Search Novice

We're all searching for something.

23 August 2007

Changing the Blogger Title Tag

Changing the Blogger Title Tag ~ Widget-based

This is a great post. I recently read another article that said one of the biggest mistakes we bloggers make is letting the blog software automatically create page titles for us. It said to at least change the software code so that it automatically places the post title before the blog's title on post pages. Looking at Google's template, I was a bit clueless until I found this post from the Widget-based blog. This post has some very useful code that will do just what I wanted. It only affects post pages, so the index page of your blog will stay the same.

Labels: , ,

22 August 2007

Print vs Silicon

A few times a month, I don't have time to read a really interesting article that shows up in my feed reader, so I go to the website and print out the article for reading later. I've definitely noticed that once I do that, it usually takes me 2, maybe 3 days to finish reading the article, and I generally read everything in the article. My behavior with reading articles on my computer screen is much different - I rarely read every word (or paragraph even), and I never leave the article until later, if I do decide to read it. Without delving too deeply into the issue (I'm pressed for time), I'm just wondering what the real causes are for the differences in behavior. Thinking of the two situations even more, I realize that I'm fairly likely to click on ads online, whereas I hardly ever pay attention to advertisements in a newspaper or magazine. There definitely are opportunities for exploiting such behavior for gain.

Labels: ,

21 August 2007

Another New Feature...

Just FYI, I have made another addition to the blog - I've added links to what I'm currently reading. This will be located in the sidebar, labeled "stack" (as in, the stack of stuff that I'm currently reading). I think it'll be a good addition.

Labels:

Will the Internet Eventually Close the Loop?

SELand: What Influences Online Searches?

OK, so this is not a link to the actual study, but iProspect conducted a recent study that says, according to SELand,

"...offline channels prompt two-thirds of online search. 37% said a television ad encouraged them to conduct a search, 36% said word-of-mouth initiated a search, 30% said a print ad, 20% said a physical store's location and 17% said a radio ad."
If it were me and I were an offline kind of guy, I'd be asking, "where'd that other third of the people go?" It used to be that all searches were prompted somewhere along the line by offline channels. But if a third of the people don't even get their search terms offline, then I am thinking that number is not going to get any smaller.

Is this an indicator of the power of offline channels, or an indicator of the growth of the internet?

Labels:

A Message to the TV Industry

BBC NEWS | The Editors' Blog: A Message to the TV Industry

If you read this blog at all, you're probably surprised that this post is implying that I've gotten at least some of my news from the BBC, given my recent post about how the news giant just doesn't know how to blog. But, alas, I did read an interesting post this morning in the editorial blog about the upcoming International TV Festival, to be held this weekend in Edinburgh, Scotland.

Basically, the post is just brushing the surface with a couple of general questions about the industry, asking whether TV is trustworthy, and which direction the industry will take in the future. It's a worthy quandary, but I think there are also some other issues to consider.

Like, for instance, how is TV going to follow the example of the internet and become an efficient medium for communication, and a more effective place for investor dollars? It used to be that everyone watched TV at night when they got home. If a Presidential debate was on, or the World Series, or even just the Braves' game, you could bet that most people would be watching something between 7pm and 11pm. The Nightly News, with Dan Rather, with Peter Jennings, with Tom Brokaw... remember? "More Americans get their news... " Now, you can't really say that more Americans get anything from TV, any more than they get it from somewhere else.

But I think that the most important perspective is probably that of the advertiser. With the Internet, there is Cost-Per-Click, which gives you Click-Thru-Ratio, Impressions, and reports on spending categorized any way you like them. Basically, the idea is that you know exactly how much business you are generating from an Internet ad. And so you pump in more money - or, better yet, just the right amount of money.

With TV, there never has been that opportunity for measurement. Everyone just knew that, if you were big enough, you ought to advertise on TV, and in generally, you'll help grow your customer base. But is the ambiguity in knowledge of ROI enough to make people begin to see TV as a second-rate advertising medium, compared to the internet? These are the questions TV must grapple with, I think.

Labels:

17 August 2007

BBC NEWS "Blog" - How not to blog

BBC NEWS | The Editors

I subscribed to the BBC News blog weeks ago, and I really can't find a justifiable reason why. I think I did it mainly because they had a blog, and as I am always reading blogs, I thought it would be good to read one put out by a major news organization that is read by everyone - not just bloggers and SEO geeks (sorry everyone, but that's what we are).

