February 5, 2012

Supercharge Your URL’s For Maximum SEO Impact

When optimizing URLs for high rankings, little attention is given to optimizing the URL for maximum clickthrough. Yet the URL undeniably affects searcher clickthrough rates in the SERPs (Search Engine Results Pages), as demonstrated by MarketingSherpa in their eyetracking study published in the 2008 Search Marketing Benchmark Guide.

Specifically, MarketingSherpa found that short URLs get clicked on twice as often as long URLs (given that the position rank is equal). As you can see in the heatmaps below, experiment participants spent more time viewing the long URL, but less time viewing the entire listing. You could conclude from this that the long URL distracts the searcher from viewing the listing’s title and description. Not a great outcome.

MarketingSherpa eyetracking heatmaps showing impact of URL length on listing viewing
Caption: MarketingSherpa eyetracking heatmaps showing impact of long URL length on listing viewing. Used with permission.

Worse yet, long URLs appear to act as a deterrent to clicking, drawing attention away from its listing and instead directing it to the listing below it, which then gets clicked 2.5x more frequently. It’s open for debate, of course, as to what is a “short” URL or a “long” URL. But it’s the first data I’ve ever seen attempt to quantify the affinity searchers have for the URL component of natural search listings.

For us, these MarketingSherpa findings confirm that success at SEO still requires more than just Google Sitemaps, and that an unoptimized URL is money left on the table. Just because algorithms have evolved to handle dynamic URLs with multiple parameters, avoid session-based spider traps, and even fill out forms on occasion, we shouldn’t be lulled into a false sense of security that our URLs are “good enough” and don’t need work. You should be on an unending mission to find and execute on opportunities to test and optimize URLs for both rankings and clickthrough.

So even though URLs you’d never have dreamed of getting indexed a few years ago are now regularly making it into the index, this doesn’t mean that suboptimal URLs are going to rank well or convert searchers into clickers. Here at Netconcepts, we’ve conducted countless tests using our GravityStream platform, proving to ourselves and to our clients that optimized URLs consistently outperform unoptimized URLs. Given that, here are some general best practices for URLs that we believe hold true:

  • The fewer the parameters in your dynamic URL, the better. One or two parameters is much better than seven or eight. Avoid superfluous/nonessential parameters like tracking codes.
  • A static looking URL (containing no ampersands, equals signs, or question marks) is more search optimal than a dynamic one.
  • Having keywords in the URL is more optimal than no keywords.
  • A keyword in the filename portion of the URL is more beneficial than in a directory/subdirectory name.
  • Hyphens are the preferred word separator, although underscores are gaining acceptance over times past . So if you have multiple-word keyword phrases in your URLs, I’d recommend using dashes to separate them.
  • Stuffing too many keywords in the URL looks spammy. Three, four, or five words in a URL looks perfectly normal. A little longer and it starts to look worse to Google, according to Matt Cutts.
  • The domain name is not a good place for multiple hyphens, as it can make your URL look spammy. Although that said, sometimes a domain name should have a hyphen, as the domain faux pas ‘arsecommerce.com’ demonstrates (you may not get this joke if you don’t recognize Queen’s English!).

Given the above, it’s absolutely worthwhile to rewrite your dynamic URLs to make them appear static and to include keyword phrases with hyphens separating the words (done within reason). So a targeted search term of “blue widgets” would be represented as “blue-widgets” in the URL. Bare spaces cannot be used in URLs, so some “white space” character needs to be used—either the + (plus sign) or the character encoding for a space %20. I’m not a fan of using the character-encoded version, as it’s not quite as pretty: “blue%20widgets”.

The above best practices are generally accepted. It gets a lot more contentious when talking about stability/permanence of your URLs. The general school of thought is that stable is better. In other words, decide on an optimal URL for a page and stick with it for the long haul. We have a different view: URLs can be as fluid as a title tag.

In our view, URLs can be experimented with and optimized iteratively over time, just like any other on-page factor. Why would you “set it and forget it” when it comes to your URLs when you don’t do that with your titles, H1 headlines, page copy, and internal linking structure? For example, all the following hypothetical URLs follow best practices—with the exception of the first URL, of course, which is actually the real URL; now which one will perform the best?

The only way to know for sure is to test.

If your CMS or ecommerce platform supports having URLs that are malleable, then why not exploit that capability and embark on a regimen of testing and continuous improvement? WordPress supports this fairly well by automatically 301 redirecting requests for old permalink URLs, once the “post slug” for that post has been changed in the admin. Unfortunately, most ecommerce platforms do not support such a capability. When sites are stymied by their platform, the only options are to replace your CMS with one that supports malleable URLs, customize the CMS to support it (assuming you have access to the source code), or put a layer on top of your CMS by using an SEO proxy technology like GravityStream.

