December 8, 2008

Ranking highly in search engines has nothing to do with SEO

NOTE: This post is old, and is probably on different subject matter than my current writing. It is possible the information is outdated or my opinions have changed. -- Josh Klein, May 28, 2012

The two most popular websites on the planet are Yahoo.com and Google.com. Most people open their browser right to a search engine, and most people experience the whole web through a search engine, so it behooves you to know how search works.

There are plenty of tactical lessons to learn — and many places to find them around the web — but I want to share a big strategic lesson that’s more important:

Ranking highly in search engines has nothing to do with SEO. Here’s why.

Premise 1: A link is the only way to navigate the web.

This is not hyperbole.

If there were no links from the page you are reading right now — and no one had been shouting URLs at you from the television set — you could not go anywhere else on the web, including other pages on my site.

I think the reason people miss this so often is that we perceive the basic unit of the web as a web site.

The web isn’t made up of sites, it’s made up of pages. The characteristics that connect pages into what we think of as a web site — a common group of links as navigation, the same domain name, similar designs — are illusory.

This isn’t semantics; it’s a technical reality. Any geeks out there know I’m talking about the stateless HTTP protocol (you can point to AJAX and Flash as a counterpoint, but practically speaking, those just don’t matter enough).

The illusion of the web site has practical reasons — for both humans and search engines — but the “home page” as a traffic gatekeeper is an antiquated idea.

The reality is that everything is one link away from everything else. Two pages are “next to” each other whether they belong to the same web site or not.

This means a search engine result page is just a collection of pages being placed next to each other, and you’ve got to make every one of those pages attractive.

Premise 2: Every link is a word of mouth recommendation.

The web is a giant word of mouth machine. People only get to your website through one of two ways — you paid someone to recommend you (an ad), or you were recommended naturally. Either way, the recommendation manifests as a link.

Every link is a choice to recommend a page, including on search engine result pages (SERPs).

Ranking highly in Google is the result of Google recommending you be “placed next to” the result page for a term someone has searched for.

You don’t need to be an SEO guru to understand that Google wants to recommend the most relevant results to a searcher’s query. Find out what people are searching for in your topic (Google Keyword Tool is a good place to find out), and come up with a way to give them what they want.

Google uses an algorithm that aggregates human judgment instead of an editor, but the result is still a word of mouth recommendation.

This is not a system you can game.

4 key strategic takeaways:

  1. Word of mouth is the only thing on the web.
  2. Search engines reflect the collective word of mouth momentum leading to your page. Forget SEO and think WOMO … er, word of mouth optimization.
  3. Optimizing for search can only be done by optimizing for humans. Translation — you rank highly in search by being worth caring about. If you optimize according to today’s SEO best practices to the detriment of human appeal, prepare to be left in the dust. Anyway, when Google goes away, what will you have left?
  4. Consider the synergies between pages you control, whether they live on your site or not. For example, every social media profile is another web page to make worth caring about. In search ranking, this matters.

Let’s switch modes and get tactical.

You don’t need to read a word of SEO technical jargon to know that search is about links. To understanding “linking strategy”, we turn to the great Groucho Marx, who once said, “I would not join any club that would have someone like me for a member.”

If it’s easy to get a link, that probably means it’s not a link worth having.

There are plenty of quick fix ways to dominate the search engines that will be useless in the long run — or get you removed from the index — and the long run is only a few months. They all involve treating search engines like they do something other than aggregate link word of mouth in order to make contextual recommendations.

So a word of warning: the short term tactics are what some SEO experts talk about because they want you to pay them to consult for a few weeks. You’ll see a nice ROI and pay them handsomely. Who cares if you crash and burn later?

To be fair, some of these tactics are standards compliant best practices that you should implement, but they’re marginally important compared to the big picture strategy. The only long term strategy involves making a website worth caring about, and that has nothing to do with search engines.

So here’s the search engine ranking lesson:

The things that actually work in the search engines are precisely the things you would be doing if search engines didn’t exist.

This may not be a useful tip to the SEO crazies (you know who you are), but to the rest of you who look at your website holistically, I think this is refreshing. After all, you do care about what happens after someone from search reaches your site… right?

I know this isn’t what some people want to hear. They want to know the easy way, as if there has to be one. Unfortunately for them, sometimes the things most worth having are the hardest to get.

