The world of the web can be innovative, fast-moving and exciting. However, there are some old ideas that just keep coming around again (usually bad), including Digg "framing" outbound links. You click through from Digg (a large social sharing site) and instead of getting the website as it should be you get it with a frame (like a toolbar) on top - taking about 50 pixels away from the website.
I felt old when I was chatting to a colleague who is slightly younger than myself about the frames issues, "wow, thats come around again, I remember the first time ..." and how webmasters had "frame busting" code in their sites, (long ago directories and some search engines would frame outbound links) "for the users of course". It seems that anyone a bit younger than myself don't remember when frames were popular... In fact a lot of Web 1.0 (or probably web 0.9) seem to be lost on the "younger generation" and for the first time I am starting to feel like a web 'veteran'.
Anyhow, back on point - In the end webmasters and web users generally tended to agree that framing outbound links was not the done thing and the practice was pretty much unanimously dropped, there were issues with usability and accessibility, plus generally people didn't like the fact that their well-designed site was being invaded and that valuable screen real estate was stolen.
There are many good reasons for using frames, but framing other people's content was considered a bad thing 10 years ago and I don't know why Digg people think things have changed today. Of course most of the Digg population are too young to recall this...
Engadget knows the answer; they have restored their frame busting script - and you can too by putting this in your page.
<script type="text/javascript">
if (top !== self && document.referrer.match(/digg\.com\/\w{1,8}/)) {
top.location.replace(self.location.href);
}
</script>
Although if you're not using frames you can probably modify it to anyone, not just Digg!
<script type="text/javascript">if (top !== self )
top.location.replace(self.location.href);}</script>
I think this is right... I am not one for writing JavaScript that actually works!
Gerry
April 17, 2009
April 6, 2009
404 day? Suppose, but it is DD/MM/YY, not YY/MM/DD
Apparently it is 404 day today, according to Google's Matt Cutts. Whether or not you want to use the Y/M/D Metrics system or proper English dates, you can't deny that a 404 page is important.
In brief a 404 page is what a system serves up if you go to a page that has been deleted or was never there, although this is more common after web redesigns or simply in development. Web servers by default will return something pretty unfriendly which simply says "page not found" and that's about it. IE will turn that into something slightly less ugly but still off-putting and if you have the Google Toolbar installed it will try to suggest other websites you might be interested in... Most of this will result in you losing a visitor so creating your own is pretty important!
As someone who is definently on the geekier side of the spectrum, I love comedy 404s. Magazine 13 has a good list of them here. However, they all share one minor flaw - they are usually pretty unhelpful and as such the average non-geek will probably be confused and wander off to the competitor.
My three top suggestions for a 404 page from a web marketing point of view are:
1. Make sure it returns a 404 code (this makes sure search engines understand how to index your site correctly
2. Make sure it has navigation and suggested pages - a search function is always useful if you have one
3. Make sure it is trackable (if you're using Google Analytics, include "page not found" in the title bar. You can find it in Analytics by using your Top Content >> Content By Title, and you can then filter it by the box at the bottom of the page)
Whilst you don't want people to come to your 404 page, invariably broken links happen. The more popular your site, the more likely it is that there are broken inbound links, as not everyone or every tool gets links right every time!
If your visitor comes to your 404 page, do you insult them? "You typed in a wrong URL!" to me sounds like you're blaming me for coming to your 404 page (which is unlikely) so don't tell me I am wrong...
Advanced
If you're already tracking your 404 pages, if you spot a popular one, can you 301 it to the right page? Can you contact people who are linking to your 404 pages and suggest a correct one?
So for those of you who think the date should be written wrong, happy 404 day. For those who understand the correct way to write the date in English is, well, the English way... you could say it is still 404 day anyhow, because its still 4/04/
In brief a 404 page is what a system serves up if you go to a page that has been deleted or was never there, although this is more common after web redesigns or simply in development. Web servers by default will return something pretty unfriendly which simply says "page not found" and that's about it. IE will turn that into something slightly less ugly but still off-putting and if you have the Google Toolbar installed it will try to suggest other websites you might be interested in... Most of this will result in you losing a visitor so creating your own is pretty important!
As someone who is definently on the geekier side of the spectrum, I love comedy 404s. Magazine 13 has a good list of them here. However, they all share one minor flaw - they are usually pretty unhelpful and as such the average non-geek will probably be confused and wander off to the competitor.
