MediaVision Blog : Search Engine Marketing

Navigating SEO waters can be perilous for old sea dogs as well as beginners trying to find their sea legs. The industry is in a constant state of ebb and flow. Nothing stands still and if it does, it’s quickly washed away, only to be replaced with the next trend riding the internet wave. Self-proclaimed industry experts jostle for position, sowing harmony as well as discontent whenever they choose to voice their opinions.

There is very little cohesion and nearly every SEO-related topic or news item is subject to fierce debate. Subtle nuances are dissected and toes are stepped on. Something as seemingly simple as the understanding of a term can create lifelong friendships or mortal enemies. It’s an industry where new terms are coined nearly every week, and where the strength of terminology coined can make or break a reputation. Any confusion adds fuel to an already raging fire. And as we know, fire is a sailor’s worst nightmare.

Unfortunately confusion abounds. Similar sounding terms, especially anything with link in it, can be particularly confusing. Links, while serving as the backbone for any organic SEO campaign, are fairly ethereal and intangible. The rules governing them are malleable and able to withstand a significant amount of bending before actually being broken. Black hat and white hat techniques do battle and the result is a rather large mess.

Consider the term “link bait”. It’s a horrible term. It conjures up images of helpless, doomed worms dangling on cruel hooks luring equally helpless and doomed fish to a sticky end. It smacks of exploitation when it is, in fact, a rather innocuous term that involves the creation of attractive content designed specifically to draw people to a website. Despite the way it sounds, it doesn’t entail anything underhand at all. What it does entail is a lot of honest hard work on the part of SEO marketers.

Lisa Barone, perhaps in an attempt to placate those who are influenced by connotation, prefers to refer to link magnets, as the goal is attraction, not repulsion. This is an example of a rather clever and appropriate term coined by piggy backing on an existing one. It’s more refined than the original, honed to Lisa Barone’s definition of what link bait should be. Thanks to a solid reputation and good writing, the post containing the concept went viral (that SEO holy grail) and now when many SEO marketers think of link baiting they think in terms of magnets.

The word “farm”, is simple enough, we all have a basic understanding of what farming entails but it invokes a different image for each of us. I have conflicting farming images; one is of a nice quiet piece of land devoted to growing crops, with a couple of cows for milk and chickens for eggs, all very organic and free range. The other is of factory farming with appalling living conditions for animals, leading to wholesale slaughter. (I’m vegetarian)

My point is that if that simple word can mean different things to one person; imagine the confusion that reigns when you combine it with another. Link farms are not warm fuzzy places where the sun always shines and it only rains at night, instead they are places of death, for your website that is. Link farms make use of indiscriminate linking, the more the merrier. If you subscribe to link farms you might as well check you credibility at the door, because you won’t be needing it anymore. Considered a form of spam, Google pounces on violators and bans the offending websites. Go directly to jail, no second chances.

No SEO practitioner worth his or her salt will touch them, but judging by a discussion thread on highrankings.com, not everyone is aware of their inherent black-hattedness. Here you’ll see SEO experts doing what they do best, as they battle to outdo each other in the provision of useful information, gently mock those who don’t share their opinions, and of course, engage in debate.

In recent weeks the most popular topic for debate was whether or not SEO needs standards. Expert opinions went back and forth as the most respected members of SEO gave their opinions on the matter, with roughly half advocating standards and half opposing them. For my two cents, I think that standards are a great idea. I have a host of reasons but the most relevant to today’s topic is that they would eliminate a whole lot of confusion. They wouldn’t stop debate or the coining of new terms and so wouldn’t limit creativity or the freedom for movement that SEOs so desperately covet. They would provide a solid base from which beginners can plot a course and confidently set sail. They would play a pivotal role in preventing all of us from floundering adrift in a sea of vague terminology and even vaguer practices.

I’ve nailed my colours to the mast, will you nail yours?