Regardless of how you accomplish continuous URL optimization, the MarketingSherpa study shows complacency when it comes to iterative testing and improvement of your URLs (or any other on-page factor, for that matter) results in more traffic going to your competitor’s listings. This is fatal to your natural search program.

The 100 Best Signs At The Rally To Restore Sanity And/Or Fear: Pics, Videos, Links, News

The 100 Best Signs At The Rally To Restore Sanity And/Or Fear: Pics, Videos, Links, News.

New Phrase Search engine – FrazeIt

Need some help in your writing?

Want to improve your language skills? Welcome to Frazeit, the most advanced search engine for phrases on the net. More than 30M phrases indexed, all coming from top news writers. 6 languages supported. Words & phrases suggestions. Regular expressions: fill,fi?l,etc. Context,translate and define capabilities for each search result.

via FrazeIt.

SMX East 2010 Badges

I am attending SMX East

SMX East 2010 Badges.

Showcase your WordPress Blog as a Book

Fancy turning your WordPress Blog into a book? If you think that you have the flair and desirability for your Blog to stand out from the crowd then perhaps Anthologize can give you the tools to achieve this. Before you get too carried away it must be mentioned that this WordPress plugin is still very much in its infancy, hence the Alpha release or Prototype, so it’s advisable to use the plugin on a test blog.

  • It is Open Source Free Anthologize 0.4-alpha includes the following core features:
  • Use your existing WordPress blog content as the basis for your project;
  • Import content feeds from non-WordPress blogs and other publishing platforms;
  • Create a project containing one or more parts chapters, acts, etc; · Add, update, remove, and reorder parts;
  • Add, update, remove, reorder, and merge individual items in parts;
  • Edit project items through standard WordPress editing interface;
  • Export your projects to: TEI, PDF, and ePUB as well as rudimentary RTF.

Please remember that this is an alpha release of a prototype and would be best installed in a test environment rather than a production environment the first time around. Please feel free to ask questions in the anthologize-users group.

via Showcase your WordPress Blog as a Book.

In Google we trust

“In Google we trust.” That may very well be the motto of today’s young online users, a demographic group often dubbed the “digital natives” due their apparent tech-savvy. Having been born into a world where personal computers were not a revolution, but merely existed alongside air conditioning, microwaves and other appliances, there has been (a perhaps misguided) perception that the young are more digitally in-tune with the ways of the Web than others.

That may not be true, as it turns out. A new study coming out of Northwestern University, discovered that college students have a decided lack of Web savvy, especially when it comes to search engines and the ability to determine the credibility of search results. Apparently, the students favor search engine rankings above all other factors. The only thing that matters is that something is the top search result, not that it’s legit.

“I Googled It”

During the study, one of the researchers asked a study participant, “What is this website?” The student answered, “Oh, I don’t know. The first thing that came up.”

That exchange sums up the overall results from this study: many students trusted in rankings above all else. In fact, a quarter of the students, when assigned information-seeking tasks, said they chose a website because – and only because – it was the first search result.

Only 10% of the students made mention of the site’s author or that author’s credentials while completing tasks. However, in reviewing the screen-capture footage of those respondents, the researchers found that even in this supposedly savvy minority, none actually followed through to verify the identification or qualifications of the site’s authors.

Google was not the only search engine used in the study, but it was one in which the students put a lot of trust. The students felt emotionally tied to the service in some cases, noting how much they loved it and depended on it. (Those who used Yahoo! said they merely “liked” it.)

Regardless the choice of search engine, though, the first step in information-seeking was always the use of such a service, which was typically referred to as a verb. And yes, in addition to “google it,” some even said they would “yahoo it.”

Wikipedia Not Trusted as Much

Another interesting finding from the study involved the use of Wikipedia. Perhaps because of teachers’ insistence over the years that the user-generated encyclopedia is not a credible source of information, only a third of the students used Wikipedia to search for answers when given particular tasks. This is a drop from earlier studies (like Raine & Tancer, 2007) which showed Wikipedia use at 46% among students.

Other popular trusted sources included SparkNotes (a study guide site), WedMD, Planned Parenthood, CNN, BBC, Microsoft (specifically Encarta and Office-related resources) and those sites with a .gov or .edu extension. Some students even thought that .org domain name meant a site was inherently trustworthy – they weren’t aware that the .org extension can be freely registered just like .com and is not for nonprofit use only, as may have originally been intended.

Students Need Media Literacy Education

Over 1,000 students were surveyed and then the researchers randomly sampled 102 students from 1,060 students who had participated in the survey. The demographics of the group were both ethnically and racially diverse, reaching a representative sample of first-year college students at the University of Illinois, Chicago.

In summary, the findings showed that students are not always turning to the most relevant clues to determine the credibility of online content, said the researchers Eszter Hargittai, Lindsay Fullerton, Ericka Menchen-Trevino and Kristen Yates Thomas. Further initiatives that help educate people in this domain are needed, they claim.