What I ended up with was a bunch of blog entries that I now just gloss over in my feed reader without thinking twice. And why shouldn't I? Does anyone out there actually read the BBC Blog?

For starters, the posts I end up reading have very descriptive titles. That's what I need to get me interested, especially when I have 100 new posts to sort through every day!

Take, for instance, this title from SELand:

AOL's Truveo Introduces New Video Search Site And Consumer Destination


What do you think this post is about? It's a stupid question - the subject is in the title. Now, look at this title from the BBC:

Setting up camp

What is this about? After reading the first paragraph, I'm still not sure. This is how it starts off:
It’s a pretty quiet period for news at the moment - fairly normal for August though - and sometimes it can be a bit of a struggle to find enough stories from around the UK.
It turns out that the post is about climate change protesters setting up camp near Heathrow Airport. What's more, it doesn't say much, besides the admission that there aren't many stories around, and so they're just writing about things people can see from their office window.

And even more than that, only the first 2 lines of the post were visible in my feed reader! Why am I going to go out of my way, click on the feed, open it in another window, and read to the middle of the post, just to figure out what the thing is about?

Here's the lesson for bloggers - learn from my inadvertent behavior.
  • Make your titles descriptive and specific.
  • Subscribe to your own feed so that you know what it looks like in a feed reader.
  • Make sure people can read enough of each post in a reader to grab their interest.
  • And... write about interesting stuff - don't just write to be writing!

Labels: ,

Google Sued! By Idiots! With Lots of Money!

Google Sued For Trademark Infringement By American Airlines Over Sponsored Ads

Dude, this is amazing. This is just another example of big corporate lawyers making more work for themselves over frivolity. If they're so smart, they could put some of that brain power to use by solving the worlds problems, instead of creating new ones.

Labels:

Matching Keywords With Yahoo

Got Ads?: Yahoo Panama Tip: Advanced Match vs Standard Match Type - Advertising revolving around Google

This is a short but informative post over at Got Ads about the way to best optimize your Yahoo! keywords. Admittedly, I don't have very much experience with Yahoo search marketing, especially compared to what I have done with Google Adwords. This is one difference that just makes me think, "why couldn't they just copy Google?" Really. Why wouldn't they?

With Yahoo!, you have two options for keyword matching in your ad systems - Standard and Advanced. The two options are vaguely explained:
  • Standard match type – for exact matches of your keywords or their minor variations.
  • Advanced match type – for matches that use your keywords in various contexts.
That is not very helpful. In an apparent attempt to clarify, Yahoo added:

"When using Advanced match type, we also provide you with our Excluded Words option to help refine your matches by filtering out searches that do are not relevant to your business.

Standard Match Type The Standard match type displays your ads for exact matches to your keywords, as well as for singular/plural variations and common misspellings."


C'mon, Yahoo!, throw us a bone.

Labels:

16 August 2007

Where do you find a good plumber?

MagicYellow online Yellow Pages

Has anyone actually used MagicYellow.com? Basically, it's the phone book online. It's a bunch of companies that said, "hey, Mr. Yellow, let me be in your book. Here's $5." Basically, the point is that there is no quality control to these kinds of sites. There's also ServiceMagic.com, FindaContractor.com, and a handful of other websites that generate leads for the average contractor.

To the contractor, it's a risk, but not a high one. ServiceMagic sells leads in groups of 10, 20, or more per month, and the contractor simply pays a fixed fee.

For the consumer, the service is marketed as a way to find "pre-screened" contractors to work in your home, but in actuality, there's nothing "magic" about the service providers. They are just the ones that were good enough to pay ServiceMagic for the placement on the website.

So, again, where do you find a good plumber? The answer is, we don't know. At least, as far as the internet is concerned, we don't know. Nobody is taking full advantage of the abilities of vertical search or Web 3.0 in this realm on a large scale.

Essentially, MagicYellow is still in the age of Web 1.0, serving up big lists. There's not much of an algorithm to go with. We've got the resources to do much better than that.

