Which is more intuitive to use? Which do you trust more?

The old version put everything on one page and used headers to separate topics, whereas the new version uses category pages to separate topics. The new version also offers a brief intro at the top of each category, and many of the tool category pages also have embedded videos that further explain why the topic is important and/or offer free tips about the topic.

I still need to place breadcrumb navigation on the individual tool pages, consolidate some of the tools, and clean up some of their formatting issues, but just fixing the top level is a start. It makes it easier to access everything else.

Why is is so Important to Make Your Site Easily Usable to New People?

I recently had a search engineer tell me that they bound my book up and made it required reading for their team (which felt cool to hear), but for every person like that (who has been in the industry for many years) there are 1,000+ people just entering the field who need much more guidance.

Navigation is a form of guidance. It can scare people away or help them convert. If my site's navigation assumes everyone else knows what I know or thinks about the web the ways I do, then what could I be justified selling them, and how can I justify selling them anything?

Profitability is at the Edges of the Customer Curve

Not only is there that 1,000 to 1 ratio mentioned in the above section, but new people are also more likely to spend money than people who already feel they know everything.

Who is more likely to buy my book? A person who has been doing SEO twice as long as I have, or a person using my keyword density analyzer? Many brand managers would like consumers to believe the former, but in most cases the latter is more likely. Most of the money for information products comes from people new to the field, with some amount coming on the backend if you sell high end services.

Content Selection vs Community Growth & User Participation

Not only are new people more likely to buy, but they are also far more likely to participate in a community. Many of my friends read this blog daily, but most of them rarely leave comments. Back when I was more naive about search my topic selection naturally drew many newer readers who felt more empathy with what I was writing about, and were more likely to comment, which made my site look much larger than it was. Now that I blog about many more abstract or higher level topics I get far fewer comments, in spite of increasing site traffic month over month and year over year.

Eventually the growing traffic trend will turn the other way unless I focus more on the beginner portion of the market, and help create more brand evangelists participating on and promoting this site.

Content Targeting & Conversion

It doesn't matter how much value you create or offer if the format is bad, or fails to display the value of the product. If the communication sucks so does the product. Then if you are unwilling to change you may get bitter as you watch inferior products outsell your product without realizing that you forgot to talk to your customers using their language.

A friend of mine showed me a listing service of his that focused the homepage on sellers with little to no communication for prospective consumers. What kind of seller is going to think that site is a legitimate listing service? Google has advertising programs in the footer of their homepage in a small text link. Both of those are extremes, but you have to figure out who your customers are and gather enough attention to be able to monetize it.

Information Format & Perceived Value

Others have resold the information in my ebook in other formats for over 5 times the price (some even asked for my latest copy before their launch, telling me about it). Good on them for formatting information in a way that allows them to deliver value. It does not matter who creates the most value. What matters is who is best at formatting it and sharing it in a way that makes people happy when they consume it. People are likely to gravitate toward channels that are positive because the market for something to believe in is infinite.

For most business owners how you structure your website and communicate with prospects day in and day out to gain their trust and attention is more important than your salesletter or product quality.

The one scarcity that will continue to grow scarcer as markets saturate is attention. If you have the attention of people at the beginning of the sales cycle likely you will have it at the other end as well, but you have to keep marketing to keep people talking about you and help your business grow.

Ideas that Spread...

If you are struggling to come up with marketing ideas look at what has already worked. Start with a random number, say 5 and work your way up to 120, combining the number with words like

Search for those sorts of phrases and you will run into lots of good stuff in the search results. And you know the story was seen by many people because for it to rank for that sort of stuff it typically either needed to get lots of links or get published on an authoritative site.

If you are in the legal field you can substitute the generic words like tips with laws or criminals. If you are in the tech field you can substitute generic words like tips with hacks or nerds. There are also a wide variety of other ways to find ideas that worked, like

  • search Digg or Del.icio.us

  • track what bloggers write about in an industry
  • look for what brands you see mentioned most commonly outside of the core related industry and research why people are talking about them

Marketing is 50% recycling and 50% packaging.

Oddly enough, near the top of 10 ways was the top 10 ways to destroy the Earth. Here is a screenshot:

Looks like AdSense may have jumped the shark. The packaging says it may destroy the Earth!

Pages