Article Categories

SiteProNews Blogs

How to Stop Worrying and Learn to Love Google

05 2007 Wednesday

By Pat Quinn in Google

Let’s be honest, the world would be a remarkably dull place without Google. It is at one and the same time a vehicle for making truckloads of profit and a rod for the backs of those desperate to win its favours. It is a great servant, but a very hard task-master.

One wonders whether Messrs Larry Page and Sergey Brin had any inkling of the kind of benign but uncompromising genie they were letting out of the bottle when they launched Google from a garage back in 1996? Probably not, yet their efforts have revolutionized the way we do business and the way we think about business. In the so doing, these two guys became multi-millionaires – and good luck to them, I say.

Google is not a connoisseur of art

As wonderful as all this may be, Google remains an idiot. Or, rather, its search algorithm is an idiot. It operates within certain strict parameters laid down for it by programmers, which means that its decisions are automatic rather than intelligent, blinkered rather than intuitive. And this is why some of the most beautifully constructed and aesthetically pleasing websites often never get so much as a sniff at the Google listings. It is also why some of the most hideous looking sites feature at Number One.

A lot of people can’t understand this. They spend thousands on the construction of a website, the design of which would give pause to Michelangelo, only to discover that Google doesn’t actually care. That’s right, it doesn’t care. Certainly, your potential customers may be impressed by the look of your website; and only a fool would suggest that good design effort is unnecessary. But if Google isn’t sending you any potential customers, your design masterpiece is going to remain unremarked and unvisited.

Google loves words

The truth is that Google robot is only interested in words. All right, it will take things like backlinks into account when it is making an evaluation of your site (and these are very important), but its primary concern is with the words you use. To start with, the robot looks at the words in your Home page HTML code between <head> and </head>. It looks at Title and Description and, to a lesser extent, those in your Keywords configuration. It then examines the words in the Home page body copy – i.e. the blurb that everyone sees. With no more ado, it turns itself inside out to find a correlation between the two. It looks for word repetition and phrase repetition between the <head> material and the body copy; and it looks for synonyms of those words and phrases. And when it does so, its heart leaps just as Wordsworth’s must have done when he saw all those daffs.

Thus, if your Title says to the effect: “Hand Made Italian Shoes”, then the body copy should also say: “We sell hand made Italian shoes.” And if your Title continues along the lines of: “Hand Made Shoes From Italy”, it follows that the body copy should continue with: “Our hand made shoes from Italy come to you at a great price.” The two sets of words reflect each other’s sentiments.

Too often, as I wander around the Net, I see that a website’s <head> material has no bearing on the body copy. The <head> says one thing and the copy – if there is any, which there often isn’t – says something else entirely. The Title says: “Cicero’s Hand Made Italian Shoes”, while the body copy kicks off with: “Cicero’s was founded in 1994 in a shed in our back yard.” There is no relationship for the Google robot to latch on to.

There is nothing difficult about producing the kind of writing that Google likes. It doesn’t have to be Thackeray, just jazz-standard English. To put it in words of one syllable, put it in words of one syllable. As I’ve implied, too, so many websites have no body copy on their Home pages whatsoever. The page is simply a beautiful PhotoShop montage, plus a navigation bar. This is a mistake. Google wants copy. It craves copy. Its whole reason for being is to unearth copy that tells it what the website is selling so that it can evaluate the website in relation to others and assign a listing.

Lack of knowledge is no defense

What I’d like to do now, if you’ll allow me, is prove my thesis with a real-life illustration. There can be few people in the world who know less about the technical side of website building than I do. Talk to me about perl, cgi, php, Flash and so on, and I shall look blank. Which I don’t find difficult. But, anyway, it came to pass a few months ago that a client asked me to optimize his website. Immediately, I saw that the Home page Title, Description and Keywords bore no relationship to the body copy. Likewise, the remaining pages. It was a right royal mess and a challenge that I couldn’t resist.

Re-writing took a day or so; and the site was posted to the major search engines. Nothing happened. Nothing, that is, except Google indexed and cached only the Home page. I therefore tweaked the copy a little and resubmitted. Again nothing, except that Google re-indexed just the Home page. Had I lost my touch? Were my previous successes just a fluke?

Fortunately, I work from time to time with a very bright young web designer and I asked him to take a look at the site in question. Within minutes, he came back with: “According to the Home page, there aren’t any other pages to this site! The reason for this is the links to the other pages are in Flash…not HTML…and Google can’t read it.” Consequently, we rebuilt the navigation bar in HTML and, within a week, the site jumped straight on to page two of Google for all our keyphrases.

Know your Google

So, as I say, Google is an idiot. But it is not so great an idiot as those of us who don’t take the trouble to figure out what it can do and what it can’t. I learned a big lesson from this and have since immersed myself in Google’s operating procedures a to z. If you are in any way serious about elevating your website onto page one of Google, you might be wise to do the same.

Websites that contain all the design bells and whistles are a glory to behold, but if they don’t play Google’s game they are, in commercial terms, a waste of space. Google can be a great friend if you learn to love it!
Author: Pat Quinn is an award-winning UK copywriter who also operates a search engine optimisation service. Because it’s all in the writing! He can be found at: http://www.search-engine-mechanics.co.uk

AdWare - What Exactly is It?

