I listened to some SEO/SEM and PR experts talk about the SEO/SEM world recently, about SEO Blackhats (I didn't know such things existed), about getting high rankings and good placement on search engine listings, and that no formula could do what SEO/SEM experts do.
Just so you'll know before you read further, this column is an experiment. I'm studying how people search for things online and I'm doing it in my typical NextStageish way. This column is really a continuation of the Searching for Search blog arc over on BizMediaScience.
I was at a Boston Social Media Club's The Search for Results: Social Media and Search Marketing panel discussion. Once again I'll emphasize that I know nothing about search, search engines, optimizing, indexing, listing, ranking, anything like that. I'm the fellow who knows I know nothing and readily admits it.
I asked only one question because time didn't allow for more, "Can SEO be formularized?", meaning "Can one create a mathematical expression that determines what needs to appear on a page, where, etc., in order to get high search engine ranking?"
As always, its not the answers, its the way the answers come that provides the most information. I think it's safe to say the answer was "No." One of my favorite answers was a statement that the search engines regularly change their ranking formulas just to prevent such a thing from happening.
I probably wasn't making myself clear. And I know I don't think like most people do.
But the concept of a formula that is in use being undeterminable truly baffles me. I'm not throwing down the gauntlet here, I'm merely recognizing that there's no lock that can't be picked.
Right now and for a while my time will be focused on working with Eric Peterson on The Engagement Project. I'll be working with Eric and WebAnalyticsDemystified to develop an equation that will satisfactorily measure whether or not a given population, audience or individual is "engaged" when they're interacting with digital media.
When I'm done though -- oh, heck, knowing me it'll be simultaneously -- I'll be devoting some cycles to this.
And because I know I don't know anything about it, your comments are both appreciated and welcome.
Please contact NextStage for information regarding presentations and trainings on this and other topics. Upcoming Trainings:
Sign up for The NextStage Irregular, our very irregular, definitely frequency-wise and probably topic-wise newsletter.
There was a time when a formula could have been applied for SEO. Fortunately, the search engines have grown smarter and are embracing more relevant factors along with human elements. A key factor for SEO lies primarily on other sites' links to yours and not only what content exists on your site. Many of those top-ranking "authority" sites have real people managing the content. Take Wikipedia for example. It's a well-known authority for many topics on Google. In order to get your content into Wikipedia, it needs to be non-commercial, informative, notable and verifiable. Each of these factors are arguably subjective and whether or not the content is allowed to stay in the index is entirely up to Wikipedia's editors. With this in mind, I think you're better off hiring an SEO professional to help guide you through these muddy waters. Adam Designworks Marketing Agency ...
Comment By: Adam | 5/14/08 at 1:52 AM SEO/SEM Formulas, Whitehats in Black Clothing and Predicting Search Engine Placement and OutcomesHello, First, thanks for your comment. I disagree with lots of it, though. I documented the outcome of the first pass at a formula in "Search Engine Keyword Strategies and Tools - Knowing what keywords your audience will use in a search" (http://www.bizmediascience.com/2008/03/search_engine_keyword_strategi.html), and while I respect what you've written I'm also guessing that the search engines -- for all their smarts -- are working with formulae themselves. If your statement is that I couldn't figure out their formulae, you're probably correct there, too. Then again, I made no attempt to figure out how search engines do things, only how people think when they do things. Going on that basis, your premises which might be true from the search engine side of the "equation" aren't valid from the consciousness side of the "equation". Also, I never in any way shape or form suggest that people stay away from SEO professionals. Several SEO professionals are close friends and business associates whose input on my math I value highly and whom (I hope) value my feedback on their work. I know several ask me questions on how my research applies to their work. As one SEO friend recently told me regarding my formulations, "Search marketing people are anything but subtle. Lets throw a bunch of keywords at an engine and see what gets flung back. Lets see what words other people are throwing at engines and see if we can get that flung back, too." Anyway (and as I recently presented at both SNCR's NewComm Forum08 (http://www.newcommforum.com/) and eMetrics San Francisco 08 (http://www.emetrics.org/2008/sanfrancisco/), understanding how humans interact with web technologies is going to require lots more than just the computer side of the equation (see "...programmable device..." and "...how a person is thinking." (http://www.allbusiness.com/media-telecommunications/internet-www/8518264-1.html)). Again, thanks for your comment and reading my posts. - Joseph ...
Comment By: Joseph Carrabis | 5/14/08 at 12:35 PM SEO/SEM Formulas, Whitehats in Black Clothing and Predicting Search Engine Placement and Outcomes