It’s the people, stupid.

P.S. – This idea has been swirling around in my head for awhile, but I wasn’t inspired until I started reading the SEO 2.0 blog. SEO 2.0 is basically about how to avoid being an SEO dick (or an SEO 1.0 if you want to be nice about it).

For full disclosure, I didn’t know SEO 2.0′s Tadeusz until he called Josh Klein Web Strategy one of the must read new blogs of 2008, but I’m writing about him because his blog is smart. OK, maybe a little of both.

Due credit to Tadeusz for the inspiration.

---
  • http://scienceforseo.blogspot.com CJ

    Brilliant :)

    CJ

  • http://www.EasyLocalShopping.com easylocalshopping

    I agree with your premise. A Website is an extension of an individual or company or group… It is not impersonal, it has a heart and only humans can understand that, not machines. Humans communicate. Humans talk to and talk about each others and the search engines are just a reflection of the community. Let's think about SEO in terms of generating Word-of-Mouth and watch the rankings go up.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Thanks CJ, but I think it's almost the opposite… so simple that people over think it!

  • http://www.jozsoft.com/ Joe Hall

    Great post, however, it is completely mis-titled. The truth is that everything you have written here is at the very heart of what the best SEO's say all the time. So if you some how think that what you have just written isn't SEO, then you need to really do some more research on what SEO is.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    You're right. At the end of the day, this post on SEO not mattering is a how-to post on SEO. The smartest people in marketing for organic search know this and say this, but there is a cognitive gap with business owners.

    My point to them would be — you cannot hire someone to white wash your website for search engines; instead, it is a process that defines your business at it's core.

  • http://sundsted.com/ Todd Sundsted

    The unfortunate part is that I can throw a rock and hit enough mediocre web-sites in very competitive markets looking for a quick-fix traffic boost to keep the legions of SEO specialists in business for a while longer. If you have high hopes, money on the line, and you're running out of runway, quick fixes look pretty good.

    With that said, this was the best post on the subject I've read!

  • http://OnlineMarketerBlog.com Ulysses1

    This is a great post, Josh. It’s so simple but you’re right – people want a quick fix, they want to get up there and then not think about it.

    It’s the opposite of what the web really is – a continually changing conversation. A website isn’t something you *do,* optimize for SEO, and then walk away from it. You keep putting up useful pages, you build your audience and your importance to a community.

    Well done.

  • http://OnlineMarketerBlog.com Ulysses1

    This is a great post, Josh. It’s so simple but you’re right – people want a quick fix, they want to get up there and then not think about it.

    It’s the opposite of what the web really is – a continually changing conversation. A website isn’t something you *do,* optimize for SEO, and then walk away from. You keep putting up useful pages, you build your audience and your importance to a community.

    Well done.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    The thing is, we're still in the wild west of the web (did I just redefine “www”? I might have to trademark that.)

    There are tons of schlocky, mediocre, quick ways to get yourself a boost. I'm confident that in a few years, they'll all go away. The question for website owners is whether they want to play catchup in the short run (and now that SEO is as widespread as it is, will they really be able to win like that?) — or should they aim to create an ownable asset for the future?

    This is a blog about the latter, so I hope I change some people's minds.

    And thank you for the high praise Todd!

  • http://OnlineMarketerBlog.com Ulysses1

    This is a great post, Josh. It's so simple but you're right – people want a quick fix, they want to get up there and then not think about it.

    It's the opposite of what the web really is – a continually changing conversation. A website isn't something you *do,* optimize for SEO, and then walk away from. You keep putting up useful pages, you build your audience and your importance to a community.

    Well done.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Glad you enjoyed it, DJ.

    I love this: “A website isn't something you *do* …” I have been writing down some thoughts on the trouble with big companies considering their website part of their advertising budget, and I think your comment nails it on the head.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    The only problem is how frustrating it can be.

    There are great tools that exist to track daily traffic, watch your search rankings, communicate with people … they all add the ability to keep a vigilant eye on your progress. The only problem is that word-of-mouth is non-linear. It will be months before people even start talking, and further months before you notice any changes.

    The long view is the road less traveled because it hurts.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    You know, I've been wondering about that “the rest will take care of itself” thing. Practically speaking, you do need to get out there and seed this thing to make it work … but you can't do so at the expense of that content and audience.

