Protection against unethical practices in search engine optimization?
Hello everyone, I'm new to this list and joined upon recommendation. I work in search engine optimisation and would be interested to know your opinions on the following question: Why is this industry not properly regulated like email marketing? Is it because it is too specific and doesn't concern the mass consumers? The ones at risk of falling prey to unethical companies are businesses and the only place where you might consider complaining to are BBBs or similar organisations. For example, a business hires a SEO (search engine optimization) company for a 3 months contract. The company performs optimization so that it has complete control over it. This means it can turn the results off with a click if the business has any intention of getting out of the contract at the end of 3 months. This is in my book highly unethical. There is a severe lack of information in this area to educate business owners and help them make a wise decision. The internet is being marketed as a "level-playing field" where the small guys can compete with the big boys but it is precisely these small companies who are at their most vulnerable. An unhappy experience with an unethical SEO provider can mean short to medium term financial difficulties. Thank you for your time, Kind regards, Carmen
For example, a business hires a SEO (search engine optimization) company for a 3 months contract. The company performs optimization so that it has complete control over it. This means it can turn the results off with a click if the business has any intention of getting out of the contract at the end of 3 months. This is in my book highly unethical. There is a severe lack of information in this area to educate business owners and help them make a wise decision.
The internet is being marketed as a "level-playing field" where the small guys can compete with the big boys but it is precisely these small companies who are at their most vulnerable. An unhappy experience with an unethical SEO provider can mean short to medium term financial difficulties.
consider that the only reason (as far as I know) to hire a search engine optimization company is to have your business's actual importance misrepresented to the users of services like google. does this start to sound like electronic fraud, yet? personally i feel very little pity for 'customers' of SEO companies. they get what they pay for (often quite literally). elijah
consider that the only reason (as far as I know) to hire a search engine optimization company is to have your business's actual importance misrepresented to the users of services like google.
I'd hate to think what you think of advertising, direct mail and mail order agencies, then. Spamming search engines is the dark side of SEO. Some of the effects of proper SEO are to increase usability, make sure all the content is properly indexed, that visitors get what they come for. Search engines reward good sites (by good I mean in terms of content, usability, fulfillment, etc). This is what long term search engine strategies are based on.
does this start to sound like electronic fraud, yet?
personally i feel very little pity for 'customers' of SEO companies. they get what they pay for (often quite literally).
elijah _______________________________________________ Air-l-aoir.org mailing list Air-l-aoir.org@listserv.aoir.org http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
consider that the only reason (as far as I know) to hire a search engine optimization company is to have your business's actual importance misrepresented to the users of services like google.
I'd hate to think what you think of advertising, direct mail and mail order agencies, then. Spamming search engines is the dark side of SEO.
they're crooks, nuisances, and annoyances. :) i assume that next you are going to suggest that spammers are just hardworking legitimate businessmen. elijah
they're crooks, nuisances, and annoyances. :)
i assume that next you are going to suggest that spammers are just hardworking legitimate businessmen.
You're labeling me without right to appeal. Just because I work in search engine optimisation doesn't mean I spam and/or support spamming. Your mind is obviously set and I'm not going to get involved in a ALL SEO = spam debate which would interest nobody on this list. Please email privately if you wish to do so.
elijah
they're crooks, nuisances, and annoyances. :) i assume that next you are going to suggest that spammers are just hardworking legitimate businessmen.