05 2007 Monday

By Adam Bauthues in Google

If you have been on the Internet for any length of time it is likely you have heard the term Adware mentioned at least once. You may have also likely heard of the term Spyware. While both are similar in some ways, as they run in the background generally with you unaware of their presence, they serve two completely different functions. Today I will be discussing Adware and what it does in its most common forms.
Adware is a software program that is created to display advertisements on your computer. Adware comes in many forms but it is most commonly a simple popup that appears on your desktop when you are not surfing the Internet and when you least expect it.

Adware can also come in less insidious ways such as with another software application that you download for free. Many of these free software applications cost nothing due to the advertising or adware they run on the software.

The company provides you with a free service because they take in advertising revenues from other companies who use adware to “pop up” offers as you use the free software. This has proven to be an effective advertising medium for these companies otherwise they would not be paying for it.

Needless to say, the existence of adware, though less of a threat than spyware, can be quite annoying. Many companies do not make it clear that their applications contain adware programs from third party advertisers, so you could be left with a big mess on your computer after awhile, simply by using common applications.

Adware has a tendency to slow down your computers performance and make surfing the Internet sluggish at best. For those Internet users who are still on dial-up connections, this can prove to be a real problem. Those on DSL and Cable connections are not exempt though. Since DSL and Cable are often left on 24/7 the potential for adware to appear is even greater.

Not all adware is a problem though so it is important for Internet users to become knowledgeable about adware, what it is, and what software applications they are downloading and using as part of their computer experience. Knowing that a piece of software is free due to the fact that it comes with adware bundles will give the user much more control over what they allow on their computers. Knowing what to expect can help protect individuals and their children from being exposed to unwanted advertisements.

There are many software applications that allow users to clean their computers of unwanted adware, and that also give the ability to search for and modify specific adware modules to gain an increasing control over every aspect of their computer and Internet experience.

These specialized software applications have a delicate balance to maintain. They have to be configured well so that important data is not lost and accidentally seen as adware. They also have to avoid confrontations with the advertising industry who provide alot of revenue for smaller software companies through the existence of adware bundles.

This delicate balance has thus far been maintained fairly well, but it is important to know which adware removal and modification software are helpful and which are just adding more adware on your computer as you use them. Sometimes free is not always the best option since someone, somewhere is always paying for it somehow!

Author: Article courtesy of: http://www.AdwareCompare.com We’ve tested dozens - even hundreds! - of adware removal programs. Some of them are great, most of them get the job done (more or less), and too many simply don’t work. We’ve gathered the top contenders in the field, and reviewed them for your convenience.

Google Analytics Gets Upgraded - Will You Bite?

05 2007 Wednesday

By Ross Dunn in Google

The Google Analytics Blog announced today a fresh look and set of tools for Google Analytics; Google’s free web analytics program.The posting announces the following improvements:

Email and export reports: Schedule or send ad-hoc personalized report emails and export reports in PDF format.
Custom Dashboard: No more digging through reports. Put all the information you need on a custom dashboard that you can email to others.
Trend and Over-time Graph: Compare time periods and select date ranges without losing sight of long term trends.
Contextual help tips: Context sensitive Help and Conversion University tips are available from every report.

Check out the excellent tour demo for details.

My Two Bits of Caution
When a company like Google puts all of this work into a free program I have to wonder how much information is used for their gain and the user’s loss. There is no question this is one slick program and their new additions make it all the more tempting so I am sure it will be a hit. That said, the kind of data that Google reaps from this arrangement must be financially worthwhile which in-turn must have positive and negative ramifications for Google advertisers - of which many users of Google Analytics are. After all, Google is bound to want advertisers to spend more. Hmm, I wonder… if the data led Google to a position where they could increase their bottom line but might cost advertisers more money whose best interest Google would ultimately side with?

I am sorry but a lovely little mantra like “don’t be evil” seems hardly enough to trust a company to safeguard my valuable traffic data against its own financial (publicly traded - read ‘pressured’) interests. Unfortunately I am in a hypocritical spot since StepForth has to work with it regularly to keep up with the latest tools so we can properly navigate some of our client’s analytics system; ahh the irony. But just because we are in that position doesn’t mean you have to be. Safeguard your long term interests and use a reputable commercial application if you can afford to - or go with Google Analytics and accept the potential consequences.

Unless finances prohibit the option we strongly advise every client utilize ClickTracks or another quality commercial analytics solution tool for their web analytics needs. At StepForth we may have to use Google Analytics to “keep up with the Jones’s” but 100% of our in-house and outsourced analytics are conducted using ClickTracks Professional. Author: Ross Dunn is the founder and CEO of StepForth Search Engine Placement. Celebrating its 10th year, StepForth is among the oldest and most trusted brands in Search Engine Marketing.

A Closer Look at the Google Supplemental Results

05 2007 Wednesday

By Sante J. Achille in Google

Supplemental results at Google have been around for a while but there has been a growing interest and focus on the evolution of this complementary index.
What are Google Supplemental Results?
Supplemental results are web pages that have been reviewed by Goggle and, after close examination, have been identified as “not very useful” to the user and therefore are placed in a so called supplemental index for future reference: It’s a sort of “just in case” resource that will be accessed if nothing in the main index matches the query.
But Google has indexed billions of pages so it’s gonna be a cold day in hell before the supplementals will be showing up in the SERPs.

Why are pages placed in the supplemental index?
I think the whole matter should be put in historical perspective: if you don’t know where you’re coming from you don’t know where you’re going. So far there have been 3 important factors leading to the supplemental results index:
1. Duplicate Content

When supplemental results first showed up they were mostly duplicate content - copies of pages from dynamic web sites with a search engine unfriendly content management system.

Search engines were faced with the problem of inflated indexes with hundreds of duplicated pages.
2. Duplicate TITLE and/or META TAGS

Another factor that would put you in the supplementals is duplicate TITLE and/or META TAGS. If you don’t believe your pages are worth personalization with unique titles and META TAGS, don’t expect additional efforts from the search engines to understand what they are about.
3. Not Enough Content

Pages with little or close to no visibile content are also subject to supplemental results indexing. This often happens with Ecommerce sites that have literally hundreds (if not thousands) of pages all looking very similar to each other.
This is what was happening. I think the philosophy is changing because of:

The ever increasing number of crawlable websites
The limited amount of resources
The increased amount of effort and complexity to maintain an up to date index of resources

It costs more to get pages into the index and keep them there
If you look at it from the Search Engine perspective, it only makes sense to keep a focus on “the best” pages. There’s less and less room for the others, and Google is putting more and more pages in the supplemental index.
In a recent Forbes article the Supplemental index is called the Google Supplemental Hell – Andy Greenberg opens his article stating: “Don’t anger the Google Gods …” I really wouldn’t go to that extreme and compare supplementals to hell, simply because once you’re in hell there’s no way back.
There is a way out of the Supplemental Results
General statements generate widespread panic and useless talk about non issues. If you have pages in the supplemental results there is a way out.
Fix your site:

New pages can go supplemental no matter what
I was recently confronted with this paradigm shift in supplemental philosophy. Adding new keyword focused content is a typical ongoing effort. The long tail is where to start looking for niche keywords and create new pages within the context and theme of your website.
About 1 month ago I did just that for a Client and after a few days when I entered the command to monitor indexing status:
site:www.myclients-site.com intitle:keyword
I found the new pages were all supplemental. I had created 3 pages, in the same sub folder (just 1 level beneath the root) over a 10 day period. There was nothing wrong with them, but they were supplemental. I did nothing but wait and wait … until they came out of the supplementals all by themselves.
It looks like there were automatically labelled supplemental, then analysed and “promoted” to the main index. Not only did they come out of the supplemental index but they are also ranking rather well (top 20), considering the fact they are lacking relevant external links right now.
So relax and focus on building a great website.
Keep in mind that supplemental indexing with Google can be an issue but only if you are careless or not doing as well as your competitors are.

Author: Sante has an engineering degree and has worked the web since 1994. An accomplished speaker, Sante has appeared at many European SES Conferences, including the first Italian SES held in Milan in April 2006. Appointed as an ICT consultant to the regional government in Abruzzo, Sante has also appeared at the Reykjavik Iceland Internet Marketing Conference and will be presenting at SES Milan in late May. Sante has a multilingual blog on Search Engines and Search Marketing.

Rescuing Pages from Google’s Supplemental Index

04 2007 Thursday

By Ross Dunn in Google

I found this interesting post from “Dr. Pete” at SEOmoz.org discussing his experience rescuing a client’s website from the vastness of Google’s supplemental index. Pete provided a great deal of detail on how he succeeded with his particular client. In this case the client was definitely in a bad state beforehand where even the most basic SEO strategies were not in place. The most basic fixes he implemented consisted of creating unique Titles and Meta Description Tags which in my opinion would definitely reduce supplemental results.
The gist of his posting is that the following changes seemed to have the most positive results:

Shortening and increasing the search engine friendliness of the site’s URLs
Apparently when a 404 page was discovered it provided search engines with an improper response - essentially that the page was “A-okay” (a 200 server response). They fixed this issue which allowed many ‘bad’ pages to be removed from Google’s index.
On a personal note I noticed this same issue with another client of mine recently by reviewing the client’s Google Webmaster Central profile… lots of valuable information can be found within that toolset - be sure to use it!
He implemented a robots.txt file to block various parts of the site that provided duplicate content (such as print versions of articles, etc.). The impact on supplemental results appeared to be profound from his standpoint which makes sense. You see supplemental results will often occur when Google notices repetitive content within a website. After all, the supplemental results is by nature meant for results that are already found elsewhere or for pages that offer little or no value to Google.

If you are concerned that your site has too many pages in Google’s supplemental index then I suggest reading and applying the advice in our instructional article “is your website search engine friendly - your personal checklist” because that article digs deep into many of the issues that also cause supplemental index issues.