    I mean, there are lots of good reasons to advertise. I advertise (not for my blog) — so I don't want to give the wrong impression on that.

    But where is the perfect balance? Seems like its a sliding scale that each of us has to find.

    Thanks for stopping by again.

  • jennikate

    This is music to my ears – I'm primarily a user experience manager and the battles I have to get user experience improvements through development often leave me tearing my hair out.

    You do need to get your site out there and visible, but what's the point if once your users hit it they have a bad experience.
    You're right, there has to be a perfect balance somewhere.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    I find that UX people are usually the ones who most “get it”. Now they just have to learn to write, code, design, and market so they can do the whole thing :)

  • jennikate

    I'm working on it ;)

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    I think paying attention to what people do after they reach the site is almost the whole point (see the comment by jennikate) — and that's what you were getting at with “and the rest takes care of itself”.

    There is no one “right” way to do it, but there are many wrong ways.

    It's interesting how often I violate SEO — and even usability — “best practices”. My posts are too infrequent, too long, and I use words above the 8th grade level.

    It's fun to buck the system.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    You might like a new tool we've been using to take UX to the next level — Protoshare: http://www.protoshare.com/

  • http://scienceforseo.blogspot.com CJ

    Brilliant :)

    CJ

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Thanks CJ, but I think it's almost the opposite… so simple that people over think it!

  • http://www.EasyLocalShopping.com easylocalshopping

    I agree with your premise. A Website is an extension of an individual or company or group… It is not impersonal, it has a heart and only humans can understand that, not machines. Humans communicate. Humans talk to and talk about each others and the search engines are just a reflection of the community. Let's think about SEO in terms of generating Word-of-Mouth and watch the rankings go up.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      The only problem is how frustrating it can be.

      There are great tools that exist to track daily traffic, watch your search rankings, communicate with people … they all add the ability to keep a vigilant eye on your progress. The only problem is that word-of-mouth is non-linear. It will be months before people even start talking, and further months before you notice any changes.

      The long view is the road less traveled because it hurts.

  • http://www.jozsoft.com joehall

    Great post, however, it is completely mis-titled. The truth is that everything you have written here is at the very heart of what the best SEO's say all the time. So if you some how think that what you have just written isn't SEO, then you need to really do some more research on what SEO is.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      You're right. At the end of the day, this post on SEO not mattering is a how-to post on SEO. The smartest people in marketing for organic search know this and say this, but there is a cognitive gap with business owners.

      My point to them would be — you cannot hire someone to white wash your website for search engines; instead, it is a process that defines your business at it's core.

  • http://sundsted.com/ Todd Sundsted

    The unfortunate part is that I can throw a rock and hit enough mediocre web-sites in very competitive markets looking for a quick-fix traffic boost to keep the legions of SEO specialists in business for a while longer. If you have high hopes, money on the line, and you're running out of runway, quick fixes look pretty good.

    With that said, this was the best post on the subject I've read!

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      The thing is, we're still in the wild west of the web (did I just redefine “www”? I might have to trademark that.)

      There are tons of schlocky, mediocre, quick ways to get yourself a boost. I'm confident that in a few years, they'll all go away. The question for website owners is whether they want to play catchup in the short run (and now that SEO is as widespread as it is, will they really be able to win like that?) — or should they aim to create an ownable asset for the future?

      This is a blog about the latter, so I hope I change some people's minds.

      And thank you for the high praise Todd!

      • BK

        The problem is, you can lose a ton of traffic in the meantime if you take the high road, while your competitors can buy a few cheesy posts from Pay Per Post and other cheap blog brokers, and rank in the top five for keywords in a competitive market. Google says they dislike this, but it would be dead simple to stop this practice if they wanted to, and they haven't. Being at the top is self-reinforcing, so those PPP buyers are getting HUGE value for 'cheating.'

      • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

        It all depends on whether you're out for a quick buck or you're building a business. Spammers and cheats will always win in the short run and lose in the long run. You will always be frustrated by the cheaters, but you have to realize that they aren't the SAME cheaters. The cheaters from last year all lost their livelihood and got replaced by new ones. That's not the game smart people play.

  • http://OnlineMarketerBlog.com Ulysses1

    This is a great post, Josh. It's so simple but you're right – people want a quick fix, they want to get up there and then not think about it.

