Thanks a lot to PushON for making our Friday here. We’ve decided to cancel all work today (sorry clients) and play SEO Bullshit Bingo using a quick search for “search engine optimization” on YouTube as the bingo caller.
I’ve been giving a lot of thought lately to how most well-known companies have failed to leverage the strengths of their online properties as part of a search engine optimization or brand association strategy. Go to any big name corporate website home page and you’ll almost always see a Page Rank of 7 or 8 out of 10, which is very high. It always amazes me how many large corporations waste the strength of their websites, due to poor optimization strategies.
You would think a company that sells so many hamburgers would come up on the first page when you do a search for hamburgers on Google. They do rank for hamburger but the page listed links to their training center, located on their corporate website. This goes to show that they could easily implement what I’m suggesting, they just don’t know to do it.
What I really want to know is why there isn’t a page titled, “The McDonalds Hamburger, First Among Hamburgers” showing the world how great their main product is. Doing so would give them a well targeted page promoting their product that will easily rank for the plural and singular versions of the word hamburger, which according to our keyword research tool both get a lot of traffic:
Before moving to the next example I wanted to invite comments on how Wendy’s is ranking for “hamburgers” as they don’t have the word hamburger anywhere in their page source:
I was recently reading a post by Bill Imada on the Big Tent Blog at AdAge.com and he pointed out an ad in China for Subaru:
Chinese Headline: “Free and unrestrained; expect to exceed expectations in the New Year!”
Advertising Agency: AdAsia Communications, New York
Creative Director: Paul Ng
Account Supervisor: Julia Kang
The idea with this ad was to associate their brand with the emotional high of rebirth/reinvention, suggesting that this renewal can occur at the beginning of the New Year, and that this feeling is also captured by purchasing a Subaru. An esoteric, abstract idea at best, that clearly required hours of creative collaboration.
You would think that if the big car companies are putting resources into such far removed ideas as an ad strategy, that they would at least be putting equivalent resources into more direct media like search, where people are actively looking for information about these products in preparation of making a buying decision.
Based on these examples I’d say either the major car manufacturers aren’t very good at keyword research or they’re not really paying attention to search at all:
hybrid vehicles ~ Doesn’t turn up any major automakers in the natural search results. There are a few in the sponsored section, (Cadillac, Toyota, Saturn, Honda). I want to know why no one has “www.carcompany.com/hybrid-vehicles” listing all their hybrid options.
alternative fuel vehicles ~ Once again no one in the natural results and only Saturn in the sponsored.
hybrid suv ~ This actually brings up a few sites in the natural results:
All the pages ranking naturally for “hybrid suv” aren’t really targeted for that keyword, they’re more of product pages for one individual hybrid vehicle, rather then their full line of hybrid offerings. This again demonstrates that they have the strength to accomplish the desired results, they’re just not doing it.
These are just two dramatic demonstrations of the truly unlimited potential for utilizing SEO as part of the arsenal in brand association campaigns. Anything from activities to ideas to self identity related searches as well as related products or slang terms can be used as the basis of an online brand association strategy, the only limit is your creativity and ingenuity.
Type in “text links”, “buy text links” or “text link ads” in Google and you will notice that there are no longer any ads for companies that offer these services. That’s right, you can no longer bid on these or other related terms through AdWords.
While this move is being praised by some:
This is the first time that Google has actually taken a stand that makes them lose money in their war against text links and I think it is a good move. There is nothing more hypocritical than Google starting a war against a certain industry on one hand and accepting money from them on the other.
I see this argument as fundamentally flawed. This move by Google will actually help them make more money, as people interested in buying text links to drive traffic will have fewer choices, and a large number of them will end up biting the bullet and buying ads through AdWords.
These kinds of anti-competitive business practices show that while Google claims not to be evil, what they really mean is that they’ll spin the motives behind their actions so well that their “evilness” will be praised by the very targets of their ploy.
Update:
Looks like Matt Cutts has confirmed that Google is banning these advertisers in the comments on his blog.
I’ve seen lots of posts over the years about how political campaigns should be using SEO principles as part of their overall effort. I’ve always agreed that would be a good idea if done tastefully and ethically, but dismissed the idea as those ideals are very rare in the political circles.
Now, with the Presidential Election fast approaching we’ve decided that we will offer our services specifically to political campaigns, with the stipulation that we will not do anything unethical or otherwise ’shady’.
So what can we search engine optimization actually do for political campaigns? Quite a bit!
Our main focus in these campaigns will be working to ranks our clients for keyword associated with big issues for the 2008 election. We already know the Iraq War, and the War on Terror will be a big part of this. Another hot button issue is Universal Health Care. Working with politicians to promote certain listings relevant to these searches can be a great way to increase the level of communication between the representatives, and the represented.
I’ll be giving updates about projects related to this post as we move forward. We’ve been in talks with some campaigns, and if all goes well we’ll have some interesting stories to tell.
Yes, you read that right. According to Google’s recently updated Webmaster’s Guidelines with regards to what Google calls “link schemes.”
Examples of link schemes can include:
Links intended to manipulate PageRank Links to web spammers or bad neighborhoods on the web Link exchange and reciprocal links schemes (“Link to me and I’ll link to you.”) Buying or selling links
Now last time I checked swapping links with other websites predates Google. Hell, before we had search engines the only way you could find anything online was following links between sites, and a lot of those were reciprocal links, as that was the only way for website owners to bring in visitors to their sites. I can understand that some people use links to game Google’s results, instead of helping users find good content, but they are hardly the majority, and the outright banning of sites that exchange links is very heavy handed.
IMO Google is going to far here. They present a catch 22 where they recommend:
The best way to get other sites to create relevant links to yours is to create unique, relevant content that can quickly gain popularity in the Internet community. The more useful content you have, the greater the chances someone else will find that content valuable to their readers and link to it. Before making any single decision, you should ask yourself the question: Is this going to be beneficial for my page’s visitors?
It is not only the number of links you have pointing to your site that matters, but also the quality and relevance of those links. Creating good content pays off: Links are usually editorial votes given by choice, and the buzzing blogger community can be an excellent place to generate interest. In addition, submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.
I don’t know about any of you, but I’ve never used DMOZ or the Yahoo Directory when looking for anything. Also, Yahoo sells links in their directory for $299 a year ($600 for adult sites). Is Google recommending I violate their guidelines in an attempt to follow their guidelines?