My three top suggestions for a 404 page from a web marketing point of view are:
1. Make sure it returns a 404 code (this makes sure search engines understand how to index your site correctly
2. Make sure it has navigation and suggested pages - a search function is always useful if you have one
3. Make sure it is trackable (if you're using Google Analytics, include "page not found" in the title bar. You can find it in Analytics by using your Top Content >> Content By Title, and you can then filter it by the box at the bottom of the page)
Whilst you don't want people to come to your 404 page, invariably broken links happen. The more popular your site, the more likely it is that there are broken inbound links, as not everyone or every tool gets links right every time!
If your visitor comes to your 404 page, do you insult them? "You typed in a wrong URL!" to me sounds like you're blaming me for coming to your 404 page (which is unlikely) so don't tell me I am wrong...
Advanced
If you're already tracking your 404 pages, if you spot a popular one, can you 301 it to the right page? Can you contact people who are linking to your 404 pages and suggest a correct one?
So for those of you who think the date should be written wrong, happy 404 day. For those who understand the correct way to write the date in English is, well, the English way... you could say it is still 404 day anyhow, because its still 4/04/
March 5, 2009
All a twitter…
Twitter has hit the headlines repeatedly. Getting a unique insight into the lives of celebrities such as Stephen Fry (presently handling a diseased squid apparently) has pushed usage up substantially over the past few months. It still isn’t mainstream though, with two-thirds of the random three people I asked what Twitter is, not actually knowing what it does.
In short it is a micro blogging service; you type and post short messages that can be read by anyone else. The tweets as they are called are less than 140 characters and initially it was about what you are doing (having breakfast, reading the paper, or as P-Diddy recently twittered, having a bubble bath with an Oscar).
So does it have any real SEO value? Headlines in a popular politics website are being twittered and the URL's clicks are being tracked using an URL shortening service cli.gs which allows us to see just how much traffic is coming in - typically only about 30 visits per story. Not much, but not a bad bit of additional free traffic.
I think the real SEO value of Twitter at the moment is actually in research and communication within the community. I listen to SEO experts and those with the greatest influence (as well as Stephen Fry); as new aspects of SEO come to light it generally gets discussed by this community quickly and decisively reviewed. I also stay in touch with thought leaders who talk about technological developments. I express a few thoughts and get interesting opinions back. Generally my Twitters are a little more professional in nature, with the odd personal comment dropped in, but it isn’t like my Facebook status – which is uniquely personal, opinionated and unrelated to my profession.
Some related links -
TwitterStream visualisations - requires Java
http://twitter.com/dergal - my personal tweets
http://twitter.com/stephenfry - more interesting tweets
In short it is a micro blogging service; you type and post short messages that can be read by anyone else. The tweets as they are called are less than 140 characters and initially it was about what you are doing (having breakfast, reading the paper, or as P-Diddy recently twittered, having a bubble bath with an Oscar).
So does it have any real SEO value? Headlines in a popular politics website are being twittered and the URL's clicks are being tracked using an URL shortening service cli.gs which allows us to see just how much traffic is coming in - typically only about 30 visits per story. Not much, but not a bad bit of additional free traffic.
I think the real SEO value of Twitter at the moment is actually in research and communication within the community. I listen to SEO experts and those with the greatest influence (as well as Stephen Fry); as new aspects of SEO come to light it generally gets discussed by this community quickly and decisively reviewed. I also stay in touch with thought leaders who talk about technological developments. I express a few thoughts and get interesting opinions back. Generally my Twitters are a little more professional in nature, with the odd personal comment dropped in, but it isn’t like my Facebook status – which is uniquely personal, opinionated and unrelated to my profession.
Some related links -
TwitterStream visualisations - requires Java
http://twitter.com/dergal - my personal tweets
http://twitter.com/stephenfry - more interesting tweets
March 2, 2009
Social Media Experts?
Apologies in advance if this sounds like an advert for Razorfish (as my previous employer I have a huge amount of respect for the work they are doing in the field of social media).
Whilst at Razorfish, I did find the world of social media fascinating, but couldn't quite get to grips with how people could ever become social media experts. The field was evolving faster and in directions which were truly unpredictable; the meteoric rise of Facebook (which was in essence a glorified alumni forum which got opened up) and people's desire to blog, tweet and share were truly underestimated.
It was odd to read a post by Shiv Singh in which he says "hiring a social media guru is not always the answer". After listening to him talk before, I would describe him as a true social media guru. However, I completely understand his point. Social media shouldn't be the function of one marketing guy in the corner office, but something taken up by many within an organisation and embraced. However, as one girl recently found out, being too honest could be risky (Girl fired or Facebook comment).
