21 replies to this topic

[iamlost]

Thanks to Elizabeth (ablereach) for directing me via her Twitter stream to an info-graphic so irritating I had to write about it

To concentrate my grump on the info-graphic I'll bypass the further irritation of the site that republished it and the associated fulsome comments...and go direct to the original and their comments: The New Face of SEO: How SEO Has Changed [INFOGRAPHIC], Fuzz One Media, 25-November-2012.

Before we get to the actual graphic, the intro:

Over the past 18 months, SEO processes as well as SEO strategy has immensely changed. Whilst SEO is still very much rooted as a technical discipline, a significant degree of SEO is verging more and more towards a creative and marketing mindset that touches the nerves of humans OR an audience that search engines are getting better at understanding. SEOs are starting to think about their audience first with engaging content before optimisation for search engines.

Well, a lot of SEO shortcut hacks and sloppy spam-y practices were impacted. And SEO blog world advice largely immensely changed.

This crap about SEO verging into marketing is pure unadulterated excrement. SEO is optimisation focussed on optimising a site's search engine traffic. That is all folks. Yes, SEO should be done in tandem with many other business disciplines but that does not make SEO more than it ever has been. Just because a person or agency providing SEO services broadens their business model doesn't ipso facto broaden SEO. Idjits.

Here comes the info-graphic critique:
* keywords:
OLD: very specific based on search volume
NEW: broader targeting based on conversion probability; use PPC data.

Sorry, that 'new' method has actually been best practice since, well the beginning; on the other hand that 'old' method was and is simply shoddy lazy behaviour. And PPC data was and is not necessary.

* UX
OLD: design (UX) separate from SEO
NEW: UX now #1 priority

So, SEO has gone from promising #1 in Google to offering #1 in UX? Double crap. Yes, holistic web design was - and still is - rare. No, improving UX is not directly part of SEO. Nor is design.

Funny little mention on the 'new' importance of load times... guess whoever hasn't been in the business long enough to know that load times were once a critical consideration...

Funny little mention of 'no focus on mobile' - well, keeping up with the times does separate the pros from the hacks...

I really can't be bothered shuddering my way through the rest at the moment... guess my spleen is purged... it is NOT an info-graphic on the difference/change between something old and something new but between fast and sloppy short term bandwagon non-holistic thinking and long term conversion-centric business model specific thinking...

Except that I get the feeling that whoever doesn't really understand the latter...

[seosmarty]

This crap about SEO verging into marketing is pure unadulterated excrement. SEO is optimisation focussed on optimising a site's search engine traffic. That is all folks. Yes, SEO should be done in tandem with many other business disciplines but that does not make SEO more than it ever has been. Just because a person or agency providing SEO services broadens their business model doesn't ipso facto broaden SEO. Idjits.

Exactly.

It's become so fashionable to call "SEO" anything and everything. One of the forums there was a question on how to charge for SEO services. And one answer everyone seemed to support was paying for "conversions". Converting involves so much more than SEO. Makes no sense to me

[AbleReach]

Oh -- Wait! You watch my tweets? Whodathunkit.

I thought it was a neat graphic in that it shows how Cre8's holistic approach was ahead of the curve for a long, long time.

Mr Lost, I'll bet you have been ahead of the curve in some ways, too. Long before there was open conversation about specific SEO effects of related words NEAR linked text, a certain Internet marketer pinged me in chat to bubble over about interesting trends gleaned from server logs. Ain't data fun?

Doesn't anyone else remember a gap between faster modems that made heftier images more practical and renewed focus on load times? I distinctly remember arm-wrestling with a client in about 2005, about a beloved Flash header that took five minutes to load on slower but not unusual connections, if it finished loading at all. Her response was something on the line of "Oh you poor thing! Upgrade your Internet!" Harumph.

I think that UX should be considered as part of SEO. (Added - though not all UX is SEO!) For instance, hierarchical, semantically correct code gives signals to Search AND humans AND shapes the way information is presented on the page... which, in turn, informs usability - yes? Part of my point of view may come from being a fine arts person with an employment background in creative arts like baking and wearables, where the finished product simply must be both appealing and functional. I never start a web design with a box. First there are questions about what it is supposed to DO for users and the owner, then there are stacks of doodles, then, after I know what I want from a container, I'll code a box. For me, a design starts with a sense of integration. Someone who is shy about design might not start there.

I'm curious about what others will say.

I think it's a neat graphic because it covers a lot of ground in a straightforward way.

[EGOL]

Still waiting for you to start that rant blog.... I am sure that Jim will allow you to repost everything here.

[glyn]

Most seo are not marketing trained. That is spread across the whole industry. Now the fact that these people learn about marketing on the way and then reflect this in infographics is just an industry patting themselves on the back for learning something new. But for those with marketing training allot of what is stated is common marketing practice. It is why I cannot read seomoz blogposts. They need our help!

Edited by glyn, 21 December 2012 - 05:09 PM.

[iamlost]

glyn, glyn, glyn...

p.s. feel free to do so...
p.p.s. but do come back to where, I at least, appreciate your weirdly wonderful and twisty take on things.

[iamlost]

Glyn's comment, besides making me chortle, does point out a serious mistake that the primarily search focussed individuals and agencies make as they transition to other parts of the web or expertise: they forget that they are now at the bottom of their new ladder. SEO/SEM is not SMM is not internet marketing... yes, some knowledge transfers well in whole or in part but most does not.

And to those that have worked in this 'new' (to SEOs) area the noobie pronouncements miss more than they hit, often misuse terms (and acronyms), misunderstand what they mean or their nuances and connections, and seem oblivious to the complexities and realities. It often makes, as glyn mentioned, for painful reading.

[chuckfinley]

I love rants, but isn't there some way we can blame this on google?

[iamlost]

...isn't there some way we can blame this on google?

In the beginning there was Google and Google was good and many an SEO came to worship at his algo and life was good until Google moved his algo and the old ways of worship failed and many an SEO was discombobulated and lost in the wilderness of their distress and some were moved to worship SMM and called it SEO+ and some were moved to worship UX and also called it SEO+ and a desperate few of the greatest believers in Google renamed SEO G+ and so now every SEO is truly Plussed.
And it is all Google's fault.

[chuckfinley]

And it is all Google's fault.

LOL x 10,000!!! Now that made my day.

[jonbey]

Skimming down that infographic, it is almost like an admission from someone - on the left is what I used to do to make money online, on the right is the stuff that I now have to do to try to succeed ..... ooh, I'll make an infographic, people will like that.

Thing is, a lot of people were making a lot of money by doing the stuff on the left, which was SEO - not the best SEO, but SEO all the same. They optimised, they got shed loads of traffic, they bought nice cars.

[glyn]

Actually I blame matt cutts and randfishkin for bringing seo to the masses!

[cre8pc]

I thought it was a neat graphic in that it shows how Cre8's holistic approach was ahead of the curve for a long, long time.

And how many millions thought I was nuts! (and still do.)

[EGOL]

After Panda and Penguin, SEOs don't know WTF their job is. So they are grabbing at anything that floats trying to get their nostrils back up above water level. Some have already drowned. Others will shortly.

Most of those still sucking air don't know what UX is. Some think it's design. Others think it is offering people an opportunity to make spam comments on a page that has no seed content. Others think it has something to do with linking their site to FB.

I think that UX should be considered as part of SEO.

Right... well.... actually.... I think that UX has been the definition of SEO all along.

However, most people who call themselves SEOs have relied upon tricks and shortcuts that could be substituted for UX in the Google algo.

I think that Google wanted UX all along but they never had the ability to measure it directly.

The people who knew how to deliver UX ten years ago are still doing the same things that worked all along.

[cre8pc]

The people who knew how to deliver UX ten years ago are still doing the same things that worked all along.

Exactly. When was it that Avinash took me to the UX department at Google and let me peek in (and then giggled and placed his hands over my eyes when I started to stare at the long wall whiteboard with notes on it from the UX folks)....4, 5 years ago? It's not like that entire department sprouted overnight.

[chuckfinley]

Exactly. When was it that Avinash took me to the UX department at Google and let me peek in (and then giggled and placed his hands over my eyes when I started to stare at the long wall whiteboard with notes on it from the UX folks)....4, 5 years ago? It's not like that entire department sprouted overnight.

And, what did you see on that white board?

[Ken Fisher]

Problem with the old SEO way is many will be believing it for years to come. I'm sure that makes the job real hard for you folks that do it for a living. Nowadays the average Joe on the street knows how to link spam, similar to meta tag stuffing in the old days.

"Oh you poor thing! Upgrade your Internet!" Harumph.

That can't be true?

[cre8pc]

And, what did you see on that white board?

It was a huge, and had words and diagrams and notes...none of which registered in my brain because Avinash put his hands over my eyes and led me away, joking that I'm not allowed to see anything. Technically I wasn't allowed anywhere near there but he knew it would tease me like crazy to let me see they had a UX dept. Was a thrill, not only because my peers were there, but it was proof that Google had indeed gotten serious about searchability and human needs at a time when some SEO's were in denial.

[chuckfinley]

Was a thrill, not only because my peers were there, but it was proof that Google had indeed gotten serious about searchability and human needs at a time when some SEO's were in denial.

That's really good info. Thanks for that.

[bwelford]

Perhaps that may all be true, but nevertheless I find Google is very poor at introducing new features in their various products. They'll switch things around or use very tiny symbols you have to mouse over. For a little while you'll be baffled before experimenting and finding out how to do what was so easy before. To my mind they're too clever by half and like to give you little surprises in the hope that you'll be even more pleased.

If it ain't broke don't fix it, is the KISS solution in most situations.