Auhtor: Ross Dunn is the founder and CEO of StepForth Search Engine Placement. Celebrating its tenth year in business, StepForth is one of the oldest and most trusted brands in SEO. He can be reached at 1-877-385-5526 (toll free in North America)

Google’s Last Dance! Could Semantic Search Mean the End of Google?

04 2007 Wednesday

By Titus Hoskins in Google

As a full-time online marketer and webmaster I try to keep my eyes peeled to what is happening with the search engines. These complex creatures control the Internet. They truly are the heart, soul and brains of the web.

Unfortunately, they also control the faith of many struggling webmasters who are clawing their way to the top of SERPs in organic search. Being listed on these first page results for your chosen keyword phrases is the ultimate goal and it is often the determining factor in the success of your site.

Recently, I have noticed some strange movements with my closely watched keywords, especially in Google. Which shouldn’t alarm anyone because there are often sudden movements and adjustments as Google tweaks and refines its algorithm, the complex series of formulas it uses to determine which pages and sites get featured.

(Ed. note: An excellent resource on Google’s Algorithm and ranking factors can be found at: http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#f41

It’s way too early to jump to any conclusions but the big question on everyone’s mind: Is Google Moving Towards Semantic Search?

Or more precisely will Google have to move to semantic search if it has any chance of surviving in our ‘here today - gone tomorrow’ search world. Most of us old folks can easily recall a pre-Google web. Is a post-Google web possible?

That’s very hard to swallow but stranger things have happened on the net. But the real question should be: will Google have to embrace semantic search or perish?

Wikipedia defines Semantic Search or Semantic Web as the evolving process of taking all the content on the world wide web and “expressing it not only in natural language, but also in a förm that can be understood, interpreted and used by software agents, thus permitting them to find, share and integrate information more easily.”

As can be imagined, finding the formats and framework by which all this data can be processed into meaningful responses directly related to a search enquiry is mind boggling. Technologies such as RDF (Resource Description Framework), data interchange formats (e.g. RDF/XML, Turtle, N3, N-Triples), RDFS (RDF Schema) and OWL (Web Ontology Language) will all probably play a role. Many believe microformats will be very important in this evolving semantic web.

New Semantic Search Engine

We now have our first search engine supposedly based on semantics or meaning: Hakia. Is it the first in a whole new wave of search engines generated and powered by the Semantic Web which is now tagged as Web 3.0? More importantly, can it compete against a more text based search engine such as Google?

Hakia has some great features such as highlighting potential answers to your posted question. For example, ask it a question like: What is the population of Seattle? And you will get an answer. But you will also get a gallery page featuring all the relevant information about Seattle: How to get there? Local Hotels, Restaurant Guides, Local Weather…

Of course, do the same search in Google and you will also find your information along with images and maps of Seattle. However, using Hakia will show you the relevant information faster because it is highlighted and easier to find. And in my opinion having a whole gallery page of information somehow makes your search more relevant and useful.

Can Google Compete?

Is this a better mousetrap? Maybe, maybe not… but it is definitely pointing the way to a better method of searching on the web.

Granted, this type of search engine has a long way to go to match Google’s massive resources and obvious dominance in the search market. But even the most devoted Google user like myself must admit Google’s method of ranking pages and content on the web is not without some flaws. Take for example the issue of Google Bombing where different webmasters influenced the listing of the keyword ‘miserable failure’ to point to President Bush.

Google has now solved that problem but Google is basically an elitist system where sites and content are judged by the PR ranking system and its algorithm and filters. One would like to believe it is a democratic system where the best and highest quality content rises to the top. One would like to…

Information is one thing but opinions and the quality of those opinions is something entirely different. Will the new semantic web/search be able to judge quality content and rank it as good as Google presently does?

Problems For Webmasters

Regardless of how the whole Semantic Web scenario plays out, it may have some consequences for webmasters and marketers. At least in the initial stages until you can adjust or optimize your sites to this new 400 pound Gorilla on the block.

One major concern is how will the literal translation or semantic meaning of your site’s title and URL determine your placement in a semantically themed search engine? Most webmasters know to place their major keywords in their site’s domain name but, if you cover many topics within your site, this is not always possible.

Plus, does a Semantic Web mean everything will probably have to be tagged to the nth degree as we are seeing in blogs, social media and Web 2.0? Thankfully this can be easily done with free software such as WordPress which has tagging already built into its programming.

If we do get truly semantic search, wouldn’t on page factors play an even greater role for ranking? Special care would have to be taken as regards to your keywords and keyword variations. Great care will also have to be taken with page Titles, Meta Tags and your URLS.

I notice I am listed in Hakia for certain keywords but those have the direct phrases in the URLS.

Keen observers will also note that Google is now listing five or six related links in the number one SERPs position for certain keyword phrases. All these links come from the same site but are they more semantically related to the search enquiry than traditional links we have seen in Google? Or are they more in line with the gallery pages we see in Hakia?

Of course, jumping to any conclusions based on just one or two examples is foolhardy to say the least. Especially where search engines are concerned.

