2 Percent Creativity - Marketing and Advertising Insights from a Connected Perspective

Google's Pilot Project - About Time

This is so long overdue, it shouldn't be news, but it is good news, so we must offer some comment. Google recently announced that, when they decide to penalize or ban a website for apparent infringement of their guidelines, they will contact the website owner, tell them that they have banned their website and why. They are actually going to talk with their customers. Well, good for Google!

Finally the sacred walls of organic search have started to crack and I suggest that Google will find that this one move will dramatically improve their index. The fact that the world's largest search engine did this first, is clearly a 2% move. The folks at Yahoo! should take note and realize that they missed an opportunity here. But then again, they're organic geeks are probably laughing at Google for this move. Here's why Google will improve its index with this move and why Yahoo!'s will continue to suffer.

They have now said to all the companies with internal or outsourced SEO specialists, we will work with you. Now, if you are an optimizer and you are tired of seeing affiliate spam, doorway junk and Adsenseless sites dominating organic search on Yahoo!, why not optimize and recommend your SEM clients to what will inevitably become a purer index as a result of Google's move. Google will find out very quickly who the real scammers are as well. More importantly, they will discover a few innocent companies (whether as a result of their own ignorance or the use of an unscrupulous SEO firm) who are truly grateful for the heads up and asistance in getting the penalty withdrawn. These companies will be very happy customers indeed. Yes Yahoo! - customers. In today's online world, the same customers who are willing to purchase PPC/Sponsorship programs, expect to have a chance in the organic search as well. And, if they are out of line for any reason, they will begin to expect the kind of customer service that Google now offers.

The future will be very interesting, but once again, Google is leading the way.

Yahoo Paid Inclusion: Is this Story Authentic?

Andrew, with Traffic, a weblog that preaches 'search engine elightenment', is one of the first from the search engine/SEO community that I have seen actually come out and question Yahoo's paid inclusion scheme. Although he makes and discloses several very good points, I would disagree with his final conclusion that maybe this is a way to pay for the cleansing of organic search. The oxymoron here is clear—paid inclusion with PPC and organic search? There is absolutely no excuse for this Yahoo tactic to mislead the consumer about organic, natural and free search. The consumer will find out, one way or the other and the real judging will begin.

Link: Traffick - Internet Search Enlightenment: Yahoo Paid Inclusion: Is this Story Authentic?.

degree

Google Getting Sued Again - Click Fraud the Charge

Another class action lawsuit has been launched against Google over click fraud allegations. Unfortunately, one of the Internet's dirty little secrets, click fraud must be seriously addressed and marketers need to start asking more serious questions. One of the problems that exists today for most marketers, is that no one in the marketing world or the SEO space is willing to take the issue on. To do so will get you branded a whiner and just not a smart marketer. After all, Yahoo and Google are winners right? They have built successful brands, er stories right? Let's not get caught up with issues like disclosure, accountability and metrics for advertisers. That's just not something a smart marketer does. She's too busy finding her next great story to tell. Sheeesh!

Check out the news story...

Link: Google sued over 'click fraud' in Web ads - Yahoo! News.

Search Engines Trashed for Paid Links, Paper Trashed for Bias

Aaron Wall of SEObook.com, has posted an interesting rant about a recent article by the East Bay Business Times and their concern over the fact that search engines do not label ads properly. The article points out that both the FTC, Federal Trade Commission and Consumer Reports, have led the criticism of the search engines and that the problem is not really improving. In fact, it is probably getting worse. I will suggest that there is little hope advertising on search engines will ever be properly designated and here's why...

First, the Internet has evolved into the medium that it is today, as a result of the major search engines and the culture that they have mutually spawned—information should be FREE and down with business (or anyone who wants to charge for their property, intellectual or otherwise). As soon as you try and mix an organic/natural/free search with 'advertising' or 'sponsored' listings, there are the inevitable questions, as there should be, about truth in advertising.

This leads to the second problem and as a marketer I believe this issue requires serious consideration by those businesses currently or those considering, advertising on search engines.

In the traditional world of print, radio or television, you craft your message, your ad and you place it into the medium of choice. In rare circumstances, the newspaper, magazine or other media representatives may object to your ad on the basis of known and respected guidelines for advertising. In some cases, they may even suggest that you can run your ad if you want, but they sometimes suggest you rethink your rather bold claims or maybe how 'tasteful' the message is for their viewers. In the end, you know the guidelines and the risks, the choice is yours.