My personal view is that I could never be a "social media expert". As an analytics guy I can listen to the chatter about my (or my clients') brands, and be reactive. As an online marketing guy I could start conversations and "ride the wave", but never really be ahead of it. I can provide insight and assistance as to the who, what and how - but no one today has an accurate crystal ball (but isn't that what makes it fun?).
DirectNews and Adfero have had a lot of traffic both with our own sites and our clients as a result of social media. If an article is well received by Stumble Upon (a social bookmarking sharing site), the traffic generation can be immense. We are constantly experimenting, but one thing we are aware of is that social media communities don't like classic push advertisers screaming "look at me".
Whilst at Razorfish, I did find the world of social media fascinating, but couldn't quite get to grips with how people could ever become social media experts. The field was evolving faster and in directions which were truly unpredictable; the meteoric rise of Facebook (which was in essence a glorified alumni forum which got opened up) and people's desire to blog, tweet and share were truly underestimated.
It was odd to read a post by Shiv Singh in which he says "hiring a social media guru is not always the answer". After listening to him talk before, I would describe him as a true social media guru. However, I completely understand his point. Social media shouldn't be the function of one marketing guy in the corner office, but something taken up by many within an organisation and embraced. However, as one girl recently found out, being too honest could be risky (Girl fired or Facebook comment).
My personal view is that I could never be a "social media expert". As an analytics guy I can listen to the chatter about my (or my clients') brands, and be reactive. As an online marketing guy I could start conversations and "ride the wave", but never really be ahead of it. I can provide insight and assistance as to the who, what and how - but no one today has an accurate crystal ball (but isn't that what makes it fun?).
DirectNews and Adfero have had a lot of traffic both with our own sites and our clients as a result of social media. If an article is well received by Stumble Upon (a social bookmarking sharing site), the traffic generation can be immense. We are constantly experimenting, but one thing we are aware of is that social media communities don't like classic push advertisers screaming "look at me".
February 20, 2009
Content is the foundation of the SEO pyramid
In the current economic climate, to suggest that a pyramid is a model of stability invites derision. Wasn’t Bernie Madoff’s giant scam a “pyramid scheme” of sorts? And doesn’t that provide an eerie study in miniature of the global financial crisis itself? So take your pyramids and get out of here. A pyramid scheme, however, starts at the top, with a handful of participants recruiting new members, who in turn have to recruit ever more members in exponentially expanding layers.
Whether you believe they were the handiwork of ancient Egyptians or aliens, we can all agree that the actual pyramids were not constructed from the top down. Rather they started from the bottom and worked up, and the pyramids have lasted a good few thousand years so far. And doesn’t that remind us - as the bishop in the radio studio would have it – of the role of content in SEO? It is the foundation upon which all other work must be overlaid.
You won’t get links without good content to link to. Social media promotion needs content to be effective. Keywords need to feature in content. Any of these techniques without a base of good solid content beneath will come crashing down to earth at the speed of a Wall Street trader. And as we all know, the volume of a pyramid is equal to the area of the base times the height over three...This is probably stretching the metaphor way beyond the original intentions of those who have used it before, and for that we apologise. But the point is, the more content you have, the bigger, stronger and deeper the foundations of your edifice and the higher you can build. You have more pages to promote, more points of entry for visitors, more material to interest search engines, more opportunities to optimise to your keywords, more room to establish yourself as an authority in your area. And quality content that people will want to read will endure over time. Admittedly, not for thousands of years, but investment in content and SEO have been demonstrated time and again to be much more cost effective in generating traffic in the long term than spending on PPC.
The key to building something that is going to last, rather than collapse, is to start with the foundations. And content is the foundation of the SEO pyramid.
By Gerry White and Alan Boyce
Whether you believe they were the handiwork of ancient Egyptians or aliens, we can all agree that the actual pyramids were not constructed from the top down. Rather they started from the bottom and worked up, and the pyramids have lasted a good few thousand years so far. And doesn’t that remind us - as the bishop in the radio studio would have it – of the role of content in SEO? It is the foundation upon which all other work must be overlaid.
You won’t get links without good content to link to. Social media promotion needs content to be effective. Keywords need to feature in content. Any of these techniques without a base of good solid content beneath will come crashing down to earth at the speed of a Wall Street trader. And as we all know, the volume of a pyramid is equal to the area of the base times the height over three...This is probably stretching the metaphor way beyond the original intentions of those who have used it before, and for that we apologise. But the point is, the more content you have, the bigger, stronger and deeper the foundations of your edifice and the higher you can build. You have more pages to promote, more points of entry for visitors, more material to interest search engines, more opportunities to optimise to your keywords, more room to establish yourself as an authority in your area. And quality content that people will want to read will endure over time. Admittedly, not for thousands of years, but investment in content and SEO have been demonstrated time and again to be much more cost effective in generating traffic in the long term than spending on PPC.
The key to building something that is going to last, rather than collapse, is to start with the foundations. And content is the foundation of the SEO pyramid.
By Gerry White and Alan Boyce
Guaranteed top ten positions - employing a black hat SEO
We tend to find a lot of our clients on the back of recommendations both directly from our clients and indirectly from SEO agencies who understand that what we do compliments what they do, but occasionally our clients get offers that seem to be too good to be true… "Get 20 keywords into top ten positions, or pay us nothing!"
As many things that sound too good to be true - no risk, guaranteed placement? - unfortunately there is a small risk. This risk is the fact that these smaller businesses use many well-known black hat techniques that do tend to work, like "mesh linking" and spamming forums, but which if Google finds out you employ will stop indexing your site. This of course means no traffic, and repeat offenders can be banned permanently... So if your business depends on search engine traffic, using one of these agencies is the equivalent of trusting that man in the pub that guarantees you a sure thing on the 10 to 1 horse (and betting your business on it).
DirectNews does give some SEO advice to clients. We have (had to) become specialists in optimising clients' news to make sure it does the job and generate targeted traffic, otherwise we would lose this business. And while we aren't a specialist SEO agency, we do recommend talking to one...
Detected
"Don't worry, Google can't detect this..."
Google doesn't need to - if you suddenly start doing better than expected for a term, your competitors will be curious as to why. And if they spot a black hat technique which stops them ranking better than you, they will happily fill in the Google spam report.
How to select an SEO Company:
SEO is filled with dodgy companies, so
1. Ask about other clients
2. Ask them about their view on black hat techniques (don't expect them to be whiter than white - they should know and understand the techniques, but most good companies do not recommend anything can get you a ban).
3. Ask them what a 301 is and what it is used for…
Google provide a list on what to look for in an SEO company - http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35291
Additional advice that I personally would give
I have worked in SEO before and I strongly believe that a good SEO expert combined with a good site works. However, it does take time and you need to allow the SEO to work with small points on the site, from the HTML through to the content writing. All the small improvements will take time to see any benefits from, so be patient. Also, it won't just be about keyword rankings but about generating good quality traffic from the search engines. (It's no good ranking for a phrase such as 'car insurance' if you don't rank for anything else.)
Most reputable SEO agencies will take time to see results. SEO can be a relatively slow process - most of the advice won't give you any huge leap (changing code on site, a few links here and there) but the sum of this advice and the impact on your overall search traffic should be immense...
SEO isn't a silver bullet - you still need a good site.
As many things that sound too good to be true - no risk, guaranteed placement? - unfortunately there is a small risk. This risk is the fact that these smaller businesses use many well-known black hat techniques that do tend to work, like "mesh linking" and spamming forums, but which if Google finds out you employ will stop indexing your site. This of course means no traffic, and repeat offenders can be banned permanently... So if your business depends on search engine traffic, using one of these agencies is the equivalent of trusting that man in the pub that guarantees you a sure thing on the 10 to 1 horse (and betting your business on it).
DirectNews does give some SEO advice to clients. We have (had to) become specialists in optimising clients' news to make sure it does the job and generate targeted traffic, otherwise we would lose this business. And while we aren't a specialist SEO agency, we do recommend talking to one...
Detected
"Don't worry, Google can't detect this..."
Google doesn't need to - if you suddenly start doing better than expected for a term, your competitors will be curious as to why. And if they spot a black hat technique which stops them ranking better than you, they will happily fill in the Google spam report.
How to select an SEO Company:
SEO is filled with dodgy companies, so
1. Ask about other clients
2. Ask them about their view on black hat techniques (don't expect them to be whiter than white - they should know and understand the techniques, but most good companies do not recommend anything can get you a ban).
3. Ask them what a 301 is and what it is used for…
Google provide a list on what to look for in an SEO company - http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35291
Additional advice that I personally would give
I have worked in SEO before and I strongly believe that a good SEO expert combined with a good site works. However, it does take time and you need to allow the SEO to work with small points on the site, from the HTML through to the content writing. All the small improvements will take time to see any benefits from, so be patient. Also, it won't just be about keyword rankings but about generating good quality traffic from the search engines. (It's no good ranking for a phrase such as 'car insurance' if you don't rank for anything else.)
Most reputable SEO agencies will take time to see results. SEO can be a relatively slow process - most of the advice won't give you any huge leap (changing code on site, a few links here and there) but the sum of this advice and the impact on your overall search traffic should be immense...
SEO isn't a silver bullet - you still need a good site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
