Despite more than a decade of search marketers attempting to educate web surfers about how the search engines operate and how to properly engage in a search marketing campaign, we've still got a very, very long way to go. Tonight I came across a few examples of this that drove the point home.
#1 - Horrifying Marketing that's Nightmarishly Effective
The folks over at Berankednumber1.com (link condom applied) offer the kind of service that makes me nauseous. What's worse is that apparently, their conversions are sky high (heard it through the grapevine). Snake oil salesmen like this (of which there are hundreds in the field) not only give the rest of us a bad name, but continue to misinform individuals and businesses about the process, effectiveness and basics behind search marketing. Just read their "more information" about the service:
Why Do We Not Ask You For "Keywords"
Since we are already submitting all the "text" on your website we do not need to ask you for keywords. Your keywords are already on your site. The keywords generally come directly from your website's text. For example we presume that if you are selling "Ford Trucks" in "Omaha" that you will have the word "Ford", "Trucks" and "Omaha" somewhere on your website. As a result "Omaha Ford Trucks" , "Ford Trucks Omaha" would automatically be submitted (along with many other keyword combinations). As long as your website has "text" on it you are generally not going to have any problem at all.
May the SEO Gods have pity. The worst part? They're not nearly as bad as many other similar services.
#2 - Searches that Make a Legitimate Search Marketer Vomit with Rage
Now, not all of these are awful, but the vast majority show continued ignorance about the process of search marketing and indicate that, despite years of effort, the industry has failed to even change the dialog or vocabulary of SEM. On the plus side, the trends point to at least some decline in the use of terms like "search engine submission" and "meta tag optimization," but we've still got a long way to go.
#3 - Cringe-Worthy Answer Selection
Check out the following exchange on Yahoo! Answers:
The sad part is, Vic is really trying to help, and some of his advice is even relatively good. But, the focus on meta tags as the primary ranking element at the engines recalls the mid-1990's, yet this answer was selected only a week ago.
#4 - Hypocrisy from the Search Engine Guidelines
I know that it's impossible for the search engines to completely limit the influence of paid links (and I'm not even sure that as a search marketer, I'd want them to), but the contrast between the links that are helping many, if not most of the sites ranking for competitive queries in specific, commercial fields and the party line - don't buy links - are in direct conflict.
I have to agree with Dave on this one - the SERPs are, by and large, influenced, if not ruled by, financial considerations. For example, try looking at the backlinks of this search:
Honestly, I had trouble identifying a single link to any of those sites that appeared to be editorially given. Granted, in the grand scheme of misinformation about search engines, this is probably the least offensive, but it certainly makes it very challenging for a new entrant to the field to understand how the search engines can claim one position, threaten actions against violators and yet appear to be all but enthralled by those who practice that same technique.
#5 - Wikipedia's Error of Omission
As most folks know, I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia. However, I was somewhat optimistic about the promotion of the Search Engine Optimization (link condom again) article to the home page yesterday. However, despite the article's relative accuracy and balance, the lack of any information about how search engines rank web pages and how SEO is actually performed left me severely disappointed. What better opportunity to educate and inform the myriad of visitors (and searchers, as the piece still ranks atop queries for SEO & Search Engine Optimization) seeking information about the practice than here?
It's sad to think that in spite of hard work by good folks like Jon Hochman, the piece still can't deliver a succinct look at what to expect from an SEO and what to consider if you're taking on the project yourself. The bickering over accuracy and bias eventually removed entire sections that could have provided some insight and background for those poor souls.
So what are we to do, fellow SEOs? After 10 years of attempting to educate the outside world, is it time to give up the game and just accept the fact that SEO will always have negative, inaccurate associations and a shroud of mystery? Or... are there new approaches that could be taken to better inform a clearly curious and often desperate public?
I know this will grate on some of your nerves, but the only way you are going to educate the masses about SEO and Web 2.0 is through traditional media. You have to meet the masses where they are and explain what is what.
It will take some big bucks to accomplish this, but it's totally doable. And, whoever takes the plunge will be rewarded with nationwide authoritative status previously unheard of in our industry.
How to educate through traditional media? Think radio. Think television. Think movies. Think newspapers.
#1 Find a budding script writer and build in SEO as a main character's job. Educate the public through the storyline. This is always the most effective way of spreading ideas (other than gossip). People automatically assume that the information is true because they consider realism essential for character development.
#2 Buy radio spots.
#3 Suggest a cover story to a major newspaper / magazine.
#4 A new television series where one of the characters does SEO.
I'll build these out on my site at CultureFeast.com. It's a great idea. But it comes with a major price tag and investment of time. But as much as Danny Sullivan is revered in the industry, imagine the power of one company or person communicating the essence of SEO to the masses. Instant celebrity. Instant credibility. And eventually, almost everyone will have a website, so it applies to most everyone.
Number 1 is a brilliant idea. I'm sure you could do something aa la Hackers based on this.
I do a bit of commercial acting work on the side so I've actually thought about the idea of a feature film on SEO someday... where the greater plot would be something more dramatic so as to be mass-marketable.
I'd love a chance to share some brainstorming privately with anyone who'd be interested in trying to actually get a script developed.
I'm up for it. You can find me email at my blog, or on here.
While I love the enthusiasm and the desire, I'm not sure traditional media, mass market is the approach.
For those of us in this industry, we do and have to, live, eat, sleep, breath and everything else not suitable for print, SEO/M. There's no other way.
But I can't imagine that the masses have that much desire or interest, or even need to, have that kind of understanding of this industry. Rand/SEOmoz have done a great job of breaking into the popular culture, but that doesn't really reach into an indepth level. And that's a positive reflection on them for even breaking into the arena of "happy meal" news.