    It's the opposite of what the web really is – a continually changing conversation. A website isn't something you *do,* optimize for SEO, and then walk away from. You keep putting up useful pages, you build your audience and your importance to a community.

    Well done.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Glad you enjoyed it, DJ.

      I love this: “A website isn't something you *do* …” I have been writing down some thoughts on the trouble with big companies considering their website part of their advertising budget, and I think your comment nails it on the head.

  • http://www.marketingformavens.com Chris

    Awesome information as usual. With all the SEO hype that is out there, it's refreshing to read a thought provoking post that gets back to the basics and is truly helpful to those who can look long term. Focus on your content and your audience and the rest will take care of it self.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      You know, I've been wondering about that “the rest will take care of itself” thing. Practically speaking, you do need to get out there and seed this thing to make it work … but you can't do so at the expense of that content and audience.

      I mean, there are lots of good reasons to advertise. I advertise (not for my blog) — so I don't want to give the wrong impression on that.

      But where is the perfect balance? Seems like its a sliding scale that each of us has to find.

      Thanks for stopping by again.

      • http://www.marketingformavens.com Chris

        I certainly over-simplified it with “the rest will take care of itself” comment…it's not that easy but for those worrying about length of content on page, the number of times a keyword is mentioned, and other such tricks need to let go and focus that time on the content.

        Once the content is posted there is definitely a level of promotion that needs to be done to ensure you reach your audience. Waiting for the search engines to show up is not a strategy that will work effectively.

        I should also mention that I like how you hinted at paying attention to what people do after they reach your site. This is vastly over looked and a whole other topic entirely but one worth noting.

      • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

        I think paying attention to what people do after they reach the site is almost the whole point (see the comment by jennikate) — and that's what you were getting at with “and the rest takes care of itself”.

        There is no one “right” way to do it, but there are many wrong ways.

        It's interesting how often I violate SEO — and even usability — “best practices”. My posts are too infrequent, too long, and I use words above the 8th grade level.

        It's fun to buck the system.

  • http://green-gecko.net Jenni Wallace

    This is music to my ears – I'm primarily a user experience manager and the battles I have to get user experience improvements through development often leave me tearing my hair out.

    You do need to get your site out there and visible, but what's the point if once your users hit it they have a bad experience.
    You're right, there has to be a perfect balance somewhere.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      I find that UX people are usually the ones who most “get it”. Now they just have to learn to write, code, design, and market so they can do the whole thing :)

      • http://green-gecko.net Jenni Wallace

        I'm working on it ;)

      • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

        You might like a new tool we've been using to take UX to the next level — Protoshare: http://www.protoshare.com/

  • http://www.tumblemoose.com tumblemoose

    Josh,

    I just subscribed to your email feed the other day and after reading this article I know I made a good choice. I love the writing style and the information in this article. Thanks for giving me permission (albeit unintentionally) to not be mechanical about my SEO.

    It is all about the people, isn't it?

    Please consider this article Dugg and Stumbled.

    Cheers

    George

  • nan

    Another very clear article from you. It seems so obvious when you explain it – how come this is just about the only place I hear it explained so clearly – duh! – a website worth caring about – what an idea.
    Thanks.
    Nan

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    George – Awesome to have you as a subscriber. I hope I can keep you entertained :) It is definitely all about the people.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Seems like a novel idea — a website worth caring about — but when you get neck deep it's easy to become distracted by schlocky sales tactics. I think it's important to take the advice you get from bloggers with a grain of salt (mine included)! Try to find out if the person giving the advice has actually ever done anything :)

    The web is unique in how transparent it makes things. Outside the web, you may be making a choice to balance what's right for your customers and what's right for your business, whereas on the web those two are always the same thing.

  • http://www.tumblemoose.com tumblemoose

    Josh,

    I just subscribed to your email feed the other day and after reading this article I know I made a good choice. I love the writing style and the information in this article. Thanks for giving me permission (albeit unintentionally) to not be mechanical about my SEO.

    It is all about the people, isn't it?

    Please consider this article Dugg and Stumbled.

    Cheers

    George

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      George – Awesome to have you as a subscriber. I hope I can keep you entertained :) It is definitely all about the people.

  • http://blog.warcom.com.au Paul Warren

    Absolutely awesome post Josh.

    WOMO (haha!) as you call it, has always been an integral part of our business model, and reading your blog confirms we're doing the right thing.

    And at the end of the day, “SEO” is pretty much the “ground floor” to “WOMO”.

    In other words, if a customer finds you in a search engine (their first contact), you want to insure you keep that customer so they go on to tell their friends about you. (WOMO'ing?) … Thus making WOMO, far more important than SEO in terms of potential marketing!

    There is no better too, than word of mouth and viral marketing.

    I think far to many online companies take this for granted, and possibly don't even consider it important at all..

    Thanks again!

    Cheers,
    Paul

  • nan

    Another very clear article from you. It seems so obvious when you explain it – how come this is just about the only place I hear it explained so clearly – duh! – a website worth caring about – what an idea.
    Thanks.
    Nan

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Seems like a novel idea — a website worth caring about — but when you get neck deep it's easy to become distracted by schlocky sales tactics. I think it's important to take the advice you get from bloggers with a grain of salt (mine included)! Try to find out if the person giving the advice has actually ever done anything :)

      The web is unique in how transparent it makes things. Outside the web, you may be making a choice to balance what's right for your customers and what's right for your business, whereas on the web those two are always the same thing.

  • http://camthecameraman.com Cameron Bailey

    Great Information, I am just starting with an SEO company and I must say that this is what we say often, make the website useful and beneficial to humans first then make it readable by the machines.

    Really liked the article

  • http://www.averagegal.com AverageGal

    What a great outlook on how to be grow a blog as well as become a successful blogger. You're right; it's not about SEO… well technically not anyway. I really appreciate the post; it's very grounding.

  • http://blog.warcom.com.au Paul Warren

    Absolutely awesome post Josh.

    WOMO (haha!) as you call it, has always been an integral part of our business model, and reading your blog confirms we're doing the right thing.

    And at the end of the day, “SEO” is pretty much the “ground floor” to “WOMO”.

    In other words, if a customer finds you in a search engine (their first contact), you want to insure you keep that customer so they go on to tell their friends about you. (WOMO'ing?) … Thus making WOMO, far more important than SEO in terms of potential marketing!

    There is no better too, than word of mouth and viral marketing.

    I think far to many online companies take this for granted, and possibly don't even consider it important at all..

    Thanks again!

    Cheers,
    Paul

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Thanks Paul! Maybe I should add a little ™ next to WOMO — but then I guess that would defeat the purpose :)

      WOMO is bigger than the search engines, but then again so is much of SEO. After all, the technical side of SEO is mostly the same as “accessibility” — you want to make it obvious what your page is about in your title, give the right tags where they belong, etc.

      It's funny you mention viral marketing, because I've been thinking a lot about that recently. I don't doubt it's existence, but I wonder at the value of thinking about it as any different than word of mouth. Might be a future post in that thought somewhere…

      Thanks for sharing your experience, and always glad to have you stop by.

      • http://blog.warcom.com.au Paul Warren

        Viral marketing and WOMO(tm Josh) pretty much go hand in hand with each other when you think about it!

        Viral marketing really is the precursor to word of mouth advertising…

        In order for something to be 'word of mouth' worthy, it needs to be interesting, so people want to spread the word, so to speak.

        When we think about the world 'Viral' we think, nasty diseases, spreading themselves automatically and replicating amongst communities, cities, 'et all.

        If you want a prime example of viral marketing, look at spam bots.

        They hop from host (site) to host (site) and plaster their nasties all over the sites. Now obviously this is frowned upon!

        However keeping that in mind, if we can get humans to behave like this (and we can, quite easily) we program people, to notice our content, virally spread it amongst their communities (forums, myspace, facebook, etc) and friends and we soon have ourselves one all mighty viral-human-spam-bot.

        All the best,
        Paul.

      • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

        I think my problem is not with the word “viral”, but rather with combining it with the word “marketing”… because it suggests you're doing it on purpose.

        You can't market something virally, because that is a contradiction in terms — the whole point of viral is that you don't control it from Central Command.

        Viral marketing is about putting the tools in place to let something go viral (meaning “send to a friend” sort of functionality), but otherwise just making it so freaking badass that people can't help but tell every person they know about it.

        That's a great goal, but not really something to plan for — and marketing is planning. I just think it's more useful to think of viral as a pleasant side effect you shouldn't think too hard about. It can't be forced.

  • http://camthecameraman.com Cameron Bailey

    Great Information, I am just starting with an SEO company and I must say that this is what we say often, make the website useful and beneficial to humans first then make it readable by the machines.

    Really liked the article

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      That's great to hear Cameron. Not every SEO company is a villain; there are so many out there quietly doing it the right way and helping their clients. As an industry, good SEO needs to become easier to differentiate from bad seo.

      Sounds like your team is working hard to make that happen.

  • Denise

    Just read your helpful article over at Darren's ProBlogger site. I agree with Chris' comments here. Even though I'm still learning and don't understand the whole tech end of it, I was still able to find myself encouraged and finding that I was or am on the right track. Thankfully! While still in the process of putting my site together, perhaps now I'm a tad less stressed over all this 'SEO' info that I feel I'm so bombarded with daily, since reading these two latest writings. So to reiterate – “…this is refreshing.” I do know there is plenty of work and effort involved, but with so much to learn, I think I still have some time on my side to be part of a successful blogosphere. Thanks for enlightening me Josh.

  • http://www.averagegal.com AverageGal

    What a great outlook on how to be grow a blog as well as become a successful blogger. You're right; it's not about SEO… well technically not anyway. I really appreciate the post; it's very grounding.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Glad you found it useful, and I'm also glad you saw through the title a little. It is about SEO … but not in the way we thought.

  • Denise

    Just read your helpful article over at Darren's ProBlogger site. I agree with Chris' comments here. Even though I'm still learning and don't understand the whole tech end of it, I was still able to find myself encouraged and finding that I was or am on the right track. Thankfully! While still in the process of putting my site together, perhaps now I'm a tad less stressed over all this 'SEO' info that I feel I'm so bombarded with daily, since reading these two latest writings. So to reiterate – “…this is refreshing.” I do know there is plenty of work and effort involved, but with so much to learn, I think I still have some time on my side to be part of a successful blogosphere. Thanks for enlightening me Josh.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      You're moving in the right direction if you're doing anything. You'd be shocked at the volume of people reading all the “how to” stuff, nodding their heads, and going back to watching television :)

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Thanks Paul! Maybe I should add a little ™ next to WOMO — but then I guess that would defeat the purpose :)

    WOMO is bigger than the search engines, but then again so is much of SEO. After all, the technical side of SEO is mostly the same as “accessibility” — you want to make it obvious what your page is about in your title, give the right tags where they belong, etc.

    It's funny you mention viral marketing, because I've been thinking a lot about that recently. I don't doubt it's existence, but I wonder at the value of thinking about it as any different than word of mouth. Might be a future post in that thought somewhere…

    Thanks for sharing your experience, and always glad to have you stop by.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    That's great to hear Cameron. Not every SEO company is a villain; there are so many out there quietly doing it the right way and helping their clients. As an industry, good SEO needs to become easier to differentiate from bad seo.

    Sounds like your team is working hard to make that happen.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Glad you found it useful, and I'm also glad you saw through the title a little. It is about SEO … but not in the way we thought.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    You're moving in the right direction if you're doing anything. You'd be shocked at the volume of people reading all the “how to” stuff, nodding their heads, and going back to watching television :)

  • http://blog.warcom.com.au Paul Warren

    Viral marketing and WOMO(tm Josh) pretty much go hand in hand with each other when you think about it!

    Viral marketing really is the precursor to word of mouth advertising…

    In order for something to be 'word of mouth' worthy, it needs to be interesting, so people want to spread the word, so to speak.

    When we think about the world 'Viral' we think, nasty diseases, spreading themselves automatically and replicating amongst communities, cities, 'et all.

    If you want a prime example of viral marketing, look at spam bots.

    They hop from host (site) to host (site) and plaster their nasties all over the sites. Now obviously this is frowned upon!

    However keeping that in mind, if we can get humans to behave like this (and we can, quite easily) we program people, to notice our content, virally spread it amongst their communities (forums, myspace, facebook, etc) and friends and we soon have ourselves one all mighty viral-human-spam-bot.

    All the best,
    Paul.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    I think my problem is not with the word “viral”, but rather with combining it with the word “marketing”… because it suggests you're doing it on purpose.

    You can't market something virally, because that is a contradiction in terms — the whole point of viral is that you don't control it from Central Command.

    Viral marketing is about putting the tools in place to let something go viral (meaning “send to a friend” sort of functionality), but otherwise just making it so freaking badass that people can't help but tell every person they know about it.

    That's a great goal, but not really something to plan for — and marketing is planning. I just think it's more useful to think of viral as a pleasant side effect you shouldn't think too hard about. It can't be forced.

  • http://www.michaeldaehn.com Michael Daehn

    JK- I feel the same way about SEO, but have a hard time explaining it to people. Thanks for the well written article that simplifies what SEO is trying to accomplish- helping people find and use your site (er…pages).

    Props!

  • http://www.michaeldaehn.com Michael Daehn

    JK- I feel the same way about SEO, but have a hard time explaining it to people. Thanks for the well written article that simplifies what SEO is trying to accomplish- helping people find and use your site (er…pages).

    Props!

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Thanks Michael. Feel free to point them here when they need an explanation :)

  • http://carissaputri.com Busby SEO Test!!!

    I am still new in SEO field. thank you for this post, you have make a clear explanation about it :)

  • Busby SEO Test!!!

    I am still new in SEO field. thank you for this post, you have make a clear explanation about it :)

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      If you're new in the field, a great place to start is http://www.seomoz.org

  • BK

    The problem is, you can lose a ton of traffic in the meantime if you take the high road, while your competitors can buy a few cheesy posts from Pay Per Post and other cheap blog brokers, and rank in the top five for keywords in a competitive market. Google says they dislike this, but it would be dead simple to stop this practice if they wanted to, and they haven't. Being at the top is self-reinforcing, so those PPP buyers are getting HUGE value for 'cheating.'

  • andrew

    I really like, and agree with the concept of links=WOM, but to say “Ranking highly in search engines has nothing to do with SEO.” is a tad alarmist, even for an article teaser. Here's why.

    Neighbors can make the neighborhood.
    Case A:
    I launch a new site with 100 articles written on a given subject.
    I have the homepage gain good PR through organic links because one article was picked up by a big blogger.
    My site is well optimized for SEs in layout, navigation, interlinking, breadcrumb navigation, etc.
    The SEs index the other pages on the site
    Other content-relevant areas of my site gain natural lift on queries that the above page with good PR would rank well on in SERPs
    My site gains additional navigation links in queries that return my homepage (About, News, Articles, Etc.)
    And I can't prove it, but interlinking within a site tells the SEs what you think of your own content and while it doesn’t count as much as a real link, it does have value towards PR.

    At this point the number of and depth of impressions my site gains increases with no further change in links to my site.

    Case B:
    I launch a new site with 100 articles written on a given subject.
    I have the homepage gain good PR through organic links because one article was picked up by a big blogger.
    My site isn't SE compliant
    SEs can't crawl the site beyond this page.
    No other content gets indexed.

    I maintain my pathetic existence.

    Almost all white hat SEO experts will preach CONTENT IS KING
    The Golden Rule of SEO: Content is King – http://searchenginewatch.com/3625720
    Content is King – http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/014611.html

    Everyone is telling companies to create content, and good SEO people will not forget to remember that people are going to be reading this stuff. The User can still come first while optimizing. If you really want to sustain long term ranking, your content should be grouped in such a way to utilize related taxonomy and breadcrumb trails, keywords in <h> and <title> tags, good <meta> tags for those SE that still return the description tags on SERPs. All of this serves the user by making navigation easier and more defined. And more accessible and relevant to the SEs

    I guess you can argue some of this is good site design and architecture, but I can find a 100 awesome sites that have a great user experience but are SEO black holes. I am talking passing crazy variables, frames, duplicate content…not to mention flash

  • andrew

    I really like, and agree with the concept of links=WOM, but to say “Ranking highly in search engines has nothing to do with SEO.” is a tad alarmist, even for an article teaser. Here's why.

    Neighbors can make the neighborhood.
    Case A:
    I launch a new site with 100 articles written on a given subject.
    I have the homepage gain good PR through organic links because one article was picked up by a big blogger.
    My site is well optimized for SEs in layout, navigation, interlinking, breadcrumb navigation, etc.
    The SEs index the other pages on the site
    Other content-relevant areas of my site gain natural lift on queries that the above page with good PR would rank well on in SERPs
    My site gains additional navigation links in queries that return my homepage (About, News, Articles, Etc.)
    And I can't prove it, but interlinking within a site tells the SEs what you think of your own content and while it doesn’t count as much as a real link, it does have value towards PR.

    At this point the number of and depth of impressions my site gains increases with no further change in links to my site.

    Case B:
    I launch a new site with 100 articles written on a given subject.
    I have the homepage gain good PR through organic links because one article was picked up by a big blogger.
    My site isn't SE compliant
    SEs can't crawl the site beyond this page.
    No other content gets indexed.

    I maintain my pathetic existence.

    Almost all white hat SEO experts will preach CONTENT IS KING
    The Golden Rule of SEO: Content is King – http://searchenginewatch.com/3625720
    Content is King – http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/014611.html

    Everyone is telling companies to create content, and good SEO people will not forget to remember that people are going to be reading this stuff. The User can still come first while optimizing. If you really want to sustain long term ranking, your content should be grouped in such a way to utilize related taxonomy and breadcrumb trails, keywords in <h> and <title> tags, good <meta> tags for those SE that still return the description tags on SERPs. All of this serves the user by making navigation easier and more defined. And more accessible and relevant to the SEs

    I guess you can argue some of this is good site design and architecture, but I can find a 100 awesome sites that have a great user experience but are SEO black holes. I am talking passing crazy variables, frames, duplicate content…not to mention flash

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      I'm with you, and you anticipated my argument; I do think of what you call SEO as good site design and architecture… but more importantly good technology choices and basic competence. I capitulate that some of what SEO people do is basic accessibility and best practices stuff, but I don't understand why that isn't the domain of your HTML+CSS team.

      I might be alarmist with the title, but my basic point is that the things you've pointed out in your comment: optimized layout, navigation, interlinking, breadcrumb nav, etc — these are the “things you should be doing anyway.”

      It is SEO, but it's also plain old smart!

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    I'm with you, and you anticipated my argument; I do think of what you call SEO as good site design and architecture… but more importantly good technology choices and basic competence. I capitulate that some of what SEO people do is basic accessibility and best practices stuff, but I don't understand why that isn't the domain of your HTML+CSS team.

    I might be alarmist with the title, but my basic point is that the things you've pointed out in your comment: optimized layout, navigation, interlinking, breadcrumb nav, etc — these are the “things you should be doing anyway.”

    It is SEO, but it's also plain old smart!

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    It all depends on whether you're out for a quick buck or you're building a business. Spammers and cheats will always win in the short run and lose in the long run. You will always be frustrated by the cheaters, but you have to realize that they aren't the SAME cheaters. The cheaters from last year all lost their livelihood and got replaced by new ones. That's not the game smart people play.

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Thanks Michael. Feel free to point them here when they need an explanation :)

  • http://www.fresnoweddings.net/ California Weddings

    Very well written, in fact, I finally started understanding things as you have stated them in the past couple of years. At first I started out creating my site(s) for potential adverisers, but it was no fun. Actually quite boring. Now that I've chilled out about worrying about advertisers, I can now put my focus into what I really enjoy doing, , , that is creating my site(s) for my visitors – not advertisers, but the same people my advertisers would want to target as well. It feels really good to create content for the right reasons, and reap the benefits of it via the search engines. Thanks, and keep up the good work.

  • http://www.fresnoweddings.net/ California Weddings

    Very well written, in fact, I finally started understanding things as you have stated them in the past couple of years. At first I started out creating my site(s) for potential adverisers, but it was no fun. Actually quite boring. Now that I've chilled out about worrying about advertisers, I can now put my focus into what I really enjoy doing, , , that is creating my site(s) for my visitors – not advertisers, but the same people my advertisers would want to target as well. It feels really good to create content for the right reasons, and reap the benefits of it via the search engines. Thanks, and keep up the good work.

    • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

      Glad to hear. It pays to think about how you will eventually monetize content, but you can't produce content just for the advertising; that's what traditional media does, and why it is on the decline. It turns out that as power shifts to consumers, it shifts away from advertisers. Go figure :)

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    Glad to hear. It pays to think about how you will eventually monetize content, but you can't produce content just for the advertising; that's what traditional media does, and why it is on the decline. It turns out that as power shifts to consumers, it shifts away from advertisers. Go figure :)

  • http://www.joshklein.net joshklein

    If you're new in the field, a great place to start is http://www.seomoz.org