Take the Trouble to Label Images

More on demonstrating expertise on other sites with care: after advising someone to offer text alternatives for images I jumped on a chance to comment on a related blog post in detail… Problem: the blog has moved — in haste I missed the date in my feed reader and on the page. And since the comment hasn’t been approved and may never be…

Labeling images and offering text alternatives is not only good for search traffic generation it’s also best practice for accessibility… It offers people using screen readers an insight into images on your pages because the reader can read the text.

Years ago when there was more weight attached to alt text (i.e. text to display when images are turned off coded as alt=”relevant keywords”) for images we used to suggest using image descriptions to improve keyword density without making your content read like keyword spam.

This technique was abused by people who loaded image alt text tags with unrelated keywords. And, as with meta descriptions and meta keywords content, search engines stopped attached any ranking weight to it.

But adding appropriately keyword-rich text/labels still has value in the image search context and also in context of universal or blended search (where search engines show web page, video and image search results together). As Deb says, making it easier for search engines to understand what your images represent will pay search visiblity dividends.

Best practice:

• do a quick check for popular keywords related to your image (Google Adwords free external keyword tool is perfect for this)
• name the image file using popular keywords separating individual word with a hyphen — popular-keywords.jpg or popular-keyword.gif. (Search engines will identify keywords in merged names and when you use underscores, which they don’t recognise as breaks, but creating a space between individual words with hyphens is worth the effort — as it is in URLs*.)
• give images alt text (alt=”popular keywords”)and title tag (title=”popular keywords”) that include — you guessed it — popular keywords.

Note: most content management systems and blogging platforms offer fields to enter this data as you upload an image file; use them.

Attention to this little detail — even if you skip the keyword research step when keyword choices are obvious — can amke quite a big difference to your blog/site’s chances of getting search traffic.

* There is continuing debate about the value of keywords in URLs but many CMSs now offer control of the URL so why not attend to this little detail too?

SEO Spam Primer Featuring Key Insights From Major Search Engines

Found this really great video of SMX East (US Search Engine Optimisation Conference) session on SEO Spam on Search Engine Land. Nothing really new from my point of view. But a succinct introduction to tactics that will get you in trouble with search engines… If your search engine optimisation company recommends the things discussed in this video, fire them.

This video is a useful primer on SEO spam for anyone who isn’t familiar with the issues. And it offers great information on finding out if you have been penalised by search engines and what to do about it. But it also has significant value as an insight into big search engines’ assessment of sites and attitude to links.

Talking About SEO Spam Means Talking About What Search Engines are Looking For

Random quotes/notes, many of which are music to my ears, as an exponent of an “offer content that is of value to your target audience and the search engines will value it too” approach to SEO:

• Don’t “lose track of the user perspective” in building links — for Yahoo it isn’t about whether a link is paid but whether it is a value link that makes sense with respect to the content of the source and destination of the link… good links point your users to content they will value.
• Nathan Buggia of Live Search reminds people of the all-important search engine perspective on assessing the Web. A perspective too often lost in the discussion around obtaining search engine visibility –
  

  “Goal of a search engine is trying to find really great content and connecting people that want that content”

• Nathan again: “stay focused on creating good content” … ahem… content is… um… king!
• For Aaron D’Souza of Google site owners should concentrate on, “building great content that users are going to create the links for you” — that is, offer content that people will want to link to rather than get involved in trading links, etc.
• Aaron also reassures people that the removal of the suggestion that people submit their sites to online directories from Google’s Webmaster guidelines didn’t mean those links had been devalued. Seems it is about discouraging the plethora of low value directories. Removing the suggestion makes it harder for these directories to convince nieve site owners that investment in listings on their sites was an essential part of obtaining search visibility.
• Sean Suchter of Yahoo! Search talks about an approach to web content I would heartily endorse, suggesting site owners create content that has “timeless user value”. He cautioned against adopting the latest techniques based on SEO’s interpretation of the latest algorithm changes. Future algorithm changes will inevitably discount that content’s value… “What might work this year or this quarter might stop working at some near future point if it isn’t necessarily user focused.”

So it might be a session about what you shouldn’t do to get search engine rankings but it ends up being a powerful insight in what you should do.

Search Engine Optimiser or SEO Buyer This is Stuff Worth Knowing… Worth Watching

Watch it for that and a really interesting discussion around the issue of paid links and PageRank (Google’s measure of link popularity/site authority, Link Flux” for Yahoo! and “Static Rank” for Live Search) and whether search engine rankings should take account of big brands’ profile…

All sound a little geeky? Some of it is. SEO spam involves some tricks that take you to the border of geek world. But if you are trying to get search visibility or employing search engine optimisers, you should take a look. You will learn something.


SMX East 2008: What Is Spam? from Search Marketing Expo on Vimeo.

Basic Search Engine Optimisation That Lasts

Search engine optimisation is neither a dark art nor rocket science. Sustainable SEO relies on keyword savvy content in the right places — “Right words. Right places. Right results.” — and long term link building.

Not SEO Tricks… Keywords They Use

It is not about the latest trick, out-smarting the well-paid brain power behind the engines’ algorithms or exploiting the latest web 2.0 trend before everyone else does.

Search engine optimal website development and promotion is about demonstrating an understanding of a need by using the language those with that need use… The keywords the people with that need type into their favourite search engine.

SEO philosophy brought to mind by two things today:

1. The latest edition of one of my longest running newsletter subscriptions, Jill Whalen’s High Rankings newsletter, pointed me to a recent interview Jill gave where she repeats her consistent line on SEO: “I’d say the biggest mistake is in trying to trick the search engines rather than just fixing your site.“
2. Checking rankings of a site I optimised in late 2003 to find the content had changed little and neither had the top ten rankings for targeted keywords.

I have kept an eye on the site over the years because the job was unusual. The work was confined to content optimisation. No advice was given on site changes beyond recommended meta data and body content changes. And we didn’t even touch on link building strategies.

I reworked some great content they had to include prominent use of keywords and nearly five years later…

Neither SEO Warlock Nor Search Engine Optimisation Genius

Which is not to suggest that I am some kind of warlock or genius — “neither dark art nor rocket science”, remember. I didn’t apply a secret formula or fail-safe keyword density level. I simply tried to describe the products and convey the supporting informational content in a way that both used keywords and talked to needs the target audience was looking to fulfil.

Bottom Line: Trying to trick/influence the technology the search engines’ phd rich campus’ produce gets more attention than basic, use keywords people use in content, search engine optimisation but no SMB owner should be worried about algorithms.

[Hmmmm...] Maybe a bit too “me to” but, then again, a point that I really believe needs more attention

New & Noteworthy in Internet Marketing

Some comment-worthy stuff in the inbox & reader this morning:

• Cuil is the new Google challenger: the original search engine commentator, Danny Sullivan assesses the strength of the challenge in detail. Lots of buzz about this but no time to assess it today. The three column approach to displaying results is interesting, as is the use of images in results. Three column shoulds should help sites and searchers with more chance to win clicks. I’ll revisit this when the buzz dies down.
• Sound advice on writing with keywords from Karon Thackston of Marketing Words Copywriting Blog. Describing what you are not is a particularly good technique to remember — although I’ve often found people object to even the smell use of the word “cheap” adds to their copy. For me, the best guide is whether your copy sounds clunky as you read it aloud. If it does, you are overdoing the keyword repetition.
• I challenge you to read, social media expert, Chris Brogran’s 50 Steps to Establishing a Consistent Social Media Practice without being better informed about social media considerations. For me, the first one is always who is going to do the socialising and how much time do they have. No point even starting if you can’t sustain a target momentum*.

I kinda like Cuil’s three column results page but many are saying the results that fill the columns don’t match hyped relevance levels.
* Hmmm… not sure I am sustaining my target momentum with this blog. Very much a case of “do as I say not as I do.”

Web Marketing Insight Catchup

Some days my daily search for Web marketing insight is frustrating other days, well, the insight is in full flood.

First thing:
Turn my laptop on return; to the kitchen [sigh] to get the coffee I meant to bring down to the office; log in and wait for my beleaguered pc to sort out itself ["commmmon!"]; and settle in to read email and RSS feeds because that’s one of the things I offer clients: the latest Internet marketing tactics.

(Know the story of Sisyphus doomed to spend eternity 1. pushing a rock up a hill 2. losing it near the top and 3. repeating 1. and 3.? Well. I relate. But in a good way. The fact that one is never on top of the Internet marketing knowledge hill could be frustrating. Except, constant learning makes life interesting for me.)

Hour later:
Either:

• Hmmmm. Not sure I’ve actually learned much — another five internet marketing information product  pitches, advice I first read in 2001 recycled or repackaged, two more social media sites to consider, etc. That is: a lot of information but no insight.

“Water, water, everywhere, nor any drop to drink” Coleridge, The Ancient Mariner

Or:

• Lots of fresh insight to note (fresh water to drink from the sea of indigestible salt water that is the daily flow of Web marketing advice) and not enough time to take it in and share it with others.

Fresh or Worthwhile Web Marketing Insight:

• A reminder from Gerry McGovern that your target audience is more and more fickle every day based on a number of things Gerry has come across on his web travels
• (via Jennifer Laycock of Search Engine Guide) a very droll take on the right way to hire an SEO firm from Ian Dury of Conversation Marketing

(Note, especially: the first point about SEOs that can’t write. The technical stuff matters. But the words deliver the traffic and the ROI. I would say that, of course.)

• “Five Ways to Improve Your Customer Experience” from, Clickz columnist, Heidi Cohen actually offers more than five. Her general theme, understanding and catering to chosen customers’ needs in products, service and company style is one I heartily endorse.

Search Engine Submission Non-service

Search engine submission is a service you can do without.