Labels:

Using Vertical Search To Incite Market Upheaval

I was talking with a friend last night about ways to change marketplaces for the better, and we talked for a while about vertical search, and the potential to bring organization to disaggregated industries. How do I find a good web designer? There isn't a plethora of options. However, with the right website and programming, there could be a system that would bring the right person to your door (or to your phone) in a matter of a few minutes and a few clicks of the mouse.

I don't have that much time to write now, so this is it for now, but I will write more soon...

Labels: ,

14 August 2007

Changes in the Future

Just to let everyone know, I've made a couple of changes to the blog here. Nothing drastic, but if you really don't like them, or if they are harmful to your reading, then please let me know and I'll give your comments consideration.

Now that the site has had over 500 visitors and counting, I've installed some Google-ness between each post. I've given in to the urge to place Adsense between each post. We'll see where this goes. I think it breaks up each post nicely. (!) I don't expect to make much off of it, but I figured it couldn't hurt.

I've also made all the post titles bigger, something I should have done long ago. I'm a sucker for design - which you wouldn't know from viewing this blog - so I like to change things up if I think they will look better.

More to come soon...

Labels:

13 August 2007

JupiterResearch: Google And Yahoo Are Top Online Brands

JupiterResearch: Google And Yahoo Are Top Online Brands

This is an interesting look at brand research

A quick correction to the last post...

My apologies to Rand over at SEOmoz. I said in my post earlier today that he was the author of the post I commented on, when in fact, it was written by James C. Zolman (jameszol).

My bad.

And, according to Rand, the article was actually promoted from YOUmoz. So, it actually wasn't an SEOmoz opinion, I guess, though they did see fit to promote the article to their site.

I just couldn't help but set the record straight.

More to come soon...

JT

Labels:

SEOmoz Gets It Right, But Also Gets It Wrong

To begin, let me say that, while I have been posting, I have gotten busy and fallen behind on my reading. So my posts have not been much more than, "hey, look at this article." I haven't had much to say that's been my own.

However, today, I've got to say something about this article over at SEOmoz. I'll try to keep it short...

SEOmoz | The Economic Motive Behind Google's New Advertisement Algorithm

This article is of great interest to me, since I was once an Econ major in school. Rand gets the overall idea right by saying that demand has shifted solely because of Google's change in its ad formula. However, his graph is wrong.



He says that demand moves to the right, and he is correct.
However, this is what the graph ought to look like:



Supply does not change - it is the same no matter what demand is. In Rand's graph, supply has actually increased with the new demand, which would mean that there would be more advertising slots to sell than there were before. But in actuality, the supply of ad spots - or Impressions - did not change. There are still just 3 top spots - same as before - and 10 to 12 spots on each SERP.

Most people want to at least be on the first SERP, so that would mean that on each serch, there will also be only 3 top spots at the most, plus an additional 9 or 10 spots - a maximum total of 13. That will never change, unless Google overhauls its format.

So, supply is vertical. It never changes, which means that small changes in demand will significantly affect the price, as we will see here.

Labels: ,

10 August 2007

A Funny Look At The New Google Adwords Formula

Graywolf's SEO Blog: New Google Adwords Formula = Just Pay Us More

This post is good for a few laughs. Actually, I was reading about the new Adwords formula just yesterday on the Google Help Center, and briefly wondered how this would affect my current ad spending. It's interesting that Michael openly acknowledges that this is bad news, except for...
"except for you pesky blackhat ppc seo’s with two accounts …"
Those pesky people with 2 accounts, huh? Doesn't Google know how to sniff those people out? Seems like yet another thing that Google ought to be able to catch quite easily, but apparently hasn't.

Labels: ,

Shocking, but then again not so shocking - Gaming Google

Closed Loop Marketing Blog: Gaming Google - It Really Is That Easy…

This is a very good article from the blog at Closed Loop Marketing. Basically, they unearthed a very (obviously) blatant link-buying scheme, which basically amounts to cloaking (showing Googlebot something different than what the user sees) in order to place links on fairly prominent sites around the internet, thereby juicing up Google rankings for crappy pages like InkAndStuff.co.uk (no link there - they don't deserve any more than they have).

I'm surprised that the research was so obviously incriminating - there are no implications, just obvious facts. MyWebStats.org is using a link selling scheme to fund itself, making its users unwittingly involved in skewing of SE results around the world!