Brave New Internet

No doubt, Semantic Search or a Semantic Web poses some difficult obstacles and challenges as we seek a more human response from all those bits and bytes. For example, will semantic search mean we will have more closely focused sites strictly sticking to the topic of the url or domain name. Will the semantic web be more restricting than liberating?

When it is all said and done, will we really be able to devise a computer/machine/system that will be able to truly interpret the vast stored knowledge and give us the right meaningful answers to our questíons? Will it be able to be programmed so it’s human enough to not only understand but also interpret the subtle differences and meanings we have for different words in the whole context of a webpage?

Perhaps the most intriguing question, can someone take the present day ‘www index’ and then apply microformats or even new technology to this massive data and build a supplemental exclusive extension of the present day web? Turn it into a more semantic ‘natural language search’ accessible index. If such a gigantic feat was even feasible, you would also have to wonder who could have the resources to make such a creature possible!

As we have seen from Google a dance is not necessarily a dance and a slap is not necessarily a slap. Could an index be more than an index? It may be too early to tell, but Google will probably be better equipped to quickly adjust than anyone to this new Semantic Web whatever shape or form it takes.

Author: Titus Hoskins is a full-time online marketer. For the latest and most effective web marketing tools try: Internet Marketing Software Or for the most powerful marketing software try: Internet Marketing Tools

Green with Envy in the Google Game

04 2007 Wednesday

By Bill Platt in Google

Beginning on April 14th, 2007, a firestorm blew through the Internet community with the search engine optimization (SEO) community burning the hottest. The embers were warm and waiting for a strong wind to blow and kick up the flames, but it took Matt Cutts, the Google engineer extraordinaire to fire the flames with an off-the-cuff comment about “paid links.”

The flames raged and in most forums, the wind quickly shifted moving the firestorm back towards Cutts and Google. Thread Watch offered the most biting rebuttal to Cutts’ comments: Google Wants Reports of Paid Links… What a Joke and The Real Reason Google Doesn’t Like Paid Links.
Aaron Wall at Thread Watch is a respectable fellow, and he tore into Google with a ferociousness that I had not anticipated. Matt Cutts tried to answer some of Aaron’s questions, but it seemed that Cutts’ rebuttals only added more fuel to the fire.
I would not have wanted to be in Matt Cutts’ shoes that week. Oh my, it was brutal!
Even on Cutts’ own blog where the “paid link” comment originally surfaced (Hidden Links), Danny Sullivan posted a question that went unanswered, so Sullivan commented about it on his site: Time For Google To Give Up The Fight Against Paid Links?
Search Engine Watch even mentioned this issue and linked to additional forums where the debate was raging: Google Goes to War on Paid Text Links
What Most Readers Took From Cutts’ Comments
There were only a few readers who took Matt Cutts’ comments to be brotherly-advice.
The vast majority of people were screaming that Google intended to exercise their “monopoly control” over the Internet to run all of their competitors out of business.
Generally, I am not a “reactionary” type person. But for about an hour, even I had a ball in the pit of my stomach.
The ball passed from the pit of my stomach when I read a post that mirrored an opinion I have openly written about numerous times before: How does Google determine the “intent” of a person making a link? They can’t!
Understanding The Nuances Of Similar Items
Some people suggest that I should be ashamed of myself for speculating about the future of Google’s algorithms. There is even one clown, who has suggested that I should fear mentioning Matt Cutts’ name in an article, because I am bound to draw Cutts’ ire against me and my businesses. But, I am not worried.
I am simply laying out my “speculative” opinion about what Cutts’ comments might mean to my business and yours. You are free to use your own brain to judge the value of my words.
Am I playing a double standard when I say that Google cannot determine the intent of the person placing a link, and then I comment on how I interpret the future of the Google search algorithms? I don’t think so, and let me tell you why.
Google uses algorithms (software programs) to make distinctions about what a web page is about, how they value that page, and to judge the nature of a link.
I use my intellect (or as some would suggest, my lack thereof) to make a judgment about what Google has told us we should expect from them in the future.
I trust software to a certain extent, but software cannot always read the nuance that separates two very similar items. So, how can the Google algorithm be expected to determine the intent of a person who placed a link?
It has always been my contention that humans are “required” in any process that must make an interpretation of nuance. In my businesses, we refuse to trust computers to make judgments of nuance, because they can’t. That is the reason we employ human beings to process orders.
What Is Google’s Intent Behind The Paid Links Issue?
The whole of Cutts’ argument seems to hinge on nixing “paid links” that are designed to manipulate or “game Google’s PageRank” and to a lesser extent, their organic search results. Google seems to be really agitated that webmasters are “selling links based on the PageRank value of a page.”
The problem is that webmasters are selling an intangible asset that is wholly owned by Google and maintained for “Google’s benefit.” Webmasters are selling this Google asset, but Google will not receive any of the proceeds from that sale.
As a result, Cutts suggested that webmasters should use some method that Google’s spider can use to recognize and distinguish “paid links” from “given links.” Since Google’s algorithm is based on the theory that links are given to websites that deserve those links, the paid links on high PageRank pages can really skew Google’s PageRank values and its organic search results.
Here Is Where It Gets Ugly
Both honest and dishonest people inhabit this Internet.
Google wants webmasters who are selling links to distinguish paid links from given links, so that Google can ignore “links purchased to influence PageRank.”
If honest people distinguish paid links in a way that Google can recognize, then the market demand for those links will dry up. Once the PageRank value of a link is taken away from the buyer, the buyer will be forced to purchase links based only on the traffic that the specific web page receives. If all paid link decisions were based only on a web page’s traffic, then the market value of a link would be decimated.
Once a webmaster tells his link-buying customers that his or her links will no longer carry PageRank value to the buyer’s website, then the value of that link will drop in most cases by 80% or more. Why would a webmaster want to reduce the market value of his links by 80%?
Although Google’s links do not pass PageRank to the websites that are in their index or paid listings, we have to ask ourselves one thing. Would Google be willing to take a step that would reduce the market value of their own links by 80%? They certainly would not do anything that would cut their own bottom line that deeply, yet they are asking webmasters to do just that.
This is the reason people are teed off at Google. At least 80% of the market value of a link is driven by the PageRank value of the web page where the link will be placed.
Dishonest people don’t care to play by the rules; they will continue to sell their PageRank value, as long as they continue to have buyers. Only the honest will suffer.
Link Buyers Are Green With Envy
Link Buyers are envious of the PageRank value given to other web pages, and they want a bit of that value passed over to their own websites.
Link buyers are green with envy, because they can see that little green bar in the top of their browser that tells them how much value Google gives a web page in its algorithms.
If Google were to keep PageRank as a private value, known only to them, then “paid links” would not be an issue for them to manage.
If the public cannot see what a page’s PageRank value is, then link buyers would not be able to use PageRank to influence their link buying decisions, and webmasters would not be able to market their PageRank value to other websites.
How Simple Is That?
All Google has to do to solve this problem of theirs, is to take away the indicator people use to buy and sell PageRank.
Someone suggested to me that Google would never do away with the PageRank indicator in their toolbar, because Google feels that it is the only thing that ensures that people will keep the Google toolbar in their browser. Personally, I will continue to use the Google toolbar for my searches, even if the PageRank indicator was not there, because I like the search results Google gives to me. But that is just my opinion, and I am only one person out of millions of Google toolbar users.
What it boils down to is this. If Google is serious about nixing schemes to buy and sell PageRank, then they would simply take their PageRank indicator away from us. But will they take it away? Only time will tell.
Author: Bill Platt offers article ghost writing and article distribution services through thePhantomWriters.com. He also offers a guaranteedlink building service, utilizing article marketing as its foundation, through LinksAndTraffic.com. If you have any questions about Bill’s services, you can reach him by phone from 9am-6pm, Monday through Friday at 405-780-7745.

