New Version of Funnelback
June 25, 2012
Funnelback’s latest version boasts a number of new features, we learned at Regina’s List in “Funnelback 11 Launched with Automated Tuning and SEO Assistant.” The press release describes the new Automated Tuning component:
“Brett Matson, Managing Director of Funnelback, said Funnelback 11 has the ability to continually and automatically optimize its ranking using a correct answer set determined by the customer. This enables customers to intuitively adjust the search engine ranking algorithm to ensure it continuously adapts and is optimized to the ever-changing characteristics of their own information environment. A related benefit is that it exposes how effectively the search engine is ranking, said Mr. Matson.”
Other new features include an integrated SEO assistant, updatable indexes, efficient crawling, 64-bit indexing, a new high performance search interface, a broken links report, and a People Search feature for users’ customers. The software is available on Windows, on Linux, and as a cloud service.
Based in Australia, Funnelback grew from technology developed by premier scientific research agency CSIRO. The company was established in 2005, and was bought by UK content management outfit Squiz in 2009. They offer Enterprise and Website Search, both of which include customizable features. Their memorable name derives from the names of two Australian spiders, the funnel-web and the red back.
Cynthia Murrell, June 25, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Sponsored Content: Facebook Hits a Snag
June 22, 2012
The SEO (search engine optimization) crowd thought it had a winner with sponsored content. Pay Facebook money. Crank out some verbiage. Watch those clicks come tumbling along. What seems to be tumbling are Facebook ad opportunities. “Problems for Monetization: Lawsuit Forces Facebook to Let You Opt Out of Sponsored Story Ads” suggests a “stumbling block.” Was Facebook assuming that its “members” would ingest advertising as news without complaint? Personally I enjoy advertising centric editorial content. I used to work at a newspaper and then a big magazine company. The advertorials were often labeled. Sure, tiny type was used, but if you looked, you would see the words “Sponsored by…” or “A message from …” or a similar statement. I flipped through a slick travel magazine in the doctor’s office and it looked to me as if most of the editorial content was sponsored. But I may be overly sensitive.
Here’s the passage I noted:
For those less familiar with Sponsored Stories, when a Facebook user interacts with a business, such as by Liking a Page or Page’s post, using an application, or checking in to a physical business, that business can pay to have the news feed story that could normally appear be shown more prominently or frequently in the web and mobile news feed, or in the ads sidebar to friends. Because they seem like organic content, and feature the faces and names of friends as an automatic trusted referral, they’re clicked more often and are more influential on viewers than traditional ads.
Even the lingo is from the Land of SEO. Example: “Organic” just like beets and carrots from the farmer down the road here in Kentucky.
An alleged advertorial. Source: http://pdfcast.org/pdf/writing-sample-advertorial
Sponsored content is a very big deal. The reason is that consumers tune out ads. Do you remember the commercials which run in motion picture theaters before the show starts. I don’t. I play with one of my electronic distraction devices. On a desktop computer’s big screen, there is enough real estate to stuff a range of ads to lure the surfer. On a mobile device, the ads are really annoying. So how does one pump up the click throughs? Easy. Sponsored content that is shaped information.
Shaped information is tough for some people to identify. To get a sense of the challenge, check out A 50 Year History of Disinformation by Peter Viemeister. As a result, the content is consumed and according to information in the article cited above, performs “much better than traditional ads.”
What’s the fix?
Some are harsh. Facebook users can elect to turn off the ads. Yikes, bummer. Others can be sidestepped such as a provision to have users under 18 “represent they have received parental consent.”
Here at Beyond Search we label sponsored content, which generates questions. People reading Beyond Search wonder why a company like Polyspot would sponsor a story about search. Well, Polyspot is in the search business and we are covering topics germane to Polyspot’s interests. No big surprise.
Does One Fear or Not Fear in the Penguin Aftermath?
June 8, 2012
To fear or not to fear the aftermath of Penguin? The article 7 SEO Apocalypses That Never Happened recites words of encouragement, echoing the memories of past Google updates.
“My site has been at the top of Google SERPS for very competitive phrases. It’s a high quality site offering hundreds of pages of original content. Then, overnight, my site hit the bottom for almost everything thanks to Jagger.”
Despite rumors of SEO madness no one should lose hope. The past doesn’t always repeat itself as:
“Over the last three weeks, the SEO world seems to have gone mad. Panic has filled the web space: naïve and trusting webmasters start removing backlinks, content and keywords to cause a faster decrease in rankings.”
“This post is not another prescription to fight Penguin, it’s a prescription to stop sweating about Penguin.”
Penguin is going to analyze and hinder sites it believes are engaging in web spam tactics in order to increase search engine rankings. Their analysis will determine who is a spammer and who is not. It has been stated that sites affected will not be easily recognizable as spammers, but activity goes beyond white hat SEO. This could be confused with marketing.