Labels: ,

09 August 2007

Welcome to Virgin America

Welcome to Virgin America

The newest American air line is here - it's Virgin America, which has started operations on this side of the pond, with its first hub at San Fran.

Anyway, they've got a cool website. I definitely like the flash video on the homepage. Very easy, and very inviting. I almost wish I lived in San Fransisco or LA.

Labels:

Don't Obsess Over Superficial Details

Don't Obsess Over Superficial Details

A very good article over at SELand. That's a good site they've got going there.
JT

Labels:

08 August 2007

The Real Big Brother

FTC Town Hall Meeting To Examine 'Behavioral Advertising'

It is very nice that the government itself is actually turning its eye to the world of search. This article from SELand is about the upcoming FTC open forum to be held this November about the so-called "Behavioral targeting." However, as we have often seen, the government usually only complicates things and generally slows the progress of innovation. What is a town-hall meeting going to accomplish anyway?

Labels:

07 August 2007

Search Illustrated: Search Engine Click-Thru Behavior; You've Got To Be In The Top Ten!

Something we all knew, but it is nice to be reminded by real data:

Search Illustrated: Search Engine Click-Thru Behavior; You've Got To Be In The Top Ten!

Labels:

FT article: Online ads will overtake newspapers in US by 2011

Financial Times: Online ads to overtake US newspapers

This article foretells something we all know is coming sooner or later. However, I wonder how the paper's source, Veronis Suhler Stevenson, came to conclude that we would have to wait 4 more years to witness this eclipse. It seems the prediction is based on the fact that growth in online ads has averaged 21% annually.

But if this has been the average growth, who's to say the revenues will increase uniformly along that 21% line? I would think there will soon come a "tipping point," after which we will see the vast majority of serious players shift the bulk of their advertising dollars to the online market. If that were the case, the growth could go to 25%, then balloon to 30, then to 40, and so on. And if so, we could see online ad spending eclipse the old newspaper guard somewhere within the next 2 to 3 years.

However, either way, we are probably only talking about a maximum difference of 12 to 18 months. The point is definitely that the shift is coming, whether it happens 2 years from now or 4 years from now. The important thing is to anticipate it, and use any foreknowledge to jump ahead of your competition.

Labels:

SEW Blog's Response to Matt Cutts's Blog...

SearchEngineWatch Blog: Google Indexing Near Real Time

Here is SEW's response to Cutts's post about real-time indexing on Google's spidering. It is very interesting as well, and points out that we need to remember that Cutts's post relates just to indexing and not necessarily to ranking. Rankings will change over time. However, indexing - according to Google - ought to happen real-time in the not-so-distant future.

It's not Big Brother, but it is Google helping create a more usable internet.

Labels: ,

Matt Cutts -- "Minty Fresh Indexing"

Check out Matt Cutts's blog: Minty Fresh Indexing

Nice to know that those guys over at Google are keeping it real.

This does kind of sound a little bit like Matt is saying, "I work for the greatest company ever" or "My job is better than your job!"

He's probably right...

Anyway, way to go, Google. It's like Google is the feed reader for the whole internet.

Labels: ,

06 August 2007

ConverStations: Facebook vs LinkedIn

ConverStations: Facebook vs LinkedIn

A very interesting post by Mike over at Converstations. I forgot to put this blog on my feed reader, after finding it interesting enough to put on my blogroll (to the right side of the page). I finally did put it on my feed reader, and I suggest you do the same. Mike is keen on blogging, especially for business purposes, as a way to create an ongoing dialog with the public.

Anyway, Facebook is an excellent online community for people to be plugged into. I finally took the Facebook plunge for myself about 2 months ago, and I am very happy with the site. I agree with Mike that opening up the platform to outside developers might be Facebook's trump card over other communities like LinkedIn.

Labels:

02 August 2007

Google Adwords statistics are going haywire!

Take a look here:




That's right, it says that I actually got more clicks than impressions! 5 clicks, in only 2 impressions, which makes up for the 0 for 3 on the first keyword!

Man, I must have been doing something right when I picked that keyword.

In case you're interested in actually using adwords, take a look at this latest post on the Adwords blog about the new Search Query Performance Report. It's a good addition, which should have been made long ago.

Labels: , ,