April 21, 2015Organizations should treat social media as they would any other electronically stored information and assume it is potentially discoverable. Und...
March 26, 2015Feeling overwhelmed by the massive amount of customer feedback data you’re collecting? You’re not alone! Many businesses are struggling to find...
February 20, 2015Symantec, the global technology security provider, needed to provide its global customer base access to social customer service. They were...
February 20, 2015An Employee Advocacy program has value beyond your company’s marketing department. The community you build will be the single most important...
Dec 3 Posted 2 years ago
While it's apparent that social media now can play a role in creating search visbility, this post glosses over elements of SEO that remain critically important, seemingly to position social as some kind of online marketing elixer.
For example, it mentions "good keyword-rich content". What does this mean? What keywords? What content? How do either map to the buyer's journey? How do they map to the site? And about the site itself, what is its ability to rank for competitive terms? If it cannot rank for high-volume, relevant terms, what issues are present? To infer that this scenario is caused by a lack of a social strategy, or that it doesn't require SEO expertise, is incorrect.
The post also highlights the example of a site's optimization that produced rank but not traffic. This isn't an SEO issue. If indeed the site was optimzed for these terms (vs. those simply being what the site ranks for), that SEO did a good job.
The issue is with strategy, and you can buy a crappy SEO strategy just as easily as you can a crappy social strategy. As a side note, I'll add that the point of SEO is results, not web traffic. If a site's busines goal is to drive leads, the SEO goal is to drive qualified traffic that converts -- leads being the results in this case.
There is a lot of commentary right now about what social means in terms of SEO. The same is true of the confleunce between SEO and PR. Some of it is really valuable, and what's evident is that connecting SEO, traditional and emergent marketing practices provides an optimized marketing mix.
Dec 3 Posted 2 years ago
Some good points below.
The point of the article is that the old practices of SEO are dead. If your SEO company has changed their methods of SEO to blogging more, building social media networks, and sharing content, then they are no longer a SEO company, they are an internet marketing company. In this case, my article doesn't apply to you.
Unfortunately, I see too many companies that still market their old tactics. We lost a potential website sale to a company that promised first page rankings (at $75/month for hosting) or he didn't pay. Anybody that knows what it really takes to get first page rankings knows that they aren't going to get there using relevent keywords with only $75/month. $75/month isn't enough marketing time to do everything that is needed.
That was about 5-6 months ago. I should follow up to see how that is going for him.
Good backlinks ARE important. How/where they come from are important too. Unfortunately, SEO companies tend to focus on their reports of how many backlinks you have and the PR rank of those sites. All of this means squat if you don't get any traffic from those placements. Creating relevant and share-able content generates traffic and potential leads - your most important factor in business.
If your SEO company isn't drawing in traffic, it's time to re-think your strategy.
Dec 3 Posted 2 years ago
Back to the old saying of content creation, "Write for humans not robots (search engines)".
I wrote about why social-friendly content are increasingly triumphing over traditionally search-friendly content with the introduction of agent identity platforms such as google+ here:
I don't agree with Kent's suggestions on the possible extinction of search and social media platforms. Search is here to stay. Social networks are here to stay. Who is to say that both would not evolve, but one thing is for sure. Human are inherent social creatures, and human has a natural tendency to seek for information. Interestingly, they have proven to be really effective at doing both since the times of web directories (pre-Google era).
I do agree that our digital marketing mix should consists of several avenues and channels, but an emphasis on one over another is perfectly sensible and practical.
Dec 2 Posted 2 years ago
I think SEO in general sense is overlooked, as just link building- black or white. Guest blogging is still SEO, and probably the most legit off site SEO you could do - and you get direct traffic.
Dec 1 Posted 2 years ago
Hi Chad, rather than using only one type of strategy, we should use different types of strategy. If we too focus on SEO or social media or afflicate programme, what if they are no more search engines, no more social media platforms (who knows).
I suggest we carefully study customers requirements and draft an online marketing plan which includes different strategies rather than focus only one.