Blog Comments

You are currently browsing the archive for the Blog Comments category.

I’ve been doing a lot of research on Google recently and have noticed that many of the results I get our e-zine articles.

Now, I know that’s good for the people who wrote them. After all, when you write in the scene article, isn’t the whole objective to get on Google’s first page?

However, as a researcher I find it very annoying as I just don’t trust information I would get from an e-zine article. So, I have to scroll down and down and look at result after result until I can find an authority site.

This is where it really gets interesting.

I feel like I’m getting worse search results since Panda. Maybe this is just my imagination but it seems that the search results I am now seeing are just not as good as they used to be.

For example, when I would search on a medical term such as tubal ligation research, the 1st results I would see would typically be from something such as Web MD, an obstetrician or the Mayo Clinic. But when I now search on a medical term, I’m just as likely to get a bunch of articles before I find any authority site.

If you’re doing research, are you seeing the same kind of results that I am?

Hardly a week goes by that I don’t receive an e-mail promising me almost instant riches.  For example I received one recently about an Internet marketer who knew this guy who made something in excess of $30,000 — practically overnight.  Of course, the inference was that I could do the same thing.  That’s the promise.  However, you’ll notice these marketers never say you’re going to make $30,000 practically overnight.  It’s always told in anecdotal fashion — how Bob, the 22-year-old school dropout earned $30,000 overnight using this “new, super secret way of fooling Google.”

But the inferred promise is clear.  If you buy thr product or system, you will earn $30,000 overnight.

If you read clear down to the bottom of these sales letters and, believe me, it can take a lot of work to get to the bottom, there will be  a guarantee.  It will say something like, “if you’r unhappy with our product or service for any reason,let us know within 60 days and  we will refund your money.”

However, that’s not a guarantee as I would define it.

To me a guarantee is that the product or service will perform as described and that if it doesn’t, you can get your money back.  Maybe I’m being persnickety, but that seems different than just guaranteeing that you’ll get your money back if you’re unhappy with the product.

If all of these get rich quick programs and systems offered real guarantees, then in my mind they would be guaranteed to do as advertised — to get me that $30,000 overnight.

I guess, like most things in life, it’s buyer beware.

I found a video titled “who owns your content” that I thought had some good information. Here it is.

Who Owns Your Content?

A few days ago, I purchased a course (PDFs and videos) that taught how to make money by writing reviews of products on Amazon.com. There was nothing blackhat. It taught how to set up a site, get a domain name, find profitble keywords, etc.  I have to admit I’m sort of leading from ignorance as I never completed the course. However, it seemed to me that if one were to follow all the instructions and do everything recommended, one would make some money.

What bothered me

There were a couple of reasons why I gave up on the course. First, it taught that you should use keywords that included a brand name, such as http://canonpowershot.com.

I seriously avoid suing brand names because you can just never know when the company owning the brand will hit you with a cease and desist order – leaving you with little choice but to shut down the site.

Second, it recommended finding other people’s reviews and then writing a new one using them as source material. In other words, you didn’t have to actually own or use the product to create a review, which just rubbed me the wrong way.

I don’t see this as “black hat” or illegal but it just smacks of being a “faux” review. I also wonder if you can really write a good review if you’ve never actually used the product. IMHO, the best reviews are those that simpley say whether or not they thought the product was worth what it cost.

I know that product reviews are a great way to get ranked on Google and that people often search for product reviews so they do generate traffic. But my philosophy is that it just isn’t ethical to write reviews unless they are of products I’ve actually used.

What do you think?

 

Google is set to implement another change in its algorithm called Panda 2.2. According to one article I read:

“The differences with Panda update 2.2 lies in its implementation – Cutts (Matt Cutts of Google) said that the algorithm will be manually scanning for those particular websites that are involved in content farming and/or content re-publishing.

“While Panda Update 2.1 was only released in early May, it was a minor update and received no fanfare from Google. The fact that Matt Cutts has mentioned 2.2 at one of the biggest SEO conferences of the year indicates that its probably going to be big (and have quite an impact).

“However, to avoid any great impact to your websites ranking, ensure that your site is kept up-to-date with good quality content (italics mine). This will reduce the likelihood of any penalty or if you have already been penalized in previous updates then the penalty should soon be lifted after the 2.2 launch.”

This makes it even clearer that good quality content in the form of articles and reports written specifically for your sites will always keep you in Google’s good graces … and you sites highly ranked.

 

I belong to a great site called Earn1KaDay (http://earn1kaday.net/). It is just an amazing resource for anyone who wants to make money online. One of its best features is that you can do a poll where members can vote on a topic such as “how much do you make a day from online marketing?”

If I can frame the questions correctly, I’m going to do a poll on what’s most important to webmasters in hiring ghostwriters. I think the criteria are: on-time delivery , correct grammer and punctuation, quality content and responsiveness to requests for revisions. However, I’m afraid the real answer “is all of the above.” I would dearly like to know what webmasters want from ghostwriters but am not sure I can get a good answer. But I am going to try.

If you’re using article marketing to get rankings and drive traffic to your site, it’s important to know which directories you should be submitting to. After all, what’s the point of submitting articles to directories that aren’t very popular?

Here are the top 20 places to submit articles by page rank and Alexa ranking.

URL                     Alexa       Page Rank

 


knol.google.com 1 7
ehow.com 101 7
ezinearticles.com 157 6
squidoo.com 206 7
hubpages.com 260 6
articlesbase.com 433 6
examiner.com 709 7
buzzle.com 827 6
technorati.com 900 8
associatedcontent.com 1,057 7
suite101.com 1,130 7
brighthub.com 1,463 6
seekingalpha.com 1,548 7
goarticles.com 1,969 3
helium.com 2,117 6
ezinemark.com 2,127 2
gather.com 2,293 6
selfgrowth.com 3,078 6
articlesnatch.com 3,124 5
articlealley.com 3,195 5


 

Just watched a great presentation by Rand Fishkin of SEOMOZ on the future of linking.  He showed illustrations of the results you get on Google even after the Farmer/Panda change and that they are still crap.


Rand says that Bing is already able to spot – and ignore – links from spun articles. Google incorporates some but in the future? Rand’s guess is that it will eventually follow Bing’s lead and start ignoring links from spun articles. He feels – and I agree – that spun articles are basically spam.


Rand also said that what Google really likes are links from trusted sources. He also believes that it’s critical that you present yourself as a human and that it’s important that you create a brand.


You can see Rand’s entire presentation on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnjU4laWgDo&feature=player_embedded

He had a lot of good stuff to say. Don’t miss it.

 

I’ve been watching a video of a presentation done by Rand Fishkin of SEOMOZ. They have research showing what a site needs to ger a high number of links. The 10,000 ft. view is that you need to become a content resource in your niche. You do this by offering:

  • Unique research
  • Informed opinions
  • New/Trend analysis
  • Multimedia Content
  • Expert Contributors
  • Quality Discussion

Rand’s presentation runs more than and hour but I found it to be well worth the time. Click here to watch the presentation.


If you buy ghostwriting, thanks. Without you, we would truly be ghosts – hunched over our monitors, covered with cobwebs, dry and desiccated, whiling the hours away playing Angry Birds on our iPads.

So what’s the big secret?We love positive feedback and will just about stand on our collective heads to perform for those who give us a kind word or two.

Think about the life of the average ghostwriter. We toil away in obscurity and anonymity. We try our damndest to please our clients as we work far into the night (well, sometimes far into the night) to meet our deadlines. Then we send off our work and what do we get in return? We often get zilch feedback. Nada. No comments except for the occasional request for revisions.

Of course, we get paid and that’s always nice. But it’s really frustrating to work our butts off and hear nothing in return.

Here’s the deal. If you want to get really top quality work delivered on time, give your ghostwriter(s) a bit of praise now and then. Something as simple as “great job, thanks for the extra effort” or “damn, that was great content” not only warms the cockles of our hearts but impels us to work even harder on your next assignment.

It only takes a minute to give a ghostwriter an online “hug” but it can buy you a ton of loyalty and lots of extra effort.

 

« Older entries