Google’s Intentions for Apps and Future Acquisitions

04 2007 Monday

By Ross Dunn in Google

Since Google began ruling the realm of Internet search it has become a major figure in my professional life. As a result, whenever an interview with a key figure of Google is posted I try not to miss it. To that end, John Battelle recently interviewed Google CEO, Eric Schmidt at the Web 2.0 Expo and posed some questions that have been tugging at my imagination lately. I watched the video over at WebProNews and jotted down some of my favorite points in the interview - I did the work, I might as well share it!

Please note that unlike the answers from Eric, the questions are not quotations but are similar to the question asked by John Battelle.

QUESTION A: With the latest introduction of a free online presentation tool Google has rounded off a nice office-like set of applications. Is this meant to compete with Microsoft Office?

Eric Schmidt:
“We don’t think so and the reason is it does not have all of the functionality nor is it intended to have all of the functionality of products like Microsoft Office. This is really a different way of managing information. It’s casual, it’s sharing. It seems to be a better fit to how people use the web and we think it is an example of one of the application categories on a web 2.0 framework
that we think will be very very successful. And my guess is that there are many companies represented in the room that are building products like this or other variants of this that are using this emergent architecture. You know, this whole story about Web 2.0, which I view is a
marketing term, is really an architectural transition from an older architecture to this new web based architecture and that transition which I think is what everyone in the room is a part of, is a fundamental computer architectural transition. Google is one of the companies that is benefiting from it, there are many others.”

John Battelle then responds incredulously by stating that Google’s toolset is bound to be “exceedingly threatening to Microsoft”.

Eric Schmidt:
“Well I am sure Microsoft will have a response. They actually have a set of web-based products which they can talk about. The important point here is that for people who are using products that are on the web who need presentation access and sharing”… “they are going to use this or something like this. And I think this is a testament to the strength of web 2.0.”

QUESTION B: What areas of technology is Google interested in focusing on into the future? Note: John essentially asked Eric what areas Google might be pursuing acquisitions in. Eric, with caution required rewording and responded with the following.

The 1st noted area of acquisition interest for Google
Eric Schmidt:
“The biggest growth areas are clearly going to be the mobile space; mobile, mobile, mobile. It is the easiest way to understand it. And the reason is that people treat their mobile phones as an extension of their persons and those mobile phones are very personal, very portable, and having GPS information in them now and this next generation of wireless networks, the 3G and eventually the 4G networks will have tremendous power. So if you look at the mobile space it is probably the biggest wide open space that quite a few interesting companies that we could partner with, and I won’t say beyond that, which are building either applications or advertising services that use the targeting that is capable in mobile.”