I’ve always wondered about SEO companies touting submission to search engines as part of their services. Um. There’s no need to submit to search engines. They are in the business of finding and indexing sites. All that is needed is a link from another site.

Picture a boardroom, back room or cafe near you. A group of people is intent on a piece of paper the loudest of the group is writing on. “Anything else we can offer? This list could really do with another bullet.” “Ahh… How about submission? That will give us seven services.”

Be particularly wary of anyone offering to submit your site to hundreds/thousands of search engines for $x. Not so much a service as a scam in those cases. There aren’t that many reputable search engines. Indeed, your ROI on that particular marketing expense might be negative if you end up associated with unsavoury corners of the web.

Why am I thinking about search engine submission?

Signed up with webmaster central today and found myself appalled to find this site — very much a work in progress and not safe for public consumption yet — well indexed by Google. It seems Yahoo! Search has about the half my unfinished pages indexed and MSN Live two pages.

Time to get serious about filling in the sizable gaps in my content!

Flash For Search Engines

It is one of the maxims of search engine optimisation: if you’ve put it in Flash it might look good but you’ve pretty much hidden it from search engines.

But maybe the maxim doesn’t apply any more.

Google, Yahoo! and Adobe have got together to figure out a way to offer the big name search engines access to content in Flash file formats (SWF). According to Ecommerce Times:

“The two search companies will use an optimized version of Adobe’s Flash Player technology to improve their engines’ abilities to index the Flash file format (SWF) and scan information contained within the files.

This, according to Adobe, will provide more relevant automatic search rankings of the millions of RIAs and other dynamic content powered by Adobe Flash Player and which would otherwise remain outside the scope of traditional Web searches.”

There are already some things you can do to get content in Flash indexed. Things like, most basically, “noscript” content and ensuring that SWF file meta data is keyword rich. This, though, is an interesting development.

A kinda “duh” development, though. S’pose Adobe weren’t too concerned that Flash movies couldn’t be found via the way people find things online, search engines. That didn’t stop Flash being popular with advertising creatives, gamers, etc. or widely used. But taking 12 years to take some steps to cater to search engines…

Indeed, its not clear who approached who. Maybe the impetus came for the search engines’ endless quest to deliver good results. That definitely the feeling I’m getting from what Google has said on its Webmaster Central Blog and Googleblog:

Google has been developing a new algorithm for indexing textual content in Flash files of all kinds, from Flash menus, buttons and banners, to self-contained Flash websites. Recently, we’ve improved the performance of this Flash indexing algorithm by integrating Adobe’s Flash Player technology.

Bottomline: I wouldn’t be rushing to redo your navigation in your site in Flash. It will be a long time before “no flash please if you’re looking to get traffic via search engines” drops out of SEO-client conversation. Best bet is still href text links — modify it all you like via css but offer the simple links.

After thought: Will be interesting to see what impact this has. The heavily designed sort of sites that make use of flash aren’t generally put together in a keyword savvy way either. (Think of big brand sites put together by big ad agencies — Adidas isn’t to worried about using running shoes a lot in website content, for instance.)

The question is whether the text content in Flash files will actually help search engines understand what the content is about.

NZ Search & Social Media Stats

For the last eight years my work focus has been the US online market. Whether I was living in Melbourne, Auckland or Wanaka, the work ended up in an email inbox somewhere in the US.

Now, establishing my own consulting business and working with local clients, my work focus has shifted to spend more time studying local web usage. It’s interesting to be spending a little more time looking at my local web neighbourhood. The Web may be global but its usage varies across time zones and country borders.

Google Dominates NZ Search with  89% Market Share

And there’s definitely a “900 pound gorilla” in the New Zealand search space: combining Google.co.nz and .com shares gives  the non-resident gorilla 89.19% of NZ searches, with MSN’s Live beating Yahoo!  for the search scraps with 4.30% versus 2.23% (source: Hitwise, Search Volume 24 Weeks ending May 31, 2008).

Google can’t boast that kind of dominance in the US where its share is more like 58%.

NZ Social Network Picture is A little Different To US Picture

My latest Hitwise newsletter offers insight into New Zealanders’ use of social networks.  Seems Facebook and Bebo are almost equally popular with 39.87% & 39.15% of social network use and Myspace (still dominant in the US) lagging behind with 7.81%.

Big movers in the US market — photo sharing site, Flickr (101% growth from May ‘07 - May ‘08 to rank 3rd behind MySpace and Yahoo in unique visitors), people search network Reunion.com (77% growth for 5th spot), social bookmarking site Digg.com (90% growth for 11th) and business social networking site LinkedIn (138% growth for 20th) — don’t feature in NZ stats.

My impression [should really take a look] is that Bebo is definitely for a younger demographic — witnessed it causing sibling friction between an 11 year old boy and his 8 year old sister with one laptop to share recently, for instance.

So it seems like Facebook is the place to look if you’re a NZ business thinking about doing something about “this social media thing everyone is talking about.”