Reassurances are irrelevant until all the kinks get worked out. Only time will tell the impact the new algorithms will have, so a false sense of security can end in an SEO nightmare. Wow, the “screwing up relevance” crowd lives to mislead another day. That is just wonderful…
Jennifer Shockley, June 8, 2012
Sponsored by IKANOW
How to Get More Search Traffic to Your Website
June 2, 2012
Biznology recently provided readers with an interesting take on how to fix a cluttered website in the article “How to Clean Up a Cluttered Website? Content Analytics is the Answer.”
According to the article, Google’s new search ranking algorithm allows the search giant to pay more attention to overall cleanliness and architecture. Therefore, it is essential that websites focus on content analytics.
Even websites that follow all the SEO rules such as writing excellent copy with relevant and engaging imagery as well as incorporated social media and relevant keywords and hash-tags sometimes don’t get high search rankings.
Here is why:
“A common reason: there are other pages in your environment optimized for the same keywords. Especially in large corporate settings, the main culprit to SEO failure is duplicate content. Often this is old junk that is just sitting on a server getting in the users’ way. More importantly, the old stuff is taking up slots in Google’s index, distracting the algorithm in its attempt to rank your content. Even if the old stuff was never optimized, these pages have links into them that should be pointing to your optimized experiences.”
The solution that this author offers to the problem of duplicate content is to “clean house” by auditing content, building a strategy, and choosing the right tools. If organizations follow this simple advice they are bound to up their search traffic.
Jasmine Ashton, June 2, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Google Fights Search Over-Optimization
May 16, 2012
Google is at it again. NetworkWorld reports, “Google Begins Penalizing Search ‘Over-Optimization’.” (SEOO?) The latest algorithmic adjustment is designed to counter the proliferation of low-quality sites designed just to attract click-throughs. I guess the poor Panda wasn’t trying hard enough. Writer Cameron Scott reports:
“The company emphasizes in Tuesday’s announcement that the algorithm shift will target only those practices, such as ‘keyword stuffing’ and ‘link schemes,’ that violate its guidelines.
“However, the announcement included the caveat that not all content punished by the changes will ‘be easily recognizable as spamming without deep analysis or expertise.’
“The shift to Google’s algorithm is likely to affect, at least initially, some websites that aren’t clearly violating its guidelines, according to a strategy paper for Web marketers released earlier this month by the search-engine marketing firm iProspect.”
The paper goes on to say that such users rankings will probably be restored with “subsequent adjustments and tweaks.” I’m sure that will be of great comfort to companies who thought they were playing by the rules but suddenly find themselves at the bottom of the heap.
Look, Google fostered search engine optimization in its effort to balance “free” placement with paid traffic. Now that the ponies have left the corral, Google wants to round ’em up. Do you hear the theme from “Rawhide”?
Cynthia Murrell, May 16, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Buying YouTube Love: Is This a Step Too Far?
May 10, 2012
It seems YouTube comments are for sale.
The SEO crowd has a new angle. EzineMark announces that you can now “Buy YouTube Comments to Contribute in the Growth of Your Online Venture.” The write up starts by mentioning how useful YouTube videos can be in a marketing campaign. Naturally, the more comments a company’s video gets, the more exposure the company ultimately receives. So far so good, but such a setup begs for someone to game the system.
Now, apparently, companies are doing just that. We are advised:
“There is a revelation that social media marketing service providers design various packages of ‘buy YouTube comments’ in a different price brackets. The price of the package varies with the number of comments demanded by the owner of an online venture. You can come across packages with numbers ranging from 100 to 500 comments to choose from. You can avail the package of buying YouTube comments in tune with your requirement and budget.”
This particular, um, article is not really worth combing through, unless you get a chuckle from poorly written English. The very idea of buying YouTube comments, though, is an interesting tactic. How long before it is utterly impossible to differentiate between marketing campaigns and organic content? Are we already there?
Cynthia Murrell, May 10, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
An Expensive Recipe for Search Traffic
May 1, 2012
Remember the good old days of 1993. A person could browse a list of new sites. Most Web sites then got some traffic. Today, getting traffic is not like 1993. (Is there an artist formerly known as Prince to write a tune about the shift?)
I read a recipe for traffic which appears in “Google’s Perfect Quality Score Sauce.” Among the tips are buying more keywords. Positive keywords and negative keywords are in the list of ingredients. But the operative words are “add more keywords.” Yep, spend more, get more.
The write up’s content comes from a Googler named Tanmay, but the important point is that key to traffic is a blend of cordon bleu methods which involve buying AdWords.
Will spending money produce clicks? The answer is, “Yes.” The reason is that without some type of exogenous lift, traffic to Web sites both desktop anchor and mobile on-the-wing are a bit like the income distribution in the US. One percent of the sites get the traffic. The other 99 percent do not.
The fact is creating a crisis of sorts among marketers who are pumping six figures into Web sites which yield a meager 2,000, 10,000, or 20,000 uniques.
Now the proper response to a CFO who questions the inefficiency of a traditional Web site is, “If we make one sale, the Web site pays for itself. And we get leads.”
One hopes the CFO says, “Okay, give me one sheet of paper with the sales the Web site has made in the last 30 days and a list of top 10 leads which have come from your Web efforts.”
Bad news, of course. Metrics are easy to talk about, but they are tough to map to hard dollars.
The good news about the sad state of traffic for most Web sites is that those who sell clicks, eyeballs, traffic, or other clever “evidence” of success is that Google will benefit. This is different from the good old days when a Web site was an event. Today a Web site is a distraction, an expensive distraction.
Stephen E Arnold, May 1, 2012
Sponsored by Ikanow, which delivers analytics that answer questions
SEO Confusion is Common
April 28, 2012
If you are confused by SEO tactics, don’t fret because you are not alone. SEO admits even it is not sure what it does.
In an effort to ease the confusion, Search Engine Journal recently posted an article titled, “24 Eye-Popping SEO Statistics.” The article begins by commenting on the apparently misunderstood medium that is not well regarded in the online marketing arena (just type “seo is” into Google and watch it fill in the blanks.) We then read that a user should begin by getting their minimum viable SEO right before site-building and may then turn to more advanced SEO once they have accomplished that.
And then, to complete the explanation of SEO, some statistics are presented. Some key stats from the article:
“*Content marketing rocks. Marketing Sherpa reports distribution lead to a 2,000% increase in blog traffic and a 40% increase in revenue.
*70% of the links search users click on are organic.
*70-80% of users ignore the paid ads, focusing on the organic results.
*75% of users never scroll past the first page of search results.
*GroupM states “when consumers were exposed to both search and social media influenced by a brand that overall search CTR went up by 94 percent.”
*Search and e-mail are the top two internet activities.”
Still confused? So are we. And I’m fairly confident the SEO gurus are too.
Statistics do not define SEO, and readers should be provided more valid reasoning and explanation of processes before being asked to embrace the so-called marketing tool.
Andrea Hayden, April 28, 2012
Sponsored by Ikanow
A Click or a Sale: Which Do You Need?
April 26, 2012
A useful set of four questions to ask about online advertising and the inevitable metrics that trail along is outlined in the article, The Four Questions: Getting The Scoop On Viewable Impressions | C3 Metrics This simple outline can help businesses contemplate the most useful and profitable solution.
The point of the article is best summed up as;
“As I talk to clients and associates about the impending viewable impression standard, there’s some confusion about some of the finer points — some of the most techy ad ops questions in years. I’ve identified four of them:
1. How is data being collected?
2. How is the viewable impression method trafficked?
3. How do I grow a campaign using viewable impression data?
4. How does the iFrame issue get solved?
When evaluating the options available for your business, one should review all the information provided. Many people are misinformed when it comes to the simplicity of the click, and often don’t see the bigger picture. However, the big picture needs to be the primary focus when contemplating revenue.
We can’t stress the importance of asking the right questions when dealing with a provider. What matters more? A click or a sale? We vote for a sale. The click business sounds solid, but a click may not be revenue, just cost.
At ArnoldIT, we are into sales. Clicks? Meh.
Jennifer Shockley, April 26, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
WideStat Collects and Provides Data on Web Sites
April 23, 2012
An interesting service has turned up with a report on Exorbyte. The site is named WideStat, and calls itself a “Website Worth Calculator.” The page is a collection of statistics, many of which are displayed in colorful charts. Pretty.
We are not sure if these types of auto-complete Web services help or hinder a search and content processing vendor. Here is what it has to say about our old friend, Exorbyte:
“Exorbyte.de has #662,408 traffic rank in world by Alexa. It gets 726 internet visitors per day. Visitors to it view 2.9 unique pages each day on average. Estimated daily time on site 02:45 seconds. It has an average of 786 pages indexed in major search engines like Google. There are an average of 124 links pointing back to exorbyte.de from other websites. Exorbyte.de has the potential to earn $15 USD in advertisement revenue per day. It has an estimated value of $5,227 USD. Out of the 30 unique keywords found on exorbyte.de, ‘exorbyte’ was the most dense. This site has Google PageRank 4 of 10.”
As a aside, think about how much more readable that would have been had a human written or translated it. Just a thought.
We are not sure if these types of Web services help or hinder a search and content processing vendor. Besides, the 726 daily visitors to the company’s Web site strikes us as quite low. We recommend you check your company on WideStat and see what tidbits it may have picked up about your business.
Headquartered in Konstanz, Germany, Exorbyte was founded at the turn of the century. The company provides search and data matching software and solutions for online ecommerce, directories, and data quality applications. Their core platform is colorfully named MatchMaker.
Cynthia Murrell, April 23, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