The 2nd noted area of acquisition interest for Google
Eric Schmidt:
“Another area is in the local space, most of the transactions we do in advertising are really good for local products. Go down a street to buy a car, go down a street to go shopping… that kind of thing. And most search engines”…”don’t fully take advantage of the local information that is inherent in the web. That is another big opportunity. There are quite a few companies that have figured out how to mine, target, or advertise in a local context.”

Wrapping Up
Other questions were certainly asked and I highly recommend watching the interview. That said, I was mostly intrigued by the quotes I placed because they show some indication of Google’s future intentions. Nothing was earth shattering. After all, it is no secret that Google Apps is thinly veiled as a competitor Microsoft Office. That is at least for users only requiring basic technology, however, the launch of a presentation application really makes any denial of competitiveness humorous.

Next we come to areas of interest for Google. “Mobile, mobile, mobile” certainly stood out as confirmation that getting into the mobile web scene is a smart move; do it now before everyone else does. Early adopters of mobile will be in a very good position once it catches on. Furthermore, the interest in local search is in perfect sync with Google’s desire to provide an enhanced regional experience. After all, the more local their search is, the more profits they can make since advertisers in every region will have their own top 10 listing to bid on. Exponential profit increases must sound mighty tempting to Google.

Author: Ross Dunn is founder and CEO of StepForth Search Engine Placement. Celebrating its 10th year of operation, StepForth is one of the oldest and most trusted brands in the search engine optimization sector.

Your Competition Now Works for Google

04 2007 Friday

By Matt Foster in Google

Still think you can fool Google with your unnatural links? I’m talking about link exchanges, link farms, hidden links, and now even paid links. Google’s Matt Cutts recently wrote about Google’s plan to catch you. You and I know it as vigilantism.

Prior to the Google era search engines were mediocre at best, looking at on page factors only which could easily be manipulated and spammed. These factors included metadata (especially the keyphrase tag) and the number of times a search term appeared on a page.
Those days are long gone. With the advent of Google, the concept of link popularity became tantamount to the determination of the relevance of a page to a specific search query. But what is Google looking for when it comes to links?
The answer is natural, one way, inbound links from trusted sites to unique, original, useful, informative, or educational content, with the anchor text of the link containing keyphrases relevant to your site.. The answer may also be found in what they do not want: link farms, link exchanges, hidden links and paid links. And guess who they have watching you? Your enemy.
Cutts wrote in his blog this week the following:
“I’d like to get a few paid link reports anyway because I’m excited about trying some ideas here at Google to augment our existing algorithms. Google may provide a special form for paid link reports at some point, but in the mean time, here’s a couple of ways that anyone can use to report paid links:
- Sign in to Google’s webmaster console and use the authenticated spam report form, then include the word “paidlink” (all one word) in the text area of the spam report. If you use the authenticated form, you’ll need to sign in with a Google Account, but your report will carry more weight. - Use the unauthenticated spam report form and make sure to include the word “paidlink” (all one word) in the text area of the spam report.
As far as the details, it can be pretty short. Something like “Example.com is selling links; here’s a page on example.com that demonstrates that” or “www.shadyseo.com is buying links. You can see the paid links on www.example.com/path/page.html” is all you need to mention. That will be enough for Google to start testing out some new techniques we’ve got — thanks!”
Whoa! Google is now asking your competition to report you if you buy or sell links. Interesting, isn’t it, when Google’s massively popular AdWords program is all about paid links. Conspiracy theorists will tell you that Google is trying to take over and control all paid advertising on the Internet, worldwide. But I digress. The point is that Google is asking your competition to report you if you buy or sell links. Period.
So what to do? Create the kind of links that Google wants. There is only one way to do this, and that is through the regular creation of unique content. Here is what you do:
1) Set up a blog (blogger.com is owned by Google and a great one to use as they crawl all of their blogs regularly)

2) Post content in the form of articles

3) Syndicate those articles through article distribution sites (do a search for “article distribution” to find these sites), use your keyphrases within anchor text links back to your site (these links are usually included in an about the author section, but can be in the article body as well)

4) Get active in social bookmarking and social media optimization, sites such as digg, furl, and del.icio.us to name a few.
Those four simple steps are all it takes to conduct an effective link building campaign that won’t get you into trouble.

Author: Matt Foster is the President of ArteWorks SEO, one of the top 15 search engine optimization firms in the world. For more information, please visit www.arteworks.biz.

Let Google’s Algorithm Show You the Traffic

04 2007 Wednesday

By Titus Hoskins in Google

Recently Rand Fishkin of Seomoz.org brought together 37 of the world’s Top SEO experts to tackle Google’s Algorithm, the complex formula and methods Google uses to rank web pages. This ranking formula is extremely important to webmasters because finding which factors Google uses to rank their index is often considered the Holy Grail of site optimization.