You're labeling me without right to appeal. Just because I work in search engine optimisation doesn't mean I spam and/or support spamming. Your mind is obviously set and I'm not going to get involved in a ALL SEO = spam debate which would interest nobody on this list. Please email privately if you wish to do so.
you're free to explain how (and why) SE optimization isn't a bit of crookery or algorithmic deception - and, in fact, i'd strongly prefer that you do so on the list rather than taking it to private email. [which actually makes you look, rhetorically, as if you don't have a set of valid defenses, rather than making you look more 'polite'.] a number of folks on the list might find your explanation useful and instructive. --elijah
Ok then... elijah, I don't know why you're speaking to me as if I have the plague. You've put a 'spam' label around my neck without having a clue what I do. Search engine algorithms were built to return relevant information to a query. Recently the algos evolved and they now try to return websites that are good overall. By good websites I mean with relevant information to a query, easy to use, sites where users find what they are looking for, sites that other sites perceive to be valuable. These are all measured by various criteria. A lot of SEOs manipulate some of the criteria and buy links from other sites, stuff pages with dummy/useless text/keywords and generally clutter the web in the hope that they'll rank #1. The algos are far from perfect and many attain their goal. I despise these SEOs as much as you or anyone else. Some SEOs, however, understand that by making websites generally better these earn their high spots in search engines on merit. By "generally better" I mean things like: - including text that is of actual value to users and is not just filler text - using headings to break the page up and make it easier to scan/read - emphasising important points - omitting needless words and making every word tell (see Elements of Style 5th edition) which results in a naturally higher concentration of words that people actually search for (keywords) - writing informative titles/descriptions/headings that are appropriate to each page so that the user knows that what he's clicking on will take him to a page that gives him what he wants - improving navigation and usability in general (load time, page sizes, page names etc) for a more effective website (see Jakob Nielsen's useit.com and Steve Krug's "Don't make me think") - improving the technology behind the website to ensure that the sites display well on all browsers/platforms and that disabled people (such as the visually impaired) can use it successfully without being discriminated against - ensure that there are no errors that may confuse users and drive them away These are just some of the things involved in a proper optimisation process. The result is a website that is good for users, that people naturally link to because it offers useful information, that benefits of word-of-mouth because it has wider reach due to improved accessibility, that ensures a smooth relationship between site stakeholders and users. This sort of website earns its top spot in search engines, it does not trick its way up to it. Spammers may manipulate some of the criteria. But criteria change from month to month and spammers come and go. But by making it better, more usable and accessible, a website will stand on its own two feet and will not be brought down by algo changes. If improving a site, making it more usable and accessible means spamming to you, then what isn't spam? Keeping everything at a stand still? Throwing up a website and forgetting about it? Letting users muddle through confusing fancy/graphics intensive/flashy websites and then discover that it doesn't have what they were looking for? There will always be spammers, such as there are the "bad apples" in any industry but the fact is search engines are becoming more difficult to manipulate so more and more webmasters give up trying to do that. They realise that a long-term strategy based on building good websites ensures far greater success, less risk and yes, higher profits. This goes past optimisation, it's a mix of that and marketing, usability, accessibility and user psychology. And that, my friend, is not "spam, crookery, annoyance or nuisance" as you call it. Carmen PS: there is a document that takes the W3C accessibility guidelines point by point and explains why adhering to them improves search engine rankings. SEO is the best thing that has ever happened to accessibility and usability; it has a wider appeal and it forces webmasters to realise its importance in earning top spots in SEs. They will have to put it into practice if they want traffic and profits, and as a result they have to improve their websites. At this rate, SEO will turn accessibility into best practice far quicker than any organisation could have by publishing guidelines.
they're crooks, nuisances, and annoyances. :) i assume that next you are going to suggest that spammers are just hardworking legitimate businessmen.
You're labeling me without right to appeal. Just because I work in
search
engine optimisation doesn't mean I spam and/or support spamming. Your mind is obviously set and I'm not going to get involved in a ALL SEO = spam debate which would interest nobody on this list. Please email privately if you wish to do so.
you're free to explain how (and why) SE optimization isn't a bit of crookery or algorithmic deception - and, in fact, i'd strongly prefer that you do so on the list rather than taking it to private email. [which actually makes you look, rhetorically, as if you don't have a set of valid defenses, rather than making you look more 'polite'.]
a number of folks on the list might find your explanation useful and instructive.