Enter the world of search where the geek community (those who don't really like you and your need to be commercially successful) have taken over the screening process. First, they decided to create their 'directory' where they determined whether your website was worthy of inclusion. The 'guidelines' are so vague and full of geek-talk, that you have to hire an SEO (another geek) to help you decipher the code. They in turn have their biases as to who they wish to help and many of them have developed the same attitudes toward what is relevant and what the search engines 'want' in their organic search.

Thirdly, have you ever tried to actually place an ad through Overture or Google Adwords? Overture is priceless. You go through this terribly contrived process, create your ad and then wait for 3-4 days for 'approval'. I was astonished the first time I did this for our real estate company and had them approve the ad, BUT, completely rewrite my copy and reject our company name because it has the word 'MOST' in it. If you are Barnum and Bailey, forget Overture. The slogan, "Greatest Show on Earth" will be rejected. This is total nonsense. If I choose to be a loser and put words like lowest price, best deals, first, top, most etc. in my ad, it is not their business to act as the PCP (politically correct police) of headlines and copy writing. Google Adwords is much the same, but you can usually get away with a bit more.

Finally, Aaron makes a great point about the East Bay article and how they missed the worst offense by a search engine, when they just glossed over the subject of Yahoo's paid inclusion program. There are virtually no consumers that I have spoken with, let alone businesses for that matter, who are aware that the 'organic or natural' search in Yahoo, has PPC advertising within it, as a result of their paid inclusion progam. This is complete nonsense and advertisers should refuse to deal with Yahoo/Overture until this is either eliminated or disclosed. What is even more ridiculous, is the fact that if your website has been previously penalized, banned or not included in Yahoo's organic search, the SEO's magic solution is to try paying for inclusion, which of course comes with a PPC on your results if an unsuspecting consumer clicks on your organic result. But, and this is the big but again, they may not decide to include you if they don't like your site or business model.

So, slowly but surely, the major search engines and their various minions are attempting to create advertising in their own image or at least one that they find palatable and most certainly, one they control and dominate. If a newspaper chain, radio or television network ever tried this, they would surely be told where to place their advertising space and I am reasonably certain that it would be in a very dark place with very little traffic.

Link: Search Engines Trashed for Paid Links, Paper Trashed for Bias : SEO Book.com.

Paid Search Disclosure - Are the Results True?

There has been a lot of talk recently about reports that are critical of the major search engines and their tendency to keep the consumer in the dark regarding 'sponsored' advertising. This issue is much more serious than simple disclosure. There are billions of dollars at stake and both consumers and advertisers are, for the most part, unaware of the real under belly of PPC (pay-per-click), click fraud, affiliate scams and paid inclusion. We have been documenting our research into this specific issue for the past year and will begin an indepth series on our findings starting later this month. The information we will be providing is critical to every marketer who has a vested interest in their search engine postings, PPC and the consumer's failing faith in organic search.

Link: Report Suggests Paid Search Disclosure Could Be Better.

Yahoo's MindSet - Smoke and Mirrors?

Interesting. Very interesting. Yahoo! Search has just let the cat out of the bag. What they want us to believe is relatively simple. They have this great, new, all dotcom idea, to help keep organic search true to its roots. They call it MindSet. Really? We tried the beta site and found it more than wanting. Do a search for just about anything and when you slide the bar over to 'research' you often find that many of the sites in the first 10 are commercial and worse, affiliate or Google Adsense websites that offer zero relevance or value. Smoke and mirrors kids, smoke and mirrors.

What's really happening here is that someone at Yahoo! is finally waking up.

Well, we're on to you and we've known for some time that organic search relevance is going down the tube. We've been trying to tell you for years, but your unscalable walls of humanless, customer service, have repeatedly pushed us to fill out more forms, send endless emails, read the same 'guidelines' and NEVER hear from a real person, let alone an autoresponder.

Don't be fooled folks. This is not innovation. This is an attempt to save the reputation of organic search on Yahoo! Too little, too late I am afraid.

Link: Yahoo Tries to Get into the Mindset of the User - Search Engine Journal.

Finally, Someone Takes Link Spam Seriously

It has taken a long time. The major search engines haven't done much about it. In fact, they are still living behind those ivory covered towers, with impunity and without marketers demanding a human connection to the all powerful 'editors' at the directory and organic search level. The SEO's have given up trying to even pretend that they care about the issue and, unfortunately, many of them have joined the more unscrupulous ones, to build more link farms and affiliate the search engines to death.

To the rescue, at least as a first step, Stanford University's InfoLab has released a technical report as a 22 page PDF. Lot's of algorithms make it look pretty official, the substance is still to come. Stayed tuned...

Link: New Technical Report from Stanford Discusses Link Spam.