Google’s ranking factors affect how and where you are listed in their search engine results or SERPs. Since obtaining top positions for your targeted keywords often spells success for your site, knowing Google’s ranking factors can be very beneficial.
Every experienced webmaster will know Google is the main supplier of search engine traffíc on the web, getting listed on the first page or anywhere in the top 10 positions for popular keywords will result in plenty of free quality targeted traffíc.
Briefly listed below are some of the main ranking factors you should be optimizing your web pages for in your marketing. The majority of these ranking factors will be very familiar to most webmasters who take full advantage of any and every SEO tactic which will give their site an edge over their competition.
Here are some of the main ranking factors to consider:
1. Keywords In Your Title And On Your Page
Place your keyword or keyword phrase in the title of your page and also in your copy. Many webmasters use variations of their keywords on this page and also include it in the H1 headline.
2. Keywords In Your URL
Keep your page on topic and place your keyword in the URL. Use your keyword in the H2, H3… headlines. Place it in the description and meta tags, place it in bold/strong tags, but keep your content readable and useful. Be aware of the text surrounding your keywords, search engines will become more semantic in the coming years so context is important.
3. Create High Quality Relevant Content
Have high quality relevant content on your pages. Your content should be related to the topic of your site and updated regularly depending on the nature of your site.
4. Internal Onsite Linking
Internal linking is important to your overall ranking. Make sure your linking structure is easy for the spiders to crawl. Most suggest a simple hierarchy with links no more than three clicks away from your home/index page.
Creating traffíc modes or clusters of related links within a section on your site has proven very effective for many webmasters, including this one. For example, creating a simple online guide on a subject related to your site’s topic can prove very beneficial. Keep all the links connected and closely related in subject matter and don’t forget to have occasional external ‘anchor keyworded’ links coming to these internal links on your site instead of to your homepage. Deep build your links.
5. Only Linking To High Quality Related Sites
Don’t forget to link to high quality PR related sites. Linking to high quality sites shows the search engines your site is very useful to your visitors. Build relationships within communities on the topic of your site. Be extremely careful not to link to bad neighborhoods, link farms and sp@m sites… when in doubt, don’t link out!
Unless your site has been around for years and is well established and trusted by Google, this factor will have an adverse effect on your site’s overall ranking. Linking only to high quality content sites will give your site an edge over your competition.
6. Global Linking Popularity
One of the major ranking factors is the Global Linking Popularity of your site. You should try to build plenty of inbound links from quality sites. One simple and effective way to do this is through writing articles and submitting them to the online article directories. Only related sites will pick up and display your articles with your anchor text links back to your site. These are often ONE-WAY-LINKS.
But don’t just write articles to get links, write quality content that will help the reader first and the links will come naturally. Also remember an article is an extremely good way of pre-selling your products and gaining trust with your potential customers.
7. Anchor Text Is Very Important
Anchor text is an important factor your must not forget to use. Perhaps more importantly these inbound links should be related or relevant to your site’s topic, which will play an important role in your rankings. Don’t ignore the text surrounding your links and use different anchor text links to avoid keyword sp@mming.
Keep in mind, as search engines become more semantic, the whole text of your article will probably be considered your anchor text, thus making articles even more important to your rankings.
8. Number And Quality Of Your Inbound Links
Your inbound links should also come from related high Global Link Popular sites. The more links your have from these popular related sites the higher rankings you will get. Many SEO experts suggest you should have a steady stream of new sites (inbound links) added each month to keep your rankings growing. These links will age and íncrease your rankings after 4 or 5 months. Both quality and quantity is important.
9. Reliable Server And Service
Like any business, Google is only serving up a product (SERPs) to its customers, this service must be continuous and available at all times. Make sure you have a good reliable server because any extended downtime when your site is inaccessible to the Bots may be detrimental to your rankings. If it is down for over 48 hours, you could be dropped from the index. Ouch!
10. Duplicate Content Is A NO NO!
Make certain you don’t place duplicate content on your site. This may affect your rankings and get your pages thrown into the supplemental index. Be careful not to use duplicate title or mega tags on your pages as this will lower and disburse your internal page rankings, resulting in poor optimization.
Your overall SEO strategy should be to provide valuable relevant content and links for your visitors and the search engines. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, be extremely careful who you link out to from your site. Avoid sp@m sites, link farms or selling links. Although it is a bit outdated, using the Google Toolbar will still give you a general overview of a site’s PR or Page Rank.
These are some of the most common and important ranking factors Google uses to rank and display their search engine results. Optimizing your site or keywords for these factors can prove very beneficial and rewarding.
There are many more factors so you should use the link in the resource box below to get all the gory details. For any novice or experienced webmaster it makes for a fascinating read and is extremely helpful in tackling Google’s complex ranking system or algorithm. Conquer it and an endless supply of free organic traffíc is yours for the taking.

Author: Titus Hoskins is a full-time online marketer. For the most effective web marketing tools try his main PR6 site: http://www.bizwaremagic.com . Make sure you chëck out Seomoz.org for the complete líst of ranking factors.

« Older Entries

Newer Entries »