--elijah
Hi, Short intro as I've just been lurking here for a while. I'm just completing my MA in research psychology, soon to be begin my doctorate in media philosophy. Specifically, I will be considering the metaphysical and aesthetic implications of technology, in the context of the evolution of self. I also work in interface and information design, and in general find the juxtapositions of psychology and technology and the meaning of meaning to be fascinating. Just going to jump on the bandwagon here. Carmen, far from not being interesting, your post inspired me to consider the theoretical implications of SEO from a more philosophical vantage point. This debate is very reminiscent of some of the more metaphysical considerations of information vs. entropy/noise that can be found hanging around the edges of thinking of such pioneers as Shannon, Neuman and Bates. Consider the general consensus of how _evil_ spammers are. In fact, they have been the driving motivation for the entire field of SEO. It could be argued that without them, we would find our information much more easily - but anyone who was around in the early days of the internet, when the directories were manual, spiders and bots were not generally positively regarded and spamming was primitive will remember that even then, it was damn hard to find "what you were looking for". I find it fascinating that this has moved from the abstract of information down to the practical realities of the corporate levels of society, and the way that this tension is being used to determine meaning within the endless sea of information. Spammers pushing us towards more meaningfully structured content? That's some cool dialectics. As I see it, entropy-like spammers and their ilk exploit - thereby eroding - the structure of information: the criteria, algorithms and ranking systems. This then brings in 'lords of order' (reference to lords of light; reference to the gnostic dualism of knowledge/ and order/chaos) to more tightly determine what is considered to be meaningful to the internet populace. What's really interesting is that this has gone beyond quantitative rankings (percentage of 'how' relevant has always been silly) to qualitative rankings that consider user experience as well. True evolution. Carmen, I'd be very interested to communicate with you on your work. Also, if anyone happens to know of any work relevant to this direction, i'd be more than happy to receive a pointer or two. Thanks, Heidi haLevi (Israel)
-----Original Message----- From: Carmen Mardiros [mailto:bluecorrnet@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 8:01 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-l] Protection against unethical practicesinsearchengineoptimization?
Ok then...
elijah, I don't know why you're speaking to me as if I have the plague. You've put a 'spam' label around my neck without having a clue what I do.
Search engine algorithms were built to return relevant information to a query. Recently the algos evolved and they now try to return websites that are good overall. By good websites I mean with relevant information to a query, easy to use, sites where users find what they are looking for, sites that other sites perceive to be valuable. These are all measured by various criteria.
A lot of SEOs manipulate some of the criteria and buy links from other sites, stuff pages with dummy/useless text/keywords and generally clutter the web in the hope that they'll rank #1. The algos are far from perfect and many attain their goal. I despise these SEOs as much as you or anyone else.
Some SEOs, however, understand that by making websites generally better these earn their high spots in search engines on merit. By "generally better" I mean things like:
- including text that is of actual value to users and is not just filler text - using headings to break the page up and make it easier to scan/read - emphasising important points - omitting needless words and making every word tell (see Elements of Style 5th edition) which results in a naturally higher concentration of words that people actually search for (keywords) - writing informative titles/descriptions/headings that are appropriate to each page so that the user knows that what he's clicking on will take him to a page that gives him what he wants - improving navigation and usability in general (load time, page sizes, page names etc) for a more effective website (see Jakob Nielsen's useit.com and Steve Krug's "Don't make me think") - improving the technology behind the website to ensure that the sites display well on all browsers/platforms and that disabled people (such as the visually impaired) can use it successfully without being discriminated against - ensure that there are no errors that may confuse users and drive them away
These are just some of the things involved in a proper optimisation process. The result is a website that is good for users, that people naturally link to because it offers useful information, that benefits of word-of-mouth because it has wider reach due to improved accessibility, that ensures a smooth relationship between site stakeholders and users.
This sort of website earns its top spot in search engines, it does not trick its way up to it.
Spammers may manipulate some of the criteria. But criteria change from month to month and spammers come and go. But by making it better, more usable and accessible, a website will stand on its own two feet and will not be brought down by algo changes.
If improving a site, making it more usable and accessible means spamming to you, then what isn't spam? Keeping everything at a stand still? Throwing up a website and forgetting about it? Letting users muddle through confusing fancy/graphics intensive/flashy websites and then discover that it doesn't have what they were looking for?
There will always be spammers, such as there are the "bad apples" in any industry but the fact is search engines are becoming more difficult to manipulate so more and more webmasters give up trying to do that. They realise that a long-term strategy based on building good websites ensures far greater success, less risk and yes, higher profits. This goes past optimisation, it's a mix of that and marketing, usability, accessibility and user psychology. And that, my friend, is not "spam, crookery, annoyance or nuisance" as you call it.
Carmen
PS: there is a document that takes the W3C accessibility guidelines point by point and explains why adhering to them improves search engine rankings. SEO is the best thing that has ever happened to accessibility and usability; it has a wider appeal and it forces webmasters to realise its importance in earning top spots in SEs. They will have to put it into practice if they want traffic and profits, and as a result they have to improve their websites. At this rate, SEO will turn accessibility into best practice far quicker than any organisation could have by publishing guidelines.
they're crooks, nuisances, and annoyances. :) i assume that next you are going to suggest that spammers are just hardworking legitimate businessmen.
You're labeling me without right to appeal. Just because I work in
search
engine optimisation doesn't mean I spam and/or support spamming. Your mind is obviously set and I'm not going to get involved in a ALL SEO = spam debate which would interest nobody on this list. Please email privately if you wish to do so.
you're free to explain how (and why) SE optimization isn't a bit of crookery or algorithmic deception - and, in fact, i'd strongly prefer that you do so on the list rather than taking it to private email. [which actually makes you look, rhetorically, as if you don't have a set of valid defenses, rather than making you look more 'polite'.]
a number of folks on the list might find your explanation useful and instructive.
--elijah
The Air-l-aoir.org@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://aoir.org/airjoin.html --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.773 / Virus Database: 520 - Release Date: 05/10/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.773 / Virus Database: 520 - Release Date: 05/10/2004
Some SEOs, however, understand that by making websites generally better these earn their high spots in search engines on merit. By "generally better" I mean things like:
I would have reacted quite a bit differently if you'd mentioned that you were involved in "information architecture" rather than "search engine optimization". That's what you're describing, below. I don't think that I'm the only one who reacts to your description this way, but I may be the only one who bothers to tell you. --elijah
- including text that is of actual value to users and is not just filler text - using headings to break the page up and make it easier to scan/read - emphasising important points - omitting needless words and making every word tell (see Elements of Style 5th edition) which results in a naturally higher concentration of words that people actually search for (keywords) - writing informative titles/descriptions/headings that are appropriate to each page so that the user knows that what he's clicking on will take him to a page that gives him what he wants - improving navigation and usability in general (load time, page sizes, page names etc) for a more effective website (see Jakob Nielsen's useit.com and Steve Krug's "Don't make me think") - improving the technology behind the website to ensure that the sites display well on all browsers/platforms and that disabled people (such as the visually impaired) can use it successfully without being discriminated against - ensure that there are no errors that may confuse users and drive them away
Hi Carmen!
Why is this industry not properly regulated like email marketing? Is it because it is too specific and doesn't concern the mass consumers? The ones at risk of falling prey
I cannot tell the US-side of things, but any regulation attempt in Germany proved to be useless, as someone in another country can go on with the fraud....and they do! Thats the boundless Internet! Many unwanted E-Mail in Germany for example come from the US/Russia/Austria/and so on...as laws regarding the "not-asked-for"-mails seem do differ quite heavily...in Germany the consumer is quite heavily secured by law...e.g. no (real)mailings can be delivered, if the consumer has a "no ads"-sticker on his mail box (the real one!) - in the virtual world, German companies cannot contact anyone who did not ask for it...with a double opt in... Search Engines: E.g. Google.de is loosing more and more people/users/clients (or at least so many web-agancies here state), as SPAM-sites tend to come up, when searching...once a normal user clicks on the link, that looks like exactly what one searched for, a site comes up, trying to install a so called dialer, which wants to reconnect the user using a service, which is unbelievably expensive...this works for ISDN and modem-users only, but there still seem to be many using these "slow" techniques (the ever growing German DSL-connections cannot re-connect with other services - no tel-no. - at least for now) Of course Google.de is still No1...but in IT-related environments, mailing-lists, the other engines are regaining lost ground...so in a year or two this will show with the consumer as well...if Google.de does not find a way... It's like "Tom&Jerry" or "Itchy and Scratchy" (for those, born later)...an ongoing chase - one does not know, who is chasing who anymore...
For example, a business hires a SEO (search engine optimization) company for a 3 months contract. The company performs optimization so that it has complete control over it. This means it can turn the results off with a click if the business has any intention of getting out of the contract at the end of 3 months. This is in my book highly unethical.
You do have contracts? A company should take care of a well thought-out contract regarding the property of the services, that a SEO is to sign...
There is a severe lack of information in this area to educate business owners and help them make a wise decision.
Does that not apply to all aspects of the Internet? It is quite young...quite unregulated and acutally more and more dominant in terms of information-supply... As always with a new era things seem quite chaotic at start...the Internet is quite unregulated...Nazis or so called islamic terrorists (nobody called the IRA or the other fractions in the civil war in Northern Ireland "christian terrorists", by the way - or at least I cannot remember - terrotists are just terrorists, if you ask me - not to speak of "Christians" killing doctors in the name of God because these offer abortions...) put up their sites to show off their own views of the world, which is very different to ours (the majority of the so called Western World, one hopes)...to say the least... What I was actually trying to say is that history shows the beginning of new eras always brought some confusion with it in its start...the German history, especially the so called "founder years" of the industralization ("Gründerjahre") in the late 19th century was not that different...workers being exploited in a way, that most of us find babaric today (or view so, when looking at "emerging" countries)...not a coincedence, that Karl Marx lived exactly in this age... As a saying goes: "The market will regulate itself" ;) And it actually will...I use Google, when I know, that I can specify the search term...I use wikkipedia, when searching for things, that could be listed there...and I most often use the url now...as it is faster, when searching for a specific topic...I never thought of the url's in 2000 - always went to the search-site first (yahoo, google, meta-engines).
The internet is being marketed as a "level-playing field" where the small guys can compete with the big boys but it is precisely these small companies who are at their most vulnerable. An unhappy experience with an unethical SEO provider can mean short to medium term financial difficulties.
At least on this side of the "pond" medium and smaller companies have great opportunities because of the Internet...and "big companies" are pushing it...it is assumed, that at least 10.000 small companies have been founded in Germany only because of eBay...e.g. people started selling their used *whatever* and now have storages like medium companies and make revenues that they can live of very comfortably... Newspapers are loosing subscribers like hell (especially daily newspapers)...news-sites are growing...the market is changing! Of coures there are still obstacles to overcome...but there always were...always will be....thats what evolution (in soacial/economical terms) is about... Think of the SCO legal action against LINUX...or the patents...someone patented the "buy now"-button or the "content management system" or the "Discoverability and navigation of hyperlinks via tabs"...in the US. All these things were in use for "ages" (in Internet-terms) before they were patented...and these things are a big issue here in Germany as the EU is trying to adopt the same apporach as the US to what we call "trivial patents"... Whats next? I thought of patenting receiving messages through POP and replying through SMTP ;) I guess this topic is quite off-list here...allthough Elijah likes it here ;) Have a great night (day - morning - wherever you are)! sam
participants (4)
-
Carmen Mardiros -
elijah wright -
Heidi haLevi -
S. Liban