Archive for March, 2011

Title: Google’s Algorithm Impact Over the Years in Graphic Detail

Search Engine News, Search Engine Optimization

Article Source: Link Exchange Service Network

SEOBook has posted a very interesting infographic from Jess.NET, about Google’s “Collateral damage” and “How the Evolving Algorithm Shapes the Web”.

The infographic illustrates the story of Google’s rise to Internet power and the impact it has had on webmasters and publisher. While not covering every algorithm change over the years, it does a pretty good job of highlighting the major shifts in webmaster practices that have been largely influenced by Google.

It wraps up with the Panda update and plays heavily on Demand Media’s content business wemodel, which is still proving successful. It does emphasize, however, just how dependent on Google webmasters and publishers have become, and shows why it is in your best interest to diversify your traffic sources.

Google's Collateral Dmage

Click to View Full Size

“Rather than using unobtrusive measurement, Google both measures & monetizes the publishing ecosystem,” says SEOBook. “Their most recent algorithmic update likely shifted over $1 billion in online ad revenues. Their editorial philosophy & ad programs have likely had more impact on the shape of the web than anything or anyone since Tim Berners-Lee created it.”

“Some of the biggest problems in search (like content farms) were created by Google,” the site adds. “This image highlights how the search ecosystem has changed since Google has become a serious player, and how Google has used their amazing marketshare to bend the web to their will.”

Google’s Panda update has been incredibly controversial for something that was intended to improve the quality of results for users. Many think that the results are indeed better now, while others are skeptical or flat out disagree. Either way, it’s affected a great deal of sites  – some deservedly so, and others which are more debatable.

The In-Content Ad Leader Buy and Sell text links Health and Beauty Store

Article Source: Link Exchange Service Network
If you like all this stuff here then you can buy me a pack of cigarettes.

Title: SEO and Web Hosting Firm Held Responsible For Counterfeit Site

Search Engine News, Search Engine Optimization

Article Source: Link Exchange Service Network

Precedence setting, or lone case? I’m sure SEO experts who have discovered this case are interested to see what becomes of it. A South Carolina judge has found the SEO Firm, Bright Builders Inc., responsible for damages done by a counterfeit golf club site.

The judge ruled Bright Builders was guilty of contributory trademark infringement, and other charges, due to them providing marketing and web hosting services. The judge ordered Bright Builders to pay $770,050 in statutory damages, while the site’s owner, Christopher Prince paid $28,250.

Cleveland Golf was the company who filed the suit, and originally only targeted Prince. When Cleveland’s lawyers discovered of Bright Builder’s services, they decided to file suit against them as well. The argument presented by Cleveland’s lawyers is Bright Builders was knowingly aware of the scam, and continued their services.

Christopher Finnerty, one of the lawyers for Cleveland Golf said this of the ruling, “For Internet Intermediaries like SEOs and web hosts, this should be a cautionary warning” he continues, “The jury found that web hosts and SEO’s cannot rely solely on third parties to police their web sites and provide actual notice of counterfeit sales from the brand owners. Even prior to notification from a third party, Internet intermediaries must be proactive to stop infringing sales when they knew or should have known that these illegal sales were occurring through one of the web sites they host.

Finnerty also stated how this was the first time a service provider was found liable for infringement, without being notified prior to the lawsuit. Being the first of its kind, it brings about the question of whether or not this is a precedence setting case.

I’m not totally surprised the judge found Bright Builders guilty of contributing to trademark infringement. Considering we have no idea of the knowledge the judge has or developed during the case in terms of web hosting, or SEO practices. What I find odd is the discrepancy between the amount of money responsible between Prince, and Bright Builders. How could they be responsible for so much more than the actual owner of the site?

Bright Builders has never had a sterling reputation. If you research them on BBB, you’ll find a rating of ‘C-’. 26 complaints have been filed against them. If you search for them on Google, one of the top links will direct to a website called scam.com.

The case certainly leaves a worrisome feeling for SEO experts, and firms. It has the potential to make experts more aware of the content they’re working with. It also provides a debate among those interested.

Should SEO and hosting services be responsible for the tools they’re providing counterfeit sites? If they have no knowledge of the site being counterfeit, is there a defense to be found? Considering how much a SEO service needs to know in order to be successful, it presents a rousing debate.

The In-Content Ad Leader Buy and Sell text links Health and Beauty Store

Article Source: Link Exchange Service Network
If you like all this stuff here then you can buy me a pack of cigarettes.

Title: Adobe to Help Search Marketers Keep Paid Campaigns From Cannibalizing Organic SEO

Search Engine News, Search Engine Optimization

Article Source: Link Exchange Service Network

Back in the fall of 2009, Adobe announced it was acquiring web analytics software provider Omniture. As a result of that acquisition, Adobe runs SearchCenter+, a paid search campaign management tool. 

Adobe announced today that SearchCenter+ now allows users to integrate data from both paid search campaigns and organic SEO. 

"Our customers derive significant value from our ability to serve as the hub to gather, analyze and take action on their valuable marketing data,” said John Mellor, VP, strategy and business development at Adobe’s  Omniture Business Unit. "Customers use SearchCenter+ to collectively manage more than $1 billion of the global paid search spend. Adobe now helps search marketers ensure that their paid search initiatives do not compete with or cannibalize the search volume they’re already receiving from natural search.”

Adobe SearchCenterUsers can measure paid and organic search rankings, onsite engagement, or conversions in one report, use performance of natural search to adjust their paid search bids, gain insight to help in making keyword bidding decisions, etc. 

The new version of SearchCenter+ is currently in beta, and is expected to become generally available in the second quarter.

The Omniture acquisition has been big in terms of making Adobe a bigger deal for search marketers. Late last year, the company also introduced a tool for site search, aimed at helping marketers anticipate visitor search intent and promote relevant products and content. 

The In-Content Ad Leader Buy and Sell text links Health and Beauty Store

Article Source: Link Exchange Service Network
If you like all this stuff here then you can buy me a pack of cigarettes.