Note: This article was corrected to read “University of Illinois, Chicago,” not “University of Chicago.” The original student count details were also clarified: 1,060 students were surveyed, but 102 were activity monitored. We apologize for the error and confusion.

via So-Called “Digital Natives” Not Media Savvy, New Study Shows.

Do Not Call Registry hits 200M phone numbers

Stopping those unwanted telemarketing calls right as you sit down to dinner is proving to be quite popular. The Federal Trade Commission today said phone numbers in the Do Not Call Registry now exceed 200 million and since 2003, the agency has brought more than 60 complaints alleging violations of the Registry rules, with the largest settlement (with DirecTV) resulting in a $5.3 million penalty.

In recent enforcement activity, the FTC in June had a federal court in Chicago halt a major telemarketing operation that made at least 370 million calls illegal phone calls pitching worthless extended auto warranties and credit card interest rate-reduction programs. According to the FTC, one telephone service provider told the FTC that during a single day in April 2009 the defendants – SBN Peripherals — sent 2.4 million calls to consumers – more than 27 calls per second. The FTC charges the robocalls violated the agency’s Do Not Call Registry Rule. The court temporarily froze the assets of SBN and appointed a receiver to take control of the operation.

Is ubiquitous encryption technology on the horizon?

In December, the FTC went after three outfits that allegedly made robocalls to sell worthless credit-card interest-rate reduction programs for large up-front fees of as much as $1,495. The lawsuits against Economic Relief Technologies; Dynamic Financial Group; and JPM Accelerated Services (JPM) allege the defendants broke the law by making illegal robocalls to consumers and that their deceptive sales pitches violated the FTC Act and the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule. The companies violated a host of regulations, the FTC says, from calling consumers whose phone numbers are on the National Do Not Call Registry; calling consumers who had previously asked not to be called; and failing to transmit their caller ID information, as required.

FTC rules prohibiting most robocalls took effect Sept. 1, 2009. With the rules, prerecorded commercial telemarketing robocalls will be prohibited, unless the telemarketer has obtained permission in writing from consumers who want to receive such calls. Hopefully the rules will go a long way to helping consumers eat dinner in peace without being interrupted by amazingly annoying telemarketer blather or in this case prerecorded blather.

The FTC built the Registry to make it easier for consumers to protect their privacy and stop unwanted telemarketing calls on cell phones and land lines. Consumers can register online at www.donotcall.gov or call toll-free, 1-888-382-1222 from the number they wish to register. Once consumers have registered their phone number, they never need to re-register. Also, they can use the Do Not Call website (National Do Not Call Registry ) to verify that their phone number is still on the Registry.

The FTC said charities, political organizations, and telephone surveyors are still permitted to call. Companies with which consumers have done business within the last 18 months may also continue to call, unless consumers have asked them to stop. Debt collectors may also continue to call consumers, whether their number is on the Registry or not.

via Do Not Call Registry hits 200M phone numbers | NetworkWorld.com Community.

30 days free advertising with google places

Visit your Google Places dashboard to activate Tags.Claim your free trial

via Tags – Google Places.

New Rules for Facebook Privacy

My Facebook Flair..... by angela king photography

Is privacy on Facebook important to you? The Facebook privacy policy change means there are certain things about your Facebook and personal information that everybody can now view. Let's take a look at some of the privacy changes on Facebook and how they may impact you.

Here are a few things that everybody will be able to see on your Facebook profile due to the changing Facebook privacy policies.

Your name, gender, place of work, and school – If you don't want everybody to know where you work, or the school you go to, then you must leave these fields blank. These aren't things that you can only make visible to your friends.

Groups you become a fan of - This is something so simple that you would never think it can have a negative effect, but be certain it can. There are certain things that you might not want your work or maybe even your family to know that you are a fan of, so keep that in mind the next time you become a fan of a group.

Status Updates – The privacy changes on Facebook have also affected status updates. These are automatically set to be visible to everybody on Facebook, but you are able to change the settings on these so that only your friends can view them.If you don't adjust your settings on your status updates, then they too are available for anybody to read. There have been people that have got fired from their jobs for stuff that they said on their status updates. If you type it, the boss can read it. Don't forget if your manager is a Facebook friend of yours, they will still be able to read this. You might want to also keep that in mind if you post pictures of a Super Bowl Party you were at when you called off sick from work.

What can you do if you want certain things to be seen by some friends, but not others?

Organize your friends – You can make custom friend groups, separating work buddies from close friends or family. By doing this, you can control what posts and photos are visible to each group of friends.

Make sure you take the time to review the new privacy policies on Facebook and read the frequently asked questions about them. You can still keep most things private on Facebook, but you have to take the time to change your settings. For things you can't change, I can only suggest that you consider if there is anybody that you wouldn't want to see that information before making it public.

Resources:

http://www.facebook.com/help/?page=927

Dedicated Server - Powered by SEO Manipulator