This post is breaking format with tradition here at SEOmoz, but I think a good shaking up of the status quo is in order. I'm going to simply rant, in rough paragraph form, about 7 issues in the search world. I'm going to be generally more expressive, less forgiving and pull fewer punches (for which I fully expect to take some heat).
WebMasterWorld and Cloaking
I think that Matt Cutts' post was almost certainly a "shot across the bough" to Brett. I'd be surprised if Google didn't take some action against the domain in the near future - to make an example of them? What I would like to see is complete fairness across the spectrum - if you do it to Brett, Google, you've got to take folks like the NY Times and Nike to task as well. Either there are exceptions or there aren't - you can't have your anti-SEO cake and eat it too (well, actually, you can, but it's not particularly friendly). If I were Google, I'd probably leave things the way they are; the system isn't broken, and a few folks are getting "special" treatment, but the user experience is pretty reasonable. Danny has all the details.
Mobile Content
Mobile users aren't like people sitting at their desktops or laptops. They're not there to dive deep into content (though I do admit to browsing Reddit on my mobile while Mystery Guest is shopping sometimes). Mobile is about action - determining where you are, where to go next, getting answers to questions or fulfilling an immediate need. Sure, that need might be what three movies John Cusack starred in with his sister, or how late the zoo is open or what stores are having a sale on shoes right now, but it's not about browsing celebrity gossip (for most people). I think there's going to be some clear winners who play the content and UI game right for mobile and become the "Google" of that market.
Danny and SES
Honestly, I don't know how many of the speakers and heavy participants will continue to attend the SES shows once Danny's no longer a part of them? Nearly every 15+ minute conversation I have with someone in the search world touches on this topic, and almost everyone has the same mindset - wait and see what Danny does. If SMX is successful and that brand manages to attract the same level of press and attendees, I think we'll see a very quick migration.
The Cult of Personality
Is the search marketing world too cliquey? Are the well known names creating a level of exclusivity that hurts the industry or its image? No. I think 99.99% of people really don't follow search on a personal or gossip-type level. For most, this is a job - a fun job - but still just a job. I've always been a fanboy to the big names in SEO, and I expect I'll be doing it for a few more years to come; I can't help but idolize some of these people. But, I'd disagree when folks say that search marketers make themselves unapproachable - with the exception of a couple people, almost everyone in search is someone you can walk up to, introduce yourself, shoot the breeze about search and get an invite to dinner.
Death of Social Media
Is Digg a fad? Sure it is, but I don't think you can't put Pandora back in the box. Now that the web has been exposed to the power of collective intelligence and user-generated content, there's no way that we'll go back to the top-down, editorially-controlled content of Web 1.0. Recommendations are going to get better, social portals are going to improve and our ability to interact will only grow. Predicting that social media on the web will die is like predicting that the web itself isn't a valuable platform in the long term.
Shawn Hogan and Digitalpoint
When Digitalpoint forums launched as an SEOChat alternative, I don't think anyone could have predicted their success. Today, DP is one of the most popular on the web overall and still the fastest growing forum in the webmaster arena. The signal to noise ratio sucks, but there's enough quality and a large enough group of contributors that it easily overcomes this singular weakness. Bravo, Shawn - you've built something amazing.
AdSense & Contextual Ads
I read a study about how visitors exposed to a banner ad for a particular car were 20% more likely to buy that car in the next 6 weeks than their non-exposed peers. Banner ads apparently work (if anyone finds that link, please let us know). Direct e-commerce models work, as do Freemium models and pay-for-content sites. There are a lot of creative ways to monetize and, despite seeing evidence of contextual ads making people a fortune (especially Google), I still think it's a crappy way to do business. In my mind, you're basically relying on the ignorance of your surfing audience - the best ads are those that don't look like ads, that fool users into clicking them. Users don't "seek out" contextual ads, nor are they "exposed" to them for branding the way banner ads (or billboards on the highway for that matter) operate. They click them because they think they'll get the content they want "after the jump" and 9 times out of 10, they're dissapointed (probably even higher than that). We've run some AdSense campaigns with clients (or gotten to see the results), and while the occasional campaign will bring a positive ROI, the conversion numbers are incredibly low and the abandonment rates are staggering (even on sites that convert search visitors phenomenally well). I'm not saying you can't have success with contextual, I'm just saying that I, personally, don't buy into the logic behind it.
OK. Rants over - time to take my licks :) BTW - Can't wait to tell you all how Rebecca's first speaking gig goes tomorrow. I plan to hold up hilarious signs from the back of the room to attempt to distract her.
I hear a lot of people complaining about adsense and ROI... Here are two things to keep in mind...
1) Google gives you lots of tools to measure the effectivenss of your adwords spend when it is sent out to adsense sites. Use them to their full capabilities. Adwords conversion tools and Google analytics are the specific tools. Learn about them if you don't use them.
2) If you go into the site targeted area of your adwords account you can bid by CPM on having your ads shown on specific websites and sometimes bid on specific page placements - and there are some great URLs that you can buy ads on for 25 cents/CPM. If you are a clever ad writer who can invite the click you can get an awful lot of traffic for a very low flat cost.
In my opinion lots of the complaints being made would dry up if people educated themselves about these tools and used them to spend their money wisely - instead of just spending their money.
Solid points, EGOL. I suspect the site exclusion tool is an under-utilized feature.
Generally speaking, I recommend maxing out search marketing budget on pure search (doesn't matter if it's allocated to SEO or PPC as long as the ROI is good) and then using any remaining funds for contextual advertising. Many people don't seem to understand that contextual advertising is fundamentally different from search engine advertising. Just because Google and Yahoo! make it easy to re-purpose the same ad text and same keywords for both, doesn't mean it's a good idea.
BTW, I'll also add that lately I've been a bit irritated with both Google and Yahoo! regarding "pure" search PPC advertising. On Google, unless you opt out of both the Search network and the Content network, you don't have "pure" search engine advertising. Yeah, I'm talking about parked domains on the Search network. This distribution fraud (many call it syndication fraud) is, IMHO, a bigger problem for PPC advertisers than click fraud. How's that for a rant? ;-)
Although there are many days where I curse the fickle nature of the PPC gods, we often forget just how transparent AdWords is relative to traditional marketing. What other form of marketing allows you to, on one screen, see exactly what you've spent, how many impressions it bought, and what your conversion and ROI were? On top of that, what other medium allows you to make virtually instant changes to your ads at little or no additional cost? PPC isn't perfect, and the house always wins, but it's far and away more progressive than anything that Madison Avenue has to offer.
Thank you EGOL!! I have several campaigns that have outstanding ROI using content match on AdWords, but I also have accounts that do poorly using contextual advertising. Use the tools - it's all about measurements, "it's all about the information, Marty".
I've taken a step back from my viewpoint on SEO celebrities recently. I have a theory which I'm going to test at SES NY.
In the UK, smiling at someone is an initiation of conversation. Smiling back is saying "Hi, nice to meet you although can't speak now" and not responding with a smile or greeting is saying "I don't know who you are and certainly don't want to speak to you". Up until now I've been using the smile when meeting new people at conferences and it just doesn't work with Americans. People who I thought were previously blanking me, I later discover are the nicest of people. So next conference I'm going to be a loud mouthed git and say hello to everyone verbally :o)
Yeh, you really have to do that. It's a different culture. Just perk up and be loud :)
Works for me.
From my experience in the States, a "Hi, how are you?" often means the same thing (or something like "Yes, lovely day indeed... See ya."). At least that's what I've noticed in Los Angeles.
I love you rand. That was a rant? Damn it... G is so lucky if that is rand pissed off. Your "rant" seemed like someone straight shooting his opinions. One day you'll be pissed off enough to blog an expletive that doesn't start with d or h - and at that point, rand will achieve his rantdom. :P
>>> Is the search marketing world too cliquey?
I'd say something on that... but I like my posting rights here at randworld and I'd like to not have it disabled for a Rae style rant ensuing. ;-)
Aww... I was hoping for an epic tirade of abuse against life, the universe and everything.
And the answer isn't www.42.com
I think we're going to see the fall of "death star" social media sites that are so huge, their own gravity causes them to implode; and instead we'll see the rise of niche sites, who have a strong focus and keep their identity stationary.
Absolutely.
It only makes sense... those sites are built on the user experience and feeling a part of the community.
But what happens when that community grows beyond feeling like a community? Then you feel a part of the establishment, which many will rebel from on principle alone.
We'll see more long-tail influences all over the place and social media is no exception.
What may be interesting is whether some unifying connection brings all of them together, yet allows the autonomy and character of each community to go as it sees fit... kind of a United Nations of Social Media.
Well, lets take Facebook as an example. The reason they grew so fast was because unlike joining MySpace where you're lumped in with EVERYONE, on Facebook you're part of JUST your college. It made it feel like Facebook was just for your college -- despite the fact the same thing was going on at virtually every single college in the nation.
Now that facebook has opened its doors to (almost) everyone, I'd expect that localized feeling to diminish. Facebook still keeps it a little bit, but the feeling definitly isn't as strong.
Except for one thing - the people using myspace (teens mostly) don't give a stuff about the community side. The name of the game is narcissism - having as many friends as possible, and getting people to comment on your pictures, saying you're hot.
The community, such as it is, has no theme. It's not about information, it's about bragging rights.
And for that, it's perfect.
Talk about a generation that will have no grounded sense of self-worth... and talk about a heavy wake up call some day when they hit the wall of reality.
"friendship" the commodity of the new generation
One of the things I notice with community sites, even blogs, is that there's a critical mass of activity to capture my interest. If no one is participating and commenting, I probably won't either, but if there are too many comments or the community is a bunch of one-time users, I feel lost in the fray and go somewhere else. Ultimately, I think you're right that the niche sites and micro-communities will have more staying power.
Agree wholehartedly!
Can't remember where I read it, but some study stated that if a community/forum has more than 1000 active member, the community feeling dissapears.
If you look at the DP, the number of Active Members are 22,675, meaning its about 22 times the size it should be to keep the community feeling.
But I must also say that I visit DP alot, but only to find great deals on websites/domains/scripts/content/links/etc. Don't even visit the Search Engine or Marketing section, way too much noise.
<edit>
It was probably related to the Dunbar Numbers, see www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/03/the_dunbar_numb.html for more details and a link to the original paper.
They have calculated that the most online groups consists of 60 active users.
If you take the example of DP again, active members=22674, online currently active users=1265, you'll notice that around 5.5% of the members are currently active.
So if a forum/community has 1000 active members that means that 55 members are active at any point.
Ant that number is about the same as the 60 active users that belongs to most online groups.
I even noticed that those numbers were true for me a while back at the place alot of us began, SC. When it became big, the community feeling was gone as well. And those numbers were about right when I calculated them.
</edit>
<edit2>
Just noticed that if an URL is too long, the last part of it doesn't show in the comments. It doesn't go to the next line, it just stops. Might be a bug??
</edit2>
Just a small nitpick - "bough" is a tree branch, "bow" is the front of a ship. Unless you meant it as a pun, and Brett is a tree farmer in his spare time. In that case, well played!
Oh no, you've gotten me in to rant mode... Here we go!
1) WMW and Cloaking...
One rule for the masses anyone? Personally, I think they've been overgenerous. I wouldn't have warned them, I'd have just come down on them like a ton of bricks. They know what they're doing, and they can't pull an "Enron"(please gov, we didn't know what they wer edoing... I'm just the guy at the top)... Ban the buggers and let them sort themselves after. We all have to play by the rules, but the big boys don't? Piffle.
2) Mobile Content
Too true. The other thing is mobile is all about speed. Mobile is about communication fast. Txt messages, good ole' fashioned speaking? Multimedia messaging has never taken off. WAP never took off. And mobile content isn't going to be content on phones as we know them. If I had something like an iPhone with a keyboard, like the Samsung F700 for instance, I'd be considering it. Phones, true web browsing... They all become viable options.
But not until you've got what is essentially the world's smallest laptop in your hands.
3) Danny and SES
Why does everyone follow this guy like a dog missing it's master's leg? For crying out loud, sure the guy's the Godfather of our industry, but let's get some perspective here... He's still human. He's not God. Why not go to the online marketing conference that suits what you want to get out of it most, rather than "Going where the Sullivan is"?
4) Cult of Personality
See above, regarding the human bit. Everyone's still just a person. We all wipe our own arses, wash laundry and all that jazz. Talk to the people you respect/admire. They aren't going to call down lightning on your ass for being disrespectful.
5) Shawn and DP
Actually, the signal to noise ratio is the sole reason I'm not on there much. There's just better forums out there, if you're after more advanced stuff. Plus, if you get a lot of newbies together in one place, and ask them to review something (like advanced website code, or top end photoshopping) you'll get lots of "oohs" and "ahhs" but not much valuable info. Signal/noise. It's too much of the latter for me I'm afraid.
6) Adsense...
Ooooh don't get me start. MFA is theft. It's taking people's money and passing a customer to their page, when they probably didn't want to go there. You're making it harder, and taking the rewards.
If you want to make money from adsense, use the search box. Sure it gives less, but hey, I don't care. If you're online to make money, there's more efficient, easier, more rewarding, better paying methods.
7) The Cult of Apple
Sure, it isn't SEO/SEM related, but I don't care. Can people stop bashing Apple/Mac/Windows already? They're all flawed. And Ubuntu isn't there yet either. When I can install it and never have to play around to get something to work, it'll be awesome. Hopefully 7.04 FF will be that release. But I'm guessing it won't be.
**Disclaimer: I use windows with parts of Aston and Windowblinds, and Ubuntu myself.
8) Ignorance Mob Rule
Yahoo answers is a great idea in theory. Except that most of the answers on it are lousy, because most of the people using it are kids and morons. If I ask a question on the difference between roots and screw superchargers, I don't want some idiot posting about how great his clapped out vauxhall nova is, or some idiot giving me information that's vague, wrong and opinionated. I want an actual solid answer.
I'll climb off the soapbox now for a while...
BTW, anyone who likes a good rant, read Is It Just Me, Or Is Everything Shit? It's awesome!
1) WMW and Cloaking...
Anytime 'special' rules are created for one company or one person, it's a bad thing.
Build your algorithm, tweak away, and let it do it's job... fairly, to everyone.
SES & Danny
If the majority of 'the names' follow Danny, and leave SES, then that gives SES the opportunity to reinvent itself. After all, one of the complaints that people have about SES is that it does get a little stale, with the same presenters presenting the same topics from one conference to the next (I know Danny does mix it up and add new sessions in, dropping others, but that's the complaing I've heard from people).
Rebecca & Speaking
Rand, does this mean that you get to put the mini-comic together for that event? ;)
Stupid question, but if social media is on the way out, could the MMORPG (Multi-Mass Online Roleplaying Gamer) market be the reasonable subsititute?
I mean, the advantage is there, you have a crap load of people converging on a server getting together for more than just online hook-ups, critiqing poetry and the like, and those people usually are in the market for someting on and offline. I'm surprised Blizzard Entertainment and all these other game companies haven't signed a deal with Facebook, Myspace or whoever. But then again, seeing a big blinking neon sign that says "Eat at Joe's" would ruin the otherwise faux medieval experience of the fantasy genre.
Just my two cents.
Perhaps the next step in social media is to explore the territory that's now controlled by the likes of Second Life and WOW. An virtual-reality Reddit and Facebook where your avatar moves from profile to profile and story to story? Clicking on ads is akin to walking into a store?
I've never played a game like Second Life, but I've wondered recently if one could set up a virtual shop that's a duplicate of their real life site or brick and mortar and somehow manage to carry people from their brand in the game to their brand outside the game.
I'm not familiar at all with how the game is played so I don't really know if something like this is possible or not, bit the thought popped into my head after reading an article about the game a couple of weeks ago.
1) Second Life Currency can easily be traded in for USD
2) Large corporations like Nike are already in Second Life branding and selling virtual verisons of their products.
Thanks for the info.
I thought I'd read something about being able to exchange Second Life currency for USD. The article I read not too long ago might have been about the possibility of having your virtual earnings through Second Life taxed because it could be easily traded for real currency.
I wasn't sure if companies were selling virtual versions of their products, but I should have realized they would be.
Do you know if anyone is making a full time living selling solely through the game. If not now I would imagine it won't be long.
You asked " Is the search marketing world too cliquey?"
Perhaps - I've been reading this blog for a little while and have no idea who "Danny" and "Brett" are.
But it's almost certainly less cliquey than my usual hangouts, which are the worlds of accessibility and web standards ... ;-)
Danny - Danny Sullivan, runs Search Engine Land and Daggle. Brett - Brett Tabke, owner of WebmasterWorld
I have to disagree about contextual ads relying on users ignorance. Yes, there is that ignorance/novelty effect that still lingers around, but as users get smarter about the ads, it will be less of a factor. I think it has been happening already - that's why the effectiveness of contextual ads has been declining.
I think once that is out of the way, an ad is an ad in the eyes of a user, be it a banner or a text ad - they both get ignored usually. But while a banner "exposes" a user to its message (often too forsefully), a text ad does not really annoy and is not "pushed" onto you. Instead, it's a sort of a "pull" tactic, if you will: it's convenient to ignore, but it's there for you if you're interested. That's a much better model, in my opinion.
I do agree with you that too often a click on an ad does not give you the content you want. That is killing the great unintrusive nature of contextual ads, mostly due to the plethora of MFA and poorly run/designed campaigns (see EGOL's comment above). What a pitty, if these two problems could be eliminated, the text ads would really shine.
But it's just me ranting. I'll get off the soapbox now.
Re: "I read a study about how visitors exposed to a banner ad for a particular car were 20% more likely to buy that car in the next 6 weeks than their non-exposed peers."
I've never see that study, but this one may be of interest:
“Consumers exposed to both display and search advertising converted at a 22% higher rate than those using search alone, according to a study from the Atlas Institute. Atlas also found that search-click-only users converted at a rate 3.3 times higher than the display-click-only group. Combined display and search clicks converted at a rate 4 times higher than display click only.” See the full PDF: The Combined Impact of Search and Display Advertising
And BTW: As someone who goes on a yearly rant, I tell ya Rand - that is no rant! I'll have to send ya my copy of "That Girl From Marketing's Guide to Getting Up on your Soap Box." - LOL!!!
This is a very late comment. I was looking at something at Digital Point. 1/3 of the total volume of threads and posts are all in the business section and virtually all of these are about buying, selling, and trading services/sites/links etc. It is a huge active sprawling market place.
Subtract that volume of traffic....and it is still a very large very noisy forum.......just not as large. But cripes....watch the traffic and volume of activity in their market place. It is active!!!!!!!
The BBC website has been pretty keen on keeping up with the MMO trend for quite a while, especially with Brian Thompson's Blog on the Entertainment/Technology site (I THINK that's his name). This is an article by Darren Waters out of San Fran for the BBC. Enjoy
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6431207.stm
I think people are people. They may be the heads of our industry, they still have jobs, still do the same stuff as us (all be it at a bit higher level), but they are pretty approachable.
Personally, I have a Samsung Blackjack. 90% of its use on the web is using Google Maps for local listings, especially when travelling. The other 10% is checking sports scores.
With Danny and SES on a course to compete, I think a lot of people will go to which one suits their needs best. I wouldn't be suprised if you get a split in personalities at each event, followed by a price drop to compete for attendees. Time will tell on this one.
Rant away Rand, rant away.
Re: contextual ads, haven't you heard? Bidding up on keywords is out, and site optimization is in. If you want to stop seeing high abandonment rates, instead of just giving up on AdWords, why not figure out what would make more users stay/convert? For example, Google is beta testing a free tool right now that helps you do just that: www.google.com/websiteoptimizer
Mobile Media
I think it's hard to guess right now just how users will behave on mobile devices in the next 3-5 years. Kids are already moving to it quicker than the internet itself, and the devices themselves keep expanding their abilities. I think action will be replaced with targetted browsing very soon.
WebMasterWorld and Cloaking
I don't even bother clicking on their results in the SERPs since 99% of the time all I get is the pay to play subscription page. But I have to agree with the other sentiments here that the rules should be applied across the board... unless Google wants to ever look like they are on the take or giving preferential treatment.
Mobile Content
Totally. The initial players will try to dress-up what they already have for mobile, kind of like kids playing dress-up with their parents clothes... big and sloppy, ill-fitting and clunky. The real leaders are the ones that focus on the who, how, and why of mobile and cater to that directly.
AdSense & Contextual Ads
There may be value there, but there is so much noise. It is a tool that can be used for good or bad, but most of what we end up seeing is MFA sites and deceptive practices. But either way it is used, it brings in Google a lot of money. I think they will continue to try to keep people to work within the boundaries, but they also allow a pretty wide playing field. Certainly using them for your own advertising requires a very careful and attentive approach.
I'm going to disagree (a little bit) about mobile content. When I lived in DC, I used the web feature on my phone all the time. On the metro, waiting for a friend, etc. I could check the news, sports scores, and yes, even celebrity gossip.
When I moved back to NC, I used it less. Much less. So much so I canceled the service. (though admittedly, part of it was the limited sites i could access).
So I think when we're talking about mobile content, we have to take into consideration demographics, including (especially?) geographic ones.
Just a quick one, I think we could do with defining what we mean when we're talking about mobile content. Are we talking about websites and online material only, or are we talking in the broader sense of things that are potentially consumable/in the pipeline which will be consumed via mobile technologies - downloadable films, music and tv etc...
In the case of the former, it'll grow, but slowly. Reason? People will need different and better phones, like the new F700 from Samsung or the iPhone, before they'll really take off (to my mind). Also, bear in mind that how things are in the States isn't how they are elsewhere in the world. It'll be 3 years after you guys get everything in place before it kicks off in Europe. And they've already got it in some places (read ultra-tech countries in the East).
In the case of the latter, again, it needs different tech. Bigger screens, better download times/rates, bigger hard drives...
Just my two cents...
I think you'll probably be right on with most of your predictions, except for the US/Europe timeframe. As far as mobile technology, Europe has always been a bit further ahead than the US. I don't think mobile content will be any exception.
Nokia actually just launched their ad network in Europe a few days ago, and listening to a mobile advertising panel at Ad Tech, is something a lot of the European carriers have been testing for a while. The big question as far as they're concerned seems to be how much advertising people will deal with for free/subsidized content, how to make advertisements as relevant as possible so that they aren't seen as being overly intrusive.
If advertisers are already lining up, I'm sure content delivery won't be a problem. The people who are in line to make a killing from mobile once it gains massive appeal are probably local sites though. For the marketers who focus on local search, developing a mobile site at the same time will be a million dollar payoff.
It will be interesting to see what effect mobile browsing habits have on internet sites.
As someone who lives over here, we're sadly lacking in a lot of ways. I'm exactly the kind of person that'd be game for mobile content, as are a lot of my friends and social circle (tech savvy, high dispolsable income...)
But none of us do. The platform just isn't capable of it yet. Mobile screens are too small, and there's no good interactive UI on them yet. I stand by it needing a new generation of mobile devices before it'll truly take off.
As far as rich mobile content (video, high resolution images, games to match the quality of handheld systems) it will be a few years before a wide range of people get comfortable with spending $4-500 for a phone with all of the latest capabilities. Not to mention, it will take a while for people to trust certain mobile activities - shopping, entering credit card information, personal details, etc.
There's still content now though. Probably 90% of phones are capable of receiving text message and I'm sure a good portion are able to browse the web in some way. There will always be limitations to what can be done on a phone vs. PC. But if you look at what the internet started as, and keep that progression in mind, you'll probably see something similar in mobile. Think about it, before the internet we're on today, online marketing was primarily email (SMS) and sites were basic links and fairly concise information (mobile browsing). Compared to what the internet is now, you may think mobile content is basic, but it's almost the same place where the internet started.
Verizon is a US carrier with a lot of it's own technology, so I'll give them an edge, but at large, there seems to be more mobile content from operators and 3rd party companies in Europe (UK and France specifically).
Nathania I agree with you. I think it's early to know how people will be using mobile devices and while I understand Rand's point about mobile users being more active and looking to fill an immediate need, I think different people still use mibile devices in different ways.
For example I've used my phone in much the same way I think you might have on the metro. I've been using my phone to keep up with blogs when I find myself waiting on someone or something. My phone is replacing the books I used to carry with me.
I still don't watch video on my phone and not sure I will, but the phone companies sure think people will and they seem to be right. If that's the case then shouldn't companies like YouTube make sure their sites work well over mobile devices.
How about sites selling things like ringtones or screensavers? If those sites aren't optimized for mobile I'd suggest their losing a lot of potential sales.
We're still very early in the mobile space and I'm not sure anyone has a handle yet on how people will be using mobile devices to view online content.
My former company provided services for the tradeshow industry, and I can tell you this: put any industry group in a room together, and they'll seem cliquey. SEOs love what they do and they love to talk shop; to an outsider, that may seem cliquey, but it's just human nature.
Personally, I've been amazed at how friendly the SEO community has been. Although I've been in web development full-time for a decade, my trip to SES Chicago last year was my first real foray into the SEO/SEM world, and it was easily one of the best conferences I've ever attended. People were friendly and helpful, and, post-show, the community, especially SEOmoz, has been extremely welcoming to me. Sure, there are personalities, but that's part of the fun.
SEOmoz should capitalize on all of its growing YOUmozer's at the next conference and ship out shirts or pins to the top 100 members to wear at the event. Let's be honest here, there's a fine line between cliquey and community.
Yesterday I'd have said 'top 101 users' but I see I've broken into the top 100 so I'm happy with that.
W (#99)
PS good luck with the talk Rebecca - get security to throw out the bearded guy at the back if he heckles.
Great idea! I'd wear it even outside of a conference. :)
Maybe its just the name, but I want to start 'cliqueopedia' to help define clique segments in anything, from SEO to your local high school.
Just a little SEOmoz get-together or lunch at each event might be fun, just to put faces to names. We could be nice and not even make Rand foot the bill :)
You expect heat for... what? I agree with SugarRae. Even "Mad Rand" is a pro.
I also agree with you on pretty much every point. Especially around social media. SM tech will just blend into mainstream sites more but it won't go away (no matter how much control-freak corps want).
Search marketers are very friendly. As a mod for one forum, active particpant at another, blog reader and even interviewer I'd sayyou are dea-on right. One of the things that appeals to me in this industry is how helpful everyone is and how much they will bend over backward to help newbies out.
As for Adsense I'm in line with EGOL. And because of that I plan to use a specialist in the future. That segment of the industry has too much change and competition to be any more than "good" at it if that isn't what you do. And good isn't good enough IMO.
I agree that social media is nowhere near death. Its popularity and influence may fluctuate, but people like the sound of their own voices too much for user-generated news and commentary to disappear entirely. It's media exposure without a journalism degree!
I would love to see Reddit's influence grow, but I'd hate to it "turn into" Digg and attract an arrogant and puerile community.
Like any new technology, it's going through the crest and trough of it's own 'newness'. I think social media hasn't even begun to be utilized by certain sectors, especially associations (my clients), to really reach and provide a service to their members. BTW, I use SEOmoz often as a best practice case for the introduction of community and social interaction.
It's easy to imagine some of the more popular social media sites not being here in a few years, but I can't see social media in general not being around. The landscape will evolve and perhaps morph with something else, but I don't see it going anywhere.
The social aspects of the web have been with us since the beginning so why would anyone think there will be less social media. We're still talking about something that's barely made its way to the masses. If anything I expect to see more sites adopting social aspects in the days and years ahead.
For me your most interesting idea was about mobile content. As a new Treo 700w user I understand what you mean. I love the ability to quickly find information, but there isn't a Google out in the marketplace that has content specifically designed for it that I know of. I do take note though with your celebrity gossip idea. If TMZ had a mobil version I would be on it also like you at the mall while the girlfriend is shopping.
RE: Digital Point ForumsYes, it is an amazing successful business. You have to be thrilled for Shawn. And yes, the signal to noise ratio is horrible. Half the time people post short non-contextual quips, having only glanced at the original topic or question, in their pursuit of high post counts. For example, there is an active thread where someone asked about Google index updates. Most of the responses are about PageRank. Often I wish I could press “Bury This Post.” And yet, for some sick reason, I keep visiting. I even get caught-up, on occasion. I’ll try to change things a little by posting detailed, thought-out content. Of course that’s a pathetic loosing battle. I’ll realize it and fade away….until I get caught-up again.Thank goodness for SEOmoz and the intelligent on-topic high-level conversations we have here. SEOmoz, it’s my crack!
I would have to agree, and every time I think about writing something compelling and well-researched there I realize that half the people won't read it because english isn't their first language and the other half won't know enough about the topic matter to be educated by it. So I end up writing it anyway and filing it in some "maybe I'll start a blog someday" space.