tech support 8

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Friday, 26 August 2011

We Really Still Have to Debunk Bad SEO?

Posted on 13:25 by Unknown



Image of bottle of SEO snake oil.I've been doing this web thing from the start (sort of — I did not have a NeXT machine and a guy named Tim in my living room) and I've watched how people have clamored to have their web sites discovered on the web. As the web grew and search engines emerged, people started trying new ways to get listed in these new automated directories, and so began the scourge of the Search Engine Optimization (SEO) peddler.




The web magazine .Net posted what to me is a surprising article this week (surprising in that I thought we all knew this stuff): The top 10 SEO myths. I am going to recap them here, although you should go to the article itself for more detail and the full list of reader comments. Remember, these are myths, which means they are not true.




  1. Satisfaction, guaranteed;

  2. A high Google PageRank = high ranking;

  3. Endorsed by Google;

  4. Meta tag keywords matter;

  5. Cheat your way to the top;

  6. Keywords? Cram 'em in;

  7. Spending money on Google AdWords boosts your rankings;

  8. Land here;

  9. Set it and forget it;

  10. Rankings aren't the only fruit.




The problem here is that for those of us who know better, this is a list that could easily be ten years old (with a couple obvious exceptions, like the reference to AdWords). For those who don't know better or who haven't had the experience, this might be new stuff. For our clients, this is almost always new stuff and SEO snake oil salesmen capitalize on that lack of knowledge to sell false promises and packs of lies. One of my colleagues recently had to pull one of our clients back from the brink and his ongoing frustration is evident in his own retelling:




I have a client who recently ended an SEO engagement with another firm because they wouldn’t explain how they executed their strategies. Their response to his inquiry was to ask for $6,000 / month, up from $2,000 / month for the same work in two new keywords.



This kind of thing happens all the time. I recently ran into another SEO "guru" selling his wares by promising to keep a site's meta tags up-to-date through a monthly payment plan. When I explained that Google doesn't use meta tags in ranking, his response was that I was wrong. When I pointed him to a two-year-old official Google video where a Google representative explains that meta tags are not used, his response was to state that he believed Google still uses them because he sees results from his work. My client was smart enough to end that engagement, but not all are.




Because I cannot protect my clients in person all the time, I have tried to write materials to educate them. For our content management system, QuantumCMS, I have posted tips for our clients, sometimes as a reaction to an SEO salesman sniffing around and sometimes to try to head that off. A couple examples:




  • Verified: Google Ignores Meta Keywords

  • SEO Spammers Using Your Contact Form




Along with these client-facing tips I sometimes get frustrated enough to write posts like this, trying to remind people that SEO is not some magical rocket surgery and that those who claim it is should be ignored. I've picked a couple you may read if you are so inclined:




  • Verified: Google Ignores Meta Keywords

  • Derek Powazek on SEO as Snake Oil




And because I still have to cite this meta tags video far far too often, I figured I'd just re-embed it here:





Related




My ire doesn't stop at SEO self-proclaimed-gurus. I also think social media self-proclaimed-gurus are just the latest incarnation of that evil. Some examples:




  • Followers, Likes and +1s as Meaningless as Hits

  • Social Scoring As the New SEO

  • Lots of Twitter Followers Guarantees... Nothing


Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in Bing, clients, Google, rant, search, SEM, SEO, Yahoo | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Social Media Day 2011 in Buffalo #smdayBUF
    Last night marked the second Mashable-sponsored Social Media Day here in Buffalo. With 154 RSVPs for the event, the venue, The Eights Bist...
  • Web Accessibility Sorta-Infographic
    WebAIM is a non-profit organization within the Center for Persons with Disabilities at Utah State University. It has a reputation (perhaps o...
  • Now the Mobile Web Is Dead?
    It was barely two years ago that I scoffed when Wired declared the web dead ( Enough about the Death of the Web ). Fast forward to today and...
  • Browser Performance Chart
    Jacob Gube has posted a handy chart over at Six Revisions titled " Performance Comparison of Major Web Browsers ." He tests the c...
  • Facebook, HTML5, and Mis-Reporting
    My Twitter stream and the headlines of sites across the web yesterday lit up with Facebook's CEO blaming its stock price (failure to mee...
  • The Science of Trust in Social Media
    I am one of those people who always needs to see proof of some assertion, evidence to back up a claim. While I can accept anecdotal evidence...
  • ICANN Moves .org Away from VeriSign
    This Saturday, the .org top-level domain (TLD) will no longer be privately managed. With VeriSign's contract with ICANN for management ...
  • Speaking at Mom 2.0 in Houston, TX
    I will be in Houston this week to speak at the Mom 2.0 Summit (Feb. 18-20, 2010, Houston, TX). To make it a little easier to describe, here...
  • Algonquin Studios Gets Local Press
    I'm taking an opportunity to brag a little about my company, Algonquin Studios , being featured today in the Business section of our lo...
  • App Store Meta Tags
    Why yes, Dominos, I'd love to tap again to get your real home page to order a pizza when I could have done it right here, below your ove...

Categories

  • accessibility
  • Adobe
  • analytics
  • Apple
  • apps
  • ARIA
  • Bing
  • Blink
  • Brightkite
  • browser
  • Buzz
  • Chrome
  • clients
  • css
  • design
  • Facebook
  • Firefox
  • Flash
  • fonts
  • food
  • Foursquare
  • g11n
  • geolocation
  • globalization
  • Google
  • Gowalla
  • html
  • i18n
  • ICANN
  • infographic
  • Instagram
  • internationalization
  • internet
  • Internet Explorer
  • JavaScript
  • JAWS
  • Klout
  • L10n
  • law
  • localization
  • Lynx
  • Mapquest
  • Microsoft
  • mobile
  • Netscape
  • ning
  • Opera
  • patents
  • picplz
  • Plus
  • print
  • privacy
  • project management
  • QR
  • rant
  • RSS
  • Safari
  • SCVNGR
  • search
  • SEM
  • SEO
  • social media
  • Sony
  • speaking
  • standards
  • SVG
  • touch
  • translation
  • Twitter
  • typefaces
  • usability
  • UX
  • Verizon
  • video
  • W3C
  • WAI
  • WCAG
  • WebKit
  • whatwg
  • Wired
  • WOFF
  • xhtml
  • Yahoo
  • YouTube

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (39)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (7)
    • ►  September (4)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2012 (63)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (6)
    • ►  June (7)
    • ►  May (7)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (7)
  • ▼  2011 (67)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (7)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (4)
    • ▼  August (8)
      • We Really Still Have to Debunk Bad SEO?
      • Followers, Likes and +1s as Meaningless as Hits
      • Thoughts on Muse (Obvious Pun Avoided)
      • Browsers as Wrestlers "Infographic"
      • Another Piece Claiming Social Media Makes You Dumber
      • More on HTML5 as DHTML
      • Are Patents Killing HTML5 Video?
      • A Patent Trolling Primer
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (8)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (11)
  • ►  2010 (100)
    • ►  December (8)
    • ►  November (7)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (10)
    • ►  August (7)
    • ►  July (11)
    • ►  June (12)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (10)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (11)
  • ►  2009 (51)
    • ►  December (9)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ►  October (21)
    • ►  September (13)
    • ►  August (2)
  • ►  2003 (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2002 (9)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2001 (1)
    • ►  February (1)
  • ►  2000 (4)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  1999 (7)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile