Below is what happened in search today, as reported on Search Engine Land and from other places across the web. From Search Engine Land: “Bing For Schools” Becomes “Bing In The Classroom” & Makes Program Available To All Schools Originally [Read More]
This video series provides answers from industry pros to some of the most pressing social media questions facing today’s small businesses
The post Advice from a Social Pro: Integrating Social into Your Marketing Mix [VIDEO] appeared first on VR Marketing Blog.
Bing is using search and social signals to display predictions in its search results for how contestants of popular reality TV shows will fare. Bing said more types of predictions will be coming in the future as well.
The Cut declared ‘the golden era of fashion blogging over‘ earlier this week, and while the article focuses solely the fashion blogger’s impact on the ‘end all, be all’ of fashion (front row at New York Fashion Week), there are a lot …
Do you want more social media traffic? Did you know that the words you use within your content could drastically affect how much social media traffic you get? For example, if you want more Facebook traffic, then using words like “when,” “tell us,” “submit,” “deals,” and “discounts” can help you get more shares, likes and [click to continue...]
A question came out at a radio station: “Is it true that Mercedes cars are being given to citizens in Moscow?” The radio answers: “In principle yes, it is true, but it is not Moscow but Leningrad, not Mercedes but Ladas, and they are not given to but stolen from.”
Much like in the case of this joke, a lot of the beliefs that are popular about SEO are only true “in principle” and some turn out not to be true at all. Some of these ideas may have started as true, while others have always been incorrect or inexact. Either way, it is time for a quick reality check as we put 10 of the most popular SEO myths and misconceptions under scope.
Myth 1 – Links Are Great to Measure Site Popularity!
It’s not that the number of links that send back to your site (backlinks) doesn’t matter, it’s rather that they’re the wrong indicator to use when measuring “popularity”. Take movie box office scores for instance. Setting a box office record is a big deal for a movie, but it isn’t the equivalent of setting a popularity record. Box office numbers tell you how much the movie earned from ticket sales, not how many people went to see the movie. Which matters, because movies that have longer showing periods can earn more, and so do movies that are shown in 3D, because the tickets cost more. So if you want, it might be more useful sometimes to look at the number of tickets that were sold, rather than the earnings from ticket sales. In a somewhat similar manner, the real measure of your spread would be the number of referring domains, i.e. the number of sites linking to your own site. If you have a large number of backlinks but a rather small number of referring domains, it’s quite possible that Google will see this as shady, and even suspect an intentional strategy on your part, such as a paid linking scheme.
If you want to become the popular kid in school, it’s not helpful if just one friend keeps talