Doing the Bump with Google Places

Google continues its shift of their results pages. The newest culprit doesn't affect the natural search listings, per se, but mostly affects the paid, right column, ads.

Google Places is the latest addition to the Google Search Results page. The idea behind this is to free up some space on the natural search listings (center column) by simply tagging the locations in the center and having a map off to the right ABOVE the paid ads. So while this allows more room for those websites that are occurring naturally it is decreasing the visibility of those who are paying for attention for those results.

Most of you can see why this would be detrimental to pay-per-click marketers, but let me spell it out for those who don't see it:

1) Competition for local results now not only includes other businesses but Google's map which takes up 2-3 possible positions.
2) In order to be seen in these results you are now bidding at a much higher rate than before just to be seen.
3) Justifying the expense for pay-per-click ads will be a tad more difficult because the ROI that you had been optimizing for before Google Places no longer applies unless you were already in the #1 position which now is technically the #3 or #4 position.
4) UPDATED PORTION: The map box that takes up a good portion of the right column also scrolls down with you thus completely eliminating a top right column search ad position. All ads disappear behind the map box.

Marketers threw their hands in the air in disgust when Google first tested this out several months ago, now that it is common place, I foresee the same backlash on its way.

That's my opinion, you don't like it, let me know about!

Putting SEOs Where They Belong

I think it is time to put SEOs in their place! But where is that? Let’s look at some options:



The Technology/Developer Group: This is a good option, a lot of the onsite site SEO happens behind the curtain of the webpage and they occasionally dabble in coding.



The Copy Writers/Designers Group: Ooh this is another good option. SEOs help to inform the content creation and can head off designs that are not the most search engine friendly.



The Web Analyst Group: Hmm, another interesting choice. Most Search Engine Optimizers can filter through the raw data and provide perspective on what is going on and help put it into actionable context (the good ones can at least).



The Marketing/Strategy Development Group: Dang, another possible selection. SEOs are an excellent resource to bring in on the beginning strategy phase. They can inform best practices, perform competitive analysis, and many other exploratory and strategic offerings.



The Business Development Group: OK, Search Engine Optimizers are not going to be the closer but they definitely have the ability to add to the sales pitch; what is going wrong with the current site, value add for current clients, and other ways to ensure the client will found or will maintain ranking during a website refresh.



All these options seem to be a good fit; how do I choose? Oh, wait maybe that is the point I am trying to make! SEOs play a roll in many areas of the agency environment. No matter where they sit their perspectives and targeted insights in the whole digital marketing process can help aid the success of a client’s web presence. The SEO specialist adds to each of the groups and only when they are fully integrated into the process and a feedback loop is in place, do the best results rear their beautiful head. If your SEO strategy is developed in a vacuum then the results will truly suck. The communication needs to be a two-way street, but be sure to use your turn signal.



Have another group that is a good fit or you think doesn't fit, let me know!

Google's Instant SEO Challenge

Does Google Instant provide an SEO minefield or just expand the way we think about keyword selection?

All across the Twitterverse and in industry blogs the question is being raised, "Is Google Instant what will kill off SEO?"

I think that Google Instant provides a challenge for those of us in the Search Marketing industry. For a long time we in the SEO field have been trying to find the secret sauce of Google and trying to figure out what keywords are driving results to our clients' pages. We now not only have to think about the ultimate keyword they will use to find what they are looking for but what keywords they will start searching with. Most recently long-tail keywords have been the solution to how most searchers ultimately find what they are looking for, as the head terms are increasingly less relevant as more pages fill up these results but not targeted to what the searchers are looking for.

I believe searchers have grown accustomed to using more long-tail queries first to get at what they really want and have started adjusting their searching habits to avoid those pages that seemingly have less specific results.

Ok, now how does this apply to Google Instant?

Google is now taking a step away from the searcher by predicting what they are going to type for their query. No longer does the searcher have to waste time reformatting their query for head terms or long-tail terms. Google is now showing what results they would get if they did decide to go for the often irrelevant head terms automatically without additional keystrokes. As a searcher knowing that these results will be presented to me instantly I am more likely to try those terms knowing that I can quickly adjust that query and get what I am try looking for but it doesn't hurt to look at those head terms since they are there anyway.

As a search marketer I need to take into account how my clients' customers are searching for their products. As I mentioned previously this was focusing on a few head terms and a large portion of long-tail keywords but with the new adaptation of Google Instant it will be important to try for those head terms as they will now be viewed and considered more often because they will be the first results given for a specific query even if the searcher is heading toward the long-tail keyword.

So bottom line is that this will be a difficult period for search marketers, the results won't change instantly but SEO practitioners need to start working through their keyword strategy and see how this will ultimately affect their customers' experience of search for their products or services.

Google's Making Me Fat

As I am getting older I am noticing that I don't metabolize like I used to. Personally, I am going to blame this all on Google. I know, I know, you are saying "Oh sure blame Google, everyone else is blaming Google for their problems, like them sharing the information that they freely share online," but wait I have some good excuses how Google is driving me to add on the pounds.

1) Their Search Algorithm: From when I was a kid, shoot even when I was in college, I had to literally search for the information I needed to put into my report or do my job. Sure Yahoo was around but let's be honest those results were skewed(emphasis on were) and not the most reliable. So I ended up walking to the library and doing my research or, heaven forbid, do my own research study with hand taken surveys. Now I can just type in the data that I want to know and get a plethora of data that I can scrutinize. So I don't have to make that walking trip to the library to get what I need. - Fat Burned= -2

2) Google Maps: My family takes a lot of car trips (mainly because it is too expensive to fly 4 people now) but how do I (or my wife) plan these car trips? Get out the big paper map if I have one or go down to the store and buy the map? No! I go on my computer and plot my trip by typing in my location and where the hell I'm going and bada-boom bada-bing I have my whole route planned out. Even if I have to spend a night because the trip is too long I can find the hotel right there in that same map. I don't have to drive down to the AAA office to get a book for the area and look up what hotels are there. By not standing over the map and plotting the course or even in the car struggling with re-folding that big map. No calories burned with holding the turn-by-turn directions, forget getting out and asking for directions if I get lost I pull up the map on my smart-phone. - Fat Burned= -1

3) Google Reader: With this fabulous product I not only do not have to go to the library to pick up the latest newspaper or news-magazine to read the stories I am interested in, I don't even have to search the web! The stories are delivered to one spot that I can just go and start reading. Do you know what would help me burn less calories if I enabled the voice webpage reader. I have all the stories that I could possibly be interested in at one location, I don't have to walk from store to store in the mall to get everything I am interested in; food, video games, business journals, etc. - Fat Burned= -3

4) YouTube: I have saved the worst Google product that is leading to my forthcoming obesity problem for last. YouTube has an endless supply of stupidity, wondrous oddities, and crazy shit that you cannot find anywhere else, let alone one location. So with this myriad of entertainment options (Thank you Hockey Fights) I don't need to go and rent movies as often (I still get out of the house some, but I do have kids) or go bowling or golf or __________ Name your favorite activity that is truly active. I can sit around for hours on end and still not find everything YouTube has to offer. Thanks a lot YouTube. Here is a big F*ckYou for - Fat Burned= -10

So Google be expecting to get a bill for my diet supplements, gym membership (as long as I can watch YouTube while doing the elliptical), and the cardiac surgeon's bill. I love you Google but you are going to freakin' kill me!!!

Where is search going and how can I jump on?

First off, hello again.  It has been a long while since I have done a post.  A full-time job will do that to ya.

Something that I have noticed as a theme in all the articles and forums and twitter posts that I read is that everyone wants to know where search marketing is going and how can I get on board.  Here is some quick advice I have for those that want to dive in:

Do your research!...Search engine marketing is multi-faceted and there things that work well for some sites and things that are detrimental if done incorrectly or not fully thought out.  Don't rush into it...know what you are getting into and plan for a loooonnnnngggg process that will fluctuate and morph into something completely different.

Seek out advice and share advice... A trend that I have noticed in the SEM industry is that aside from a few thought-leaders who are willing to expose every thought and tactic that they have there is a culture of "I don't want anyone else to know what I am doing"  I think this is BS, sure we all have our client secrets and methods but being tight-lipped about issues, problems, or successes should not be under lock and key.  I was recently on a panel with 2 other area SEM practitioners.  That panel was great, I think everyone learned a lot but, at the same time, we didn't exactly reveal our secret-sauce to our success but were able to give some guidance to those that were curious about SEO and social media. This is what I would like to see happen more often.  Maybe I am in too small a SEM community to have experienced this before but I think the opportunities are here and in all regions.

Test and re-test...As I mentioned above search engine marketing is changing and fluctuating at a rapid pace.  Set up a system to analyze your progress and what is working and what is not.  Start with a testing schedule. What are you going to test? What is going to be your control group? What determines success (this is different for every site even in the same category)?  How much data do you need to determine that success (hint 5 clicks to your site does not determine success)?

Basically have a plan, research how to implement the plan, get knowledgeable advice, implement, test implementation and then start again from step one.




Tweet

Up Next at 10, News' IPO on NASDAQ

Ok here is the article that started this rant off, Article from the San Jose Mercury News.

I will give you a second to read it.... Ok got it? Great. Now here are my thoughts:

Call me naive, go ahead, sometimes I am, but my idea of news is that its function is to educate and inform the broadest audience possible. As I was growing up and having only 3-4 television stations in my home the news was a good portion of what I was consuming on a regular basis. The News in my view wasn't sensationalized or really thought provoking to be honest but I was kept aware of what was going on around me and thus learned often some essential information. Now as I am older the above article only solidifies something that I have been noticing in National and some local News productions (I call them productions rather than casts for illustrative purposes). These productions seem to have adapted their story writing and videography to make each story dramatic, comedic, or sensational. Can I blame them? These stations are now competing against an every growing list of stations for advertising dollars. Also, as the Internet has gained in popularity and stations have lost viewers to online destinations they have had to adapt their news productions to compete these online competitors.

Here is my main point, when does charging for people to view this content start and when does it end. It seems Rupert would like to assert that all News should charge for access rather than just premium content. Aren't users already paying for content via viewing advertising and in some cases purchasing Cable or Satellite packages? Is there going to be a time in the future when only the privileged and wealthy will know about the string of murders around the corner. Are we going back to a time when "News" is something told word of mouth or futuristically word-of-blog? Is my neighbor going to have to be the one to let me know the new laws our legislature just passed because I don't have the $5,000 per year to pay for my "News" subscription?

Honestly I really do get it that television stations are trying to recoup the money that they are expending on their online and traditional news reporting. I thought this used to be recouped through selling advertising and promotions. Is this media's knee-jerk reaction to a recession based problem or is this going to be an ongoing issue where advertisers rather place their ads where people are going. If people are going to other places I would think it would signal big media that something is wrong with their model and not vice-versa. Here are some questions big media should ask and be able to answer:
1) What are the aggregators offering that we are not? Objective media from a variety of sources?
1a) What can we do about it? Cut off society from all News stories we create and make them pay for it?

2) What is driving people to use these sites rather than our stories that have the same information and we work hard at presenting?
2a) Are money issues getting in the way of presenting what the public needs?

3) Are advertisers find these areas more attractive because people are there or because of the conglomeration of content?
3a) How do we keep our advertisers and attract new ones?

I think I have said what I want to say. As always tell me if I am way off the ball on this. Thanks for listening!!

Is there such a thing as too much data?

Sometimes I like to consider the unanswerable questions. The question of "Is there such a thing as too much data?" may seem like a very simple question to answer but I would like to lay out the basis for why I believe this is more a conundrum than it seems.

1) It is all about perspective.
If you were to show up for class in Elementary School and the teacher began running through the "basics" of nuclear physics and there was a test at the end of the class do you think you would be able to pass that class? Can a client who has grown up in the traditional media "age" be given a log file with all the data he/she would need to show how his/her customers interact with their new website and be able to tell what they need to do?

Are these two cases similar?

I believe that they are. In each case the individuals are being given data to which they may or may not have a frame of reference for. Each having their own set of alien terminology with a mix of words that they may have heard before but could quite possible have a very different meaning in each context. Although the minds of each are in a different state of development, each has been trained in some specific tasks. Eventually with enough training each of these sets of people will be able to analyze and make sense of what they see before them.

2) Do we really need it?
Even though as I am writing this I am think of digital media, this really applies to all forms of analysis. Do we really need all the data that we have in our reach? As a society? Yes, we probably do need all the data that we can get. As individual people and companies? Probably not, but being able to pick and choose the data that will tell us what we need to know has started becoming a crucial factor in business and personal decision making. We now have match making services that can give you match making factors to see who you would like to date. We also have free tools that go beyond telling us how many people visited our sites (think of those cheesy visitor counters we used to put on the bottom of our websites). There really is now no way to limit the amount of data available because if limiting begins a group of people or companies will begin to cry foul. They are now reliant on that data to make "informed" decisions. Once again though just like in the first bullet point giving this information to the wrong group too early can lead to false positives and inaccurate decision making criteria.

4) Why is there so much data?
There is so much data because it is now inexpensive to capitalize on the World Wide Web's global community. Research can be done quickly and with a large sample size not previously available. The tools to analyze this data are also coming on strong as well with global open-source collaborations that are added-to and streamlined to perform the tasks that an analyst would have spent weeks or months creating with archaic tools like Excel. Don't get me wrong Excel has grown along with these online tools to maintain its needed status, but compare the first version of Excel with its current version and you will see the addition of many new analytical features that have grown with the times.

4) What happens if the data goes away?
Just like the show on the History Channel Life After People what will the business and personal worlds look like after the data is gone. We will actually have to talk to people face to face to figure out if a new restaurant good. We will have to rely on local data or expensive nationwide data. Without the expansive growth of the Internet this data may not have become the necessity it is today. We would have to rely on the traveling Minstrel to regale the stories of yonder countries and the trophies that they bring.

So for those of you who are allergic to data. BEWARE...your symptoms are going to get worse..a lot worse. Signing off for now! Kevin