Yes, there have been increasing mentions in the press and traditional media, but all of this is still mostly surface level. And that's fine.
Most of what needs to be communicated, probably can't be communicated in the time allowed or at the level of comprehension needed.
This is still talking to a fairly small audience... primarily website owners and small business owners on the low end, to web analysts, webmasters, marketing execs, C-levels, company or divisional presidents, and to some extent, other related service firms like marcom and ad agencies. Even then, the further away you get from the core, the quicker the eyes are probably going to glaze over and the less they are going to understand the deeper levels. In general, most of these executive levels are, hopefully, going to have enough faith in their in-trenches levels personnel to help drive the direction.
I think it still comes down to reaching those that we touch directly. Reaching them through sites like SEOmoz, business networking, Chamber or AMA meetings, and to some extent the traditional media channels, but primarily those that are very targeted to this audience... the local business magazines, trade journals, etc.
While we might enjoy a TV show or movie with an SEO as a character, my guess is, we probably wouldn't be happy with how they are portrayed as they will probably resemble the exact characters we are trying to downplay than ourselves... sadly. But even then, once you get outside the direct people that we "connect" with, I think the general reaction is, "SEO, hmm, sounds interesting... I'm not really sure I understand what it is and I'm amazed that people actually do that for a living."
And I think this is all rather appropriate, since search marketing has really reached new ground that the other, traditional channels have never really been able to reach... the first truly, pull-level, instant gratification marketing.
This is proof that speaking with confidence doesn't equal being correct. There is no substantiation to these comments whatsoever.
Have you never seen NUMB3RS? Do you have any clue how many people are becoming informed or intrigued by advanced math because of that show?
The show is based upon a model of a crisis, a theory, and a solution. But during the theory, they use video illustrations to give the lay viewer a more solid concept of what mathematical principle or theorum is at work. It is amazingly effective and still entertaining enough to be entering its 3rd or 4th season this Fall.
Whether you want to agree with it or not, you could easily fit a character into a movie or television series who could be the sarcastic genius who constantly points out what other people do wrong in search marketing or he/she could explain each concept dripping with sarcasm as though addressing morons (think House, Shark, Nero Wolfe, etc).
This possibility is only limited by one's imagination, budget, and connections. And two of those can be found elsewhere.
I never claimed otherwise nor was it meant to be some statistical analysis or prove one way or another. I'm not sure there would be a lot of conversation here it that was a requirement.
And yes, I've seen NUMB3RS and love the show. And don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a positive portrayal of the search marketing industry in a show.
No, honestly, I don't? Do you? And I'm not trying to be facetious with that statement, I'd really love to hear if what the numbers are.
While I love the show, in all its geeky mathness, I'm pretty sure that I haven't run to any books or the web to learn or even verify the accuracy of anything theorems or anything else that has been discussed. And I have to imagine that my own interaction with the show on that level is fairly common.
And a little bit of knowledge is sometimes more dangerous than none at all. If I was placed into a situation where the use of one of these theorems was needed and was being presented to me, sadly, because I might recognize when I hear it, I might be more inclined to assume the person talking to me knew more about what they were talking about because of it.
I think we need to be careful with how we envision the "snakeoil" salesmen. To most people, they probably look and sound just like you and me. They aren't standing in dark alleys with dark trenchcoats and fedoras pulled down over their eyes.
As we've seen, the general public, dare I say possibly ourselves included at times, often take what we see in traditional media at face value. So that SEO character could just as easily be portrayed as the snakeoil salesman as the modern day online marketing expert, and thus do more damage than good.
There is something endearing and compelling in taking a young math genius and showing another side to him, especially when contrasted up against a shoot 'em up, blow 'em up FBI agent brother. The public can get behind that, much more so than him being evil or sleazy. I'm not so sure that a studio would see or gamble on winning the hearts of the public with the same angle for search marketers. I hope they would, but just not sure.
I love the idea, don't get me wrong. I just don't think it is the magic answer. This is in part because I don't see the masses needing to understand SEO.
But I love the discussion and I do appreciate thinking big and thinking of ways to come at this from different angles ;)
I will admit that thinking big has sunk a lot of underachievers who never found a way to follow through. But thinking small is what relegates millions of employees to persist in mind numbing tasks at jobs they don't like.
Unfortunately, there will always be opportunity for people to pursue the short route... and they will continue get no results, throw their money away, or worse, see their sites plummet from the SERPs.
Sadly, many of these will also make the conclusion that SEO is just a scam rather than own up to the point that they tried to follow the "to good to be true and you should have known better" route.
As always, I think much of what we do is educate... and the more people we educate, the better we make the industry.
While it may not be improving or moving as fast as we'd like, which seems even slower in an industry that in many ways moves faster than we can keep up with, I think things are improving. I've seen a dramatic growth in awareness and interest just over the last year, and I'm talking about interest from the small business side of things. And the audience, by and large, appears willing to listen to the do's and don'ts.
It's an evolution that will take time. I imagine it is like a parent watching their child take their first steps or learn to ride a bike... the excitement in their eyes, the joy in your heart as you open up a whole new world to them, and the pain it brings because you know there are times when they are going to fall and crash. But sometimes, falling and crashing is what we need in life.
Just like "real" lawyers never quite can out from under the negative perceptions that stem from a good lawyer joke, I'm not sure that we'll ever be able to clear up the inaccuracies presented or negative impression created by some "SEO" providers. We can keep education but but there is no such thing as a 100% educated public. The question is, will we ever rid the industry of these types? I doubt it. Until then we just keep educating so when when we talk to businesses they can compare us with the other, and hopefully we've helped them understand the value in true SEO.
In my experience, those looking for the cheap quick SEO services are the same ones unwilling to pay good money for the real thing anyway.
I'm sure there are sociologists out there who have documented the phenomenon of why people cling to information long after it becomes inaccurate, but it's true of every industry. I'm frustrated when I see the amount of misinformation out there on the Montessori method, but I know that I can't personally meet with everyone out there to patiently explain the truth.
What I can do, however, is what all of you do when it comes to SEO: talk to people that I know and come in contact with on a regular basis. If I can educate them, and they in turn can educate people they know, the truth will spread (albeit slowly).
There will always be people out there who believe the "too-good-to-be-true" empty promises...but for each one of those people, there are others who are genuinely curious and open to learning more. Many times they just haven't met the person yet who can authoritatively answer their questions. Those are the people I like to spend my time educating.
The situation is dire, but not hopeless. Good SEO information will prevail!
(And I feel your Wikipedia pain - the article on Montessori is atrocious, but I've never had a chance to work on it. It's on my to-do list, though).
Brilliant Lorisa. Great advice, through and through.
SEM has come along way from its origins, and I agree that it has a long way to go. But don't make it look so sad and hopeless. Sites like SEOmoz are giving SEM the boost it needs to keep going, to progress, to be an educated field.
I love you SEOmoz.
We love you, too. :)
I love everyone. I'm like a love-whore.
The problem is this. A customer might think it is our word against theirs. How can they tell who is the legitimate marketer?
I think something like a ripoffreport.com site, but for SEO victims, would be of help. Customers would learn from other customers' bad experiences.
Exactly, Hamlet. I've even had CURRENT clients, to whom I've already explained what real SEO is about, email me and ask why their site wasn't ranking #1--their argument being that they receive emails on a weekly basis telling them they can get to #1, guaranteed for just $59.95.
I think a longer-term problem is that the more customers who get burned by these kinds of snake oil guys (and gals), the less likely they're going to be to trust a real SEO in the future.
I think people are generally smarter than that. They know on some level that when it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. So, when they get burned by these $59.95 snake oil guys/gals (which they will), they will figure that they should have listened to the upstanding SEO that warned them about it.
Some know it's too good to be true, yes. But I have talked to at least half a dozen realtors, in particular (some of whom are not clients), who are still using these kinds of services, presumably with nothing to show for it, after nearly a year.
I'm not bitter that they didn't hire me or anything, because I have plenty of business, it just frustrates me that they haven't hired SOMEONE reputable to work on their sites...I hope you're right that they realize they're being burned sooner rather than later.
Too good to be true? Maybe. But I think a lot of people figure that if they spend $50 on something clearly bullshit they won't get the result advertised but they just might get $50 worth of return. Sometimes this is true. Think about spending $50 to get your site in 200 directories. Sure those links suck and don't help much but as part of a larger campagn you probably get $50 worth of PR and a small amount of exposure that could be critical to a start-up.
Take this thinking one step further and if you do enough $50 bullshit purchases and each one contributes a little something may just break through.
Unlikely, but I think that is the mentality in many cases.
Kinda like people gambling. They know they'll probably lose money - they just don't care enough to stop.
I think this all depends on the client...
I've dealt with small, single person businesses, as well as multi-million dollar divisions of multi-billion dollar corporations.
Obviously those at the high end would be less likely to go after the $59.95 deal anyway (though we might be surprised). But on the lower end, the waters get muddy pretty quickly.
When you take someone who spent $10-$20 for a domain, may have put together their own website, suddenly that $59.95 looks like a more reasonable investment. And it all comes down to what you know. If you are used to going out for a "nice" meal for two and spending $59.95, it may be hard to comprehend spending over $100 on a meal, let alone over $1,000. We all have our perspective thresholds.
And in regards to SEO/M, remember that those who have the least exposure and experience (sadly those that probably need the help the most) have probably only ever been exposed to search ads, banner ads, and spam emails for $19.95, $59.95, and $399 SEO services.
After all, while Rand and Mystery Guest may have been playing around with crazy AdWords ads, I don't think I've ever seen any for SEOmoz stating, "SEO for only $10,000 Per Month."
Many people have no comprehension of what SEO can cost outside of their exposure to the snakeoil!
True, it depends on the client and his perspective. As well as our perspective while educating the client.
You can usually gauge pretty fast what kind of client you have; the kind that's happy to eat at fast food restaurants every week (day?) or the client that prefers fine cuisine and is willing to pay for it. The 'pitch' or lesson you deliver to that client needs to depend on your services and the client.
I used to work in the restaurant business back in Holland and one of the best ways of getting quality return guests was by introducing them to some sort of delicacy. This could be some great amuse or a rare cocktail. It not only showed that the restaurant or bar has quality products/service, but it also spoiled them for 'inferior' businesses.
Maybe i'm over-associating, but I think this is the way to go for individual clients. Show them the benefits of good old-fashioned SEO (and the dangers of those scams) and if they have a craving for the good stuff they will come back. It will cost time (that's where the gauging comes in), but it can deliver great ROI and you're also educating someone in the process.
For the mass-marketing side of things there's a lot of great suggestions here. Although.... a movie about SEOs? "Michael Gray in ... drum roll ... Revenge of the SEOs" or "Matt Cutts in Silence of the SERPs" :)
I think you are right on. Why? Because you are making it about something other than price. You are making it about delivering exceptional value (the joy and excitement of discovering something new) and meeting a need (even if the need was unknown to them).
The challenge comes back to always remembering that our understanding and experience is not typical, especially when it comes to associating pricing for SEO. Let's take TVs. Most people, whether they are in the US, Holland, the UK, China, or anywhere else in the world, can probably give some rough ballpark figures on the cost of a television.
Sure, there may be some huge differences between a "regular" TV and a LCD flat panel or a plasma screen, but in general, we can get close. And we don't have to work in the industry or even be TV experts. We see prices in stores and in ads in the newspaper, on websites, etc. But most of us, even in the industry, might be challenged to list 5 websites where SEO pricing is readily avaiable, and even then, pricing may vary widely.
So while I used the low end as an example, I'm sure the high end runs into challenges... it again all comes down to perception and pricing threshold. We might find $59.95 to be a joke, but ironically, if all you've seen are ads for $19.95, you might feel that you're really going out on a limb. But that $59.95 could just as easily be $5999.95 and still be either a bargain or a splurge.
It all comes back to educating clients on the industry, proper expectations, and helping them to see value, rather than pricing. Smart decision makers know that pricing is meaningless without value.
This is a great post!
Most of my customers are in the real estate industry and they came running to me with millions of questions such as, "This company told me that if I pay them $19.95/month they will get me in the #1 spot on Google, why are you so much more expensive?" or "This company guaranteed me 500 leads a month for $20, can you deliver the same results at that price?"
I cringe everytime I hear these comments and questions because I know that it is going to be an hour conversation as to why those are not feasible promises.
These snake oil salesmen are really killing the good, hard working SEOr's out there. We need more posts like this one that explain to people that we are not all like this and these companies with these grandiose promises and guarantees will continue to make money off of naive customers if more time is not spent on researching a SEO company.
I hang out a lot on the DP forums and cringe whenever I visit the Buy, Sell & Trade sections.
So many people just seem to not understand the basics and just refuse to learn from others. The main issue is that everybody wants to take a short cut and do it in 3 weeks. They assume that Google is stupid and can be manipulated by anybody with $10 to spare on submitting to 200,000 search engines.
My campaign to bring linkbaiting to Digital Point might take a while.:-)
This really makes me laugh. I find myself telling people all the time about how many PhDs Google employs. While it might be possible to trick them (the darker shades of headware can be profitable), it's certainly not an easy route and requires a lot of skill and effort.
Myths never die, they just take on new forms. When I was a geology student we would do field research in rural towns and EVERY ONE of them had a story about an abandoned gold or prescious metals mine, sitting in the ground waiting for a lucky spelunker to stumble upon.
SEO myths are the same. Hidden text, meta tags, multiple domain names, 100 website clones, & reusing articles. Not a week goes by that a new client doesn't ask me about these 'techniques'.
I always patiently explain to them that like dedicated gold miners, the tireless PhD's at Google have been down this road long before you.
It's amazing how many people there are out there selling services like this.
I've just taken over a client who previously used a big UK SEO company without seeing any results and their backlinks are just full of spam now!
I worked in the Real Estate sector, consulting Realtors, for many years before moving "in-house". I can not tell you how many companies I came across that 'guaranteed' first page placement for my clients.
These were companies that were taking advantage of a sector that was not very tech savvy:
https://www.seomoz.org/blog/what-it-looks-like-to-be-lost-in-googles-real-estate-reciprocal-link-penalty
I believe these types of companies are polluting the water for the honest and hardworking marketers out there.
It's unfortunate, but I don't feel we are alone. There are honest mechanics that work hard, do a great job, and are loyal to their customers, and there are some that will charge you for work that was never done.
It's the world we live in....
Mike, this is exactly what I was talking about in my earlier comment. So many realtors just don't get or don't have the time to understand the internet...and they're much more used to a pay-for-bundle business model because of MLS providers, etc., where this kind of thing makes sense to them.
Re. "So what are we to do, fellow SEOs?"
Like other forms of data-driven marketing, SEM (paid and/or organic search) is a strategic investment first and foremost. While it obviously has production applications, approaching it principally as production is wrong because it leaves it to be a sub-optimal if not wholly impotent add-on. Also, while different SEOs do different types of work and vary in their strengths and specialties in between, any potential client and vendor match-up should be approached with caution as in the interest of both parties.
Being a responsible vendor means more than just being versed and proficient in current standards and methods. It means having integrity, patience and moreover courage to do things like:
a) Know when to turn down certain kinds of work even if/as one isn't fully booked at whatever given moment.
b) Be straight-up about what's dated or flat-out bullshit on behalf of a space as that's what is good for its rep, moreover helping it be less under-funded, misunderstood and mishandled.
c) Gracefully and politely give respect while building respect for one's chops, practice and peers... even though it's 2007 and people are still repeatedly coming to you with topics like metadata and white-on-white on the mind.
d) Own up to that it's our job to be able to handle the tough questions and "the talks" fundamentals, e.g. "SEO vs. advertising (link buys excepted) e.g. no guarantees or entitlements yet this still is all billable services", "common-sense, best practices, and tracking performance vs. hard $ ROI calculations", “client types I don’t takeâ€, “pushing the envelope vs. flat-out violating guidelines†etc.
e) Re. the Star Wars thing, the Hats thing etc., know how to shepherd such. Bring them up only if/as appropriate. Also be ready to catch questions about them and translate them into serious, honest reality after the laughter and buzz glamour moments fade.
f) Embrace that it's not only not rocket-science, but it's also not mystical despite how one might cleverly use the white/black/green majick analogy (WH/BH/paid). A search marketer could be an advertiser or not, but either way s/he is a communicator, moreover a matchmaker between clients' business needs, their customers and prospects, and the engines. A good SEO acts on behalf of his/her client(s) first, but being mindful of the needs of all players with a constant stake.
Managing the thinking process, and along the way being a trusted consul while respecting it may be your time but it's their money, is all part of the job. Taking good care clients is the best way to take care of SEM now and going forward.
I believe it's the same everywhere, it's no better here in Singapore.
Honestly, when I first had my hands on SEO, it was just about playing with the meta tags, keywords density and stuffs. And there were times, I noticed good ranking results and I thought I was good (Actually I am not). It is at this point, I think most will start offering their SEO services and start their small business.
As I get more involved, I begin to realize off-site and off-line "SEO" strategies carry more weight in SEO implementation. A lot of creativty and imagination and some $ needed to make it happen. I hope I am right.
Maybe some SEOs can get together and organize something like a Michael Moore film or the Truth.com commercials, but relating to SEO.
The intelligence can be constructed to dispel any rumors and to educate the public on the truth about SEO.
It could take the form of a Web site, video, etc. The SEOs can use the best in SEO techniques to get the information ranked high when browsers search for "SEO, SEO services, etc."
We did it for Colbert, so I think even more SEO services would be interested in contributing to the "truth" or at least helping the word get out there via links, blog posts, etc.
The family at the Moz has a lot of connections, maybe you guys can be the catalyst...
That would be a great start.......unfortunately not everyone is exposed to the correct media. If they were, this would be happening much less then it currently is!! There is plenty of accurate information out there, but not everyone knows where to look!
My background is in the construction industry, and we have the same issue - a few bad apples cast a pall over the reputation of the entire industry.
SEO is a relatively new industry, but it isn't fundamentally different than any other business. The problems are driven by greed - that of customers, and of shysters. Everyone wants to get rich quick - and easy.
If you do good work, and deal fairly with your customers, then you will rise above the taint of your industry and customers will eventually get in line to pay for your services. Like real SEO it takes time.
It's a problem but, it represents an opportunity to distinguish your business.
I think one of the underlying problems is that meta-tags are simple. They're easy to understand. And people WANT everything to be simple, because that means it's DIY or cheap.
As long as the snake-oil people are out there capitalizing on this wish, it makes it harder for people like us to educate. There is resistance to things that are hard and (potentially) expensive.
It gets back into the whole 'SEO is not rocket science.' Well, maybe not. But it is an art, and to do a systemic, integrated campaign isn't a one-time charge of $59.95. 'Submitting to the engines again' isn't a magic signal that creates trust and traffic.
I see our (my) biggest challenge as getting out there, at non-SEO events, and explaining what it is, and what we do.
At my last job I frequently spoke to journalist, recruitment consultants & actual job advertisers, about SEO, PPC & SMO, what it was, what it could do, and how they could benefit.
I see a subsctantial opportunity to do the same thing even now I have moved to the dark side. As I said on another post, I think that being hones & open about what is & isn't possibl, can be a huge sales tool.
You're never going to get rid of all the snake-oilers, but if we all keep chipping away, and consider education to be one of our key tasks, then it will slowly get better.
I agree. We've got to get out to local chamber of commerce events, biz development seminars, etc. and spread the word. I'd be happy to take the time to present but how does one get his/her foot in the door at these things?
Find out who organises their events and harass them! Offer to do it free of charge, run through the presentation with them, explain what their members will gain, get them drunk.
Ok, maybe that last one is just for Pat....
;)
Call PRSA, AMA, ABA and other associations you would like to present to. (If you cannot find a local contact ask the national office who you should talk to locally)
Ask who chairs their education programs and events. Tell these people about yourself.
Ask if they use an assocation management company and who their account manager is. Association management companies provide the administration and bookeeping for these groups. For example, in Seattle we have Shirley Bishop and Associates. These contacts are pure gold.
These people are always looking for compelling speakers. One of the tricks is that they often have their education agendas set a year in advance, so you have to fit yourself into the needs they have already identified.
Be prepared, be animated and be compelling. If you comport yourself well, after a while orgs will want you to speak and will build events around you.
I know. I used to produce lots of these events.
Tons of great comments on this post. Really touched a nerve with a lot of people, I guess.
Someone who was with a snake oil company before, and left to do it the right way on my own, I have seen it from both sides.
The "snake oil" company actaully wasn't trying to be dishonest, it was just a lack of knowledge at the senior levels (investors). Doesn't make it any better...they still damage the industry's image, but they weren't trying to intentionally midlead their customers.
Not a fun place to be for anyone involved.
I agree with some other comments that there are those bad apples who spoil the bunch in any profession - scams, cheats, frauds, etc. I guess it's more about educating the public about the schemes than it is to educate them about SEM in general.
And let's face it - even for those of us in the biz there aren't a boatload of educational opportunities unless one has the unlimited resources or company expense account to attend conferences or take ridiculously expenses courses, the value of which, no "accreditation body" has ever independently vouched for.
Even those of us in the business have to take our educational opportunties where we can find (and afford) them and we have to ferret out what's good information and what's just plain crap.
I can't exactly aspire to get a PhD in Search Marketing from Columbia or U Dub (although I couldn't afford them either, but maybe I could get a scholarship). By adding some curricula to higher ed institutions, even those who don't go into the biz would at least have a feel for what's legit and what's hocus pocus. Over time, maybe the public could be better informed that way.
I think the major SEs also need to take a more active role in educating the public, once they can learn to stop contradicting themselves and stop dishing up fraudulent results.
If only blogs had existed 90 years ago... Henry Ford might have been commenting about the ignorance of the horse-buying public as to the advantages of the internal combusted perambulator.
Plus ca change...
HAHA - im going to look into them as im constantly looking for fodder for my SEO Parody blog :) I bet theres lots of material in the waiting... I might even compose a poem about SEO and Snake Oil lol.
We can continue to educate the masses as much as possible through our own blogs or websites, but when big media like the NY Times, USA Today, Forbes continue to write uninformed columns that the masses are more likely to see than our writing we are pretty much stuck.
The joys of reporters reporting opinion and sensationalism over fact and informed content.
Sorry for the slow response. I'm in Mexico. :-)
Wikipedia isn't a How To guide, so we don't cover that aspect of SEO in the article, but we certainly link to resources that do. Rand, you and SEOmoz are specifically mentioned in that article and you even have your own Wikipedia page.
Notable SEOs, such as Rand Fishkin, Barry Schwartz, Aaron Wall and Jill Whalen, have studied different approaches to search engine optimization, and have published their opinions in online forums and blogs.[9][10] SEO practitioners may also study patents held by various search engines to gain insight into the algorithms.[11]
Those bracketed numbers are reference links. You're not only mentioned. You're mentioned first in that list. Well, Danny is mentioned first in the article, then Sergei and Larry, and then you. That's not so bad. Anybody who wants to learn more about SEO can look at the references and go straight to those good sources of information. There are three reference links to SEOmoz.org. There's also this inline statement:
A top ranked SEO blog Seomoz.org[40]...
Wow--you're called "top ranked," and that's backed up with a source. Somebody wanting good information should be able to follow that clue.
We have a template over there called {{SoFixIt}}. This generates a message that says something like: instead of complaining, click the edit button and make the necessary changes. Worried about backlash? Go to the article talk page and engage some experienced community members to help you make the necessary changes. You can also register an account and type {{helpme}} on your own talk page to get an experienced mentor.
I believe strongly in promoting SEO Education and learning. The problem that bothers me to some extent and I sure bothers other internet marketers is that it is difficult to find people who's egos are not too big to share information and leanring with others. I am trying to promote SEO in the mainstream educational systems in this country and the world. I believe that the principals are importan for today's marketers.
Just had another prospect asking about their service, sure glad this post was available so they can see that SEO is more than just submitting your site to 10,00000000 sites
Eww, Look what came in my Inbox today, not sure how they got my address:
Exclusive Sale Save 25% on Submission - 3 Days Only
Hello Linda, xxxx is having a submission sale! Don't miss your chance to save 25% on our most popular submission services. Tap in to unlimited free traffic today! xxx Save 25% on Manual Submission to Top Search Engines - 3 Days Only! 25% OFF - Submission to Google, Yahoo!, MSN & more 3 Day Sale! Premium Submit registers your website for inclusion in the top 17 search engines including Yahoo!, MSN, Google, AOL and More. Thousands of customers use Premium Submit to be included in search results. 17 Popular Search Engines Yahoo!, MSN, Google, AOL, Netscape & more Submission by SEO Experts Huge Savings on subscriptions Hurry Only 3 Days to get 25% Off! JUST $14.96 (25% Off!) Promo Code: SUBMITJULY07 Submit to 300+ Search Engines for 25% Off - 3 Days Only! Easy Submit to 300+ Search Engines - Now Only $2.24 Easy Submit is an advanced automated submission service that will register your website for inclusion in over 300 search engines and directories. 300+ search engines Advanced auto submission Quick and easy Huge savings on subscriptions Save 25% on Easy Submit Today ONLY $2.24 (25% Off!) Promo Code: REMOVED CODE Don't miss out on these great submission savings. For more information about our full range of products, please contact customer service or visit xxxx online.
How do companies like this exist? If this company offers a guarantee, do people not call them out on it? Or do they just take the money and run?
Flashy and vague if not wholly meaningless headlines in any given vendor's advertising e.g. "Guaranteed Results - Premium Visibility" are one thing. The fine print re. said vendor's actual legal obligations and associated liabilities as indicated on actual work orders that their clients sign is another matter altogether.
Therefore, post-fulfillment if/when clients are unhappy, contingent on they're having done nothing more or less than what they agreed to in their contract, the vendor needn't take the money and run. Especially if/as they've arranged to get paid before the client had a chance to become unsatisfied, all they need to is ignore their calls and emails and move onto the next sucker.
OK...how about this? I suggest that there is an inherent problem with "educating the public" about SEO...as there isn't one central FREE clearinghouse for plain-spoken information...WITHOUT the need to sign up first or pay money. Yes, there's a ton of stuff out there on blogs...but that would be a Herculean task to find it, wade through it all and decide what applies to one's individual situation. Not being an SEO myself, might I recommend that some group of you have a document/page created cooperatively between you (maybe a limited-access Wiki, maybe not) that sort of definitively addresses many of these SEO myths...and possibly is accompanied by some videos covering some of the same ground? I am NOT suggesting that you give away your trade secrets or preferred techniques or resources. But if "first page" SEO claims are making you apoplectic anyway...why not take a clear, singular, cogent public stance against them? Explain what's behind those claims, and why they are not valid...and worse yet, why the techniques employed could hurt you in the long run. It could be done in a Q&A format, as a FAQ or whatever. And this could be something that ALL major, credible SEOs would link to as a valid introduction to the topic. It would NOT have any direct advertising so as to avoid mixed motives...although those who have contributed (a closed group) could have their companies listed down the side. And regarding the videos or series of videos...there should be no one SEO personality face on them...again, to avoid the whole charge of mixed motives. If someone wants to go this route, and organize it, I'd be happy to kick in the pro voiceover for the videos for free (https://professionalvoicetalent.com for my demos). I just think that it's easy to bemoan the lack of a clear public perception on the subject...but until there's a SINGLE good, FREE resource where you can ALL point people to help them work through some of these issues before deciding whether or not to do it themselves, hire one of the very-long-tail fly-by-nighters, or hire you guys...I think it's hard to blame folks for not having learned the basic issues involved. Just my two cents' worth.
An SEO self-help Wiki could be a reasonable project. Edit priveleges could be restricted to qualified experts. I think it would be worth a link from the main Wikipedia SEO article. Again, Wikipedia articles don't go into "how to" territory, so that's an opportunity for others. I'd be willing to do this as a joint venture with one or more other people.
Depending on the turnaround requirements, timing and workload I might be able to pitch in on the narrations end as well. My voiceover site is scottreyns.com.
I hear your cry, in my country even search marketers have to be educated. Many of them thinks that SEM = PPC, they don't know that PPC is only a part of SEM.
Man Rand, you are lucky that you live USA and work in this SEO focused city. You should see how the SEO Market is developing in Germany. You would laught to dead if you could have a overview.
These highflyers will allways exist and their clients will run away from them as soon as one week is. So I don´t worry about them. Explaining to the clients what SEO really is maybe much harder. I think references say a lot and all the others will handle with some foolish internet marketing tricks, some successful, some not.
You should write your story how you built your image and how hard this way was. I think all the "foreigners" will thank you a lot off such a share.
The general public don't seem to be able to differentiate proper SEO from the Snake Oil Salesmen, and I think this has a lot to do with price.
Although everyone knows that you generally get what you pay for, some people will always insist on going for the cheapest option available and since good SEO costs money, it leaves there plenty of room for crappy SEOs with no real knowledge other than a few pieces of software and an "SEO For Dummies" book as their bible.
I think that if there was some governing body that oversaw the SEO industry (not unlike what SEOmoz does or many of the reputable forums) and if you wish to provide SEO services, you need to be a member of such a community.
There would need to be a reasonable level of PR done to educate the public that such a governing body exists, but just like SEO buzz words like "PageRank" and "MetaTags" have filtered down to the most non-technical people, so will the belief that unless you use an accredited SEOmoz member to do your SEO work you're not getting proper SEO.
This is a grand suggestion and something that would take a lot of time and effort to establish (or at least make people aware of), but if SEOmoz can gain a million links, then I'm sure it'd be up for the challenge...
What does everyone else think?
"there is no such thing as a 100% educated"
Your right…This industry grows and changes at a fast pace, and there may always be a relative distance between the uneducated and those in the know. This isn’t a bad thing though, because without that distance there wouldn’t be the need for “experts”.
"learning from other customers bad experiences"
Absolutely! There will always be customers who suffer bad experiences as the result of poor SEO practices, but it’s these unfortunate SEO victims who offer a clear distinction as to what's right and wrong with the industry.
-ripoffreport.com would certainly serve its purpose.
I've found that more and more people are becoming aware of Search Marketing/SEO, but I would agree with the general consensus here that most people don't have a clue.
I usually try to look at this kind of stuff filosophically and not be bothered too much by these practices (maybe this also has to do with the whole Caribbean island thing, but nonetheless).
Most of our local 'competitors' build websites (our core business is design) that make even my mother cry with shame, but still they have business. Some of those 'competitors' are doing pretty good. We even get questions sometimes about why we don't make websites like them...
Our theory is that clients get the design company that they want at that point. The client's needs are governed by their level of education. They get their crappy design and are happy with it until they learn where it fails horribly. At that point they come to us for a proper website. Like Identity says above "they are going to fall and crash" and hopefully they learn from this.
The same goes with these cringeworthy 'SEOs' Rand describes. People try to take the easy route and after a while they crash and burn. Real SEOs will then need to be there to pick up the pieces and show them what it can really do for the client's company. That is, if the client hasn't decided that all SEOs are evil leeches. If that happens then that clients has the wrong frameset anyway and you probably don't want him/her as your client.
The industry also needs to stop shooting itself in the foot and start refusing to give them ad space on "authoritative" sites. Without even looking at it right now, I know that searchengineguide.com is allowing these snake oil salesmen to pitch their wares. I only pick on that site because it is the first to come to mind, but I'm sure a simple search could turn up a lot more.
Beautiful Post! You drove that nail with one whack.
Who applies the link condoms?
Im not sure who applies the link condoms, but this guy sure could use one. This company is an ideal candidate for link baiting. $10 says they will now receive multiple proposals for SMM from this post :)
With the money they make, they probably have a secratary just for link condoms. No pun intended.
I could be guessing here, so someone correct me if I'm way off base, but maybe, JUST MAYBE, 'ol rand could be forcing himself into physical labor by adding 'rel=nofollow' at the end of the link code.
Again... just guessing.
Christ Rand, could you have covered more ground in one post?
Miriam at Solas Web Design made asimilar post about top-ranking Bay Areas SEOs recently. And I made my own comments about Wikipedia yesterday. That post took a lot of time because the deeper you look into Wikipedia the darker it gets. That site is bad news for more than just SEOs - we just happen to be the first to really see it because of Google's odd love for them.
Good to see interest in meta tags and submission services is dropping. Maybe we are being a bit more effective than we thought?
Perhaps.
On the other hand, while SEO remains very high on client-side marketers' for ROI, spending on SEO vendors reportedly slowed a lot last year in favor of investing on internal resources (ref. MarketingSherpa Search Marketing Benchmark Survey 08/06), so Rand's Google Trends findings could be symptomatic thereof.
That's kust a cool-ass avatar!
But even if you are right about the trend wouldn't that mean that education is getting out about those things? If internal departments are losing interest I still see that as a good sign.
Or am I missing something?
Cheers mate.
I think the study was implying that it's more about marketers wanting to DIY more, partially from some having been burned by 3rd-party charlatans. Also, the study indicated that spending on SEO vendors didn't stop growing last year, it just hadn't grown year-over-year by 2x as it has in '04 to '05.
So it's not like interest has waned or that it's not getting taken more seriously. My take is yes in ways the trend is good, as part of it probably means buyers are increasingly fanning out the shake from the prime buds as they learn more about shopping carefully and getting what they're paying for (in not just $ but in doing their homework).
Like with the processing of... tea leaves. :)
"SEO is not rocket science."
You said it. Too many (not all) corporate decision makers take this angle as well. They actually believe two hours a week from the summer intern will adequately handle the company's SEO objectives. It's hard to drive home the point that getting good results is a continuously daunting 40+ hours a week job. I just goes back to that "do it all in two weeks" mentality.
This usually results in hiring a "snake oiler" for cheap quick results or simply being offered an anemic amount of resources.
My view? SEO is only not rocket science if you understand it. Like anything, if you don't know it, then it IS rocket science.
Have to agree with you there. When explaining some basic aspects about optimising a site to clients they look as if i'm talking another language (and thats when trying to explain it very simply...). It seems easy to "us", because its what we do. To someone who has a 5 page static website (and probably still has a @hotmail.com business email address) it can be quite hard to "get" straight away.
Another problem i've come across is people believing SEO is bad (in much the same way black hat seo is treated, but for all kinds (inc white hat)). I guess to someone who doesn't have much to do with web sites may think its hacking google or something along those lines ;p
Perhaps as dangerous as all of the snakeoil salesman and scammers...
our biggest enemy is our own understanding & familiarity, or more to the point, our assumption of understanding in others and our inability to teach and explain what we take for granted.
The pitfall of being an expert - sometimes, especially when you surround yourself with other experts, you forget that the general population aren't.
Ha. I get the same thing. I am an in house SEO/Online Marketer and most of my fellow employees have very limited knowledge of what I do. In fact most have limited knowledge of the Internet and computers in general. When we have meetings and I am discussing the status of my projects they look at me like I am from a different planet. Luckily our senior management is either fairly knowledgable or trust me enough to let me do my thing.
It was especially weird coming here from an SEM agancy where everyone was very well versed with technology and Internet related themes.
test
I don't really see the point in trying to educate the general public about SEO. In a field that is in constant flux, it is impossible to keep things up to date. What was true today may be completely wrong tomorrow morning when Google decides to change policies. So even the best intentioned advice can seem like a rip-off base on one update.
As SEOs we are paid to employ current best practices and we're retained to stay on top of the changes. That's our job.
The truth is that the client who wants a quick fix would not make a good client over the long run and he'll find a way to get ripped off no matter what we do. So let the ignorant masses remain ignorant. It's what they do best.
We should just focus on our own clients and businesses. I deal with people that have been ripped off by "SEOs" every week. Or maybe we should call them FSEOs. The F is for Faux. I feel bad for them but in many cases, they got ripped off because of their own greed. Those who pay attention to life know that there is no quick fix or easy road for 99% of people. Why should search rankings be any different?
And for those that think the Google PHD's can't be fooled, you're wrong. Google is just a machine. PHDs are just people. Neither are gods and they are both fallible and vulnerable to manipulation. See Rand's post about black hat SEO if you have any doubts.
I'm not sure the everflux of our situation is a reason to not inform the public. It might be even more reason. There's another industry that actually sees more change in a day than we do in a month (well, usually) - politics!
If those idiots can get the word out about their BS, I'm sure we can come up with *something*.
I'm not talking (and I doubt Rand is either) about trying to educate the general public about SEO. I'm talking (and again, big assumption here, stop me if I'm wrong, so is Rand) is how do we make potential clients see that there is no quick fix, and that the sort of examples he mentions are sh*te?
If you're a self-employed SEO, making lost of bucks, then no - it isn't a problem. But if you work agency side, it's a bloody massive problem.
And that's where the education comes in - you're not trying to explain to them every factor in the current thinking on SEO; more the best practice principles, and latest trends. That way you prove your worth, and highlight the fact that you're honest.
I think blogs are great educational tools. When potential clients view your site they will understand that your approach is slow and steady, honest and gimick-free. If they want a quick-fix they really aren't your client anyway.
SEOmoz is a good example of that: Yes we will deliver results. Yes it does take time. No there are not any shortcuts that are worth doing because of the risk.
Rinse, repeat.
...and milage may vary
I don't envy anyone that has to work agency side. Explaining something to your boss is probably harder than to the client.
The thing is that if the client doesn't get it, no amount of persuasion will really change their mind. Those are the types of clients that are not worth dealing with. My only advice, if you have no choice but to work with them, is to clearly outline what they want in writing and tell them the potential consequences (also in writing). That way you can proceed with their meta tags and whatever they want and when it doesn't work, you can point to the written document and warnings and then get down to the real work. Usually takes about 3 months for them to come around.
I quite agree - roll on the day when we can pick & choose clients!
Very solid post. I have people ask me why I'm not usting white links / keywords on a white background. Makes me cringe.
"After 10 years of attempting to educate the outside world, is it time to give up the game"
Careful there. I haven't quite met any SEO pro that physically educates the public on anything. Just lots of gray-line material, where the user makes their best guess in an 'appropriate' direction.
Not that I'm complaining, as every seo pro has bills too, and giving away the secret recipe would only turn their services into a $19.95 Walmart bundle package.
You've worked real hard and built a strong reputable business. Kudo's. You deserve the gold coin. But SEO professionals should tread lightly when expressing what they have and have not done. You're playing with your own credibility.
I Like That - "Link Condom" new one on me....
BTW Rand I voted for you as the Nicest Bloke In SEO on SEO Blokes - well I did speak to you once.
Now can I have a link without the condom???? www.idoseo.com
:)
No, but you get a thanks from one of the blokes!
I think people are being a bit harsh with the thumb downs on davy - can't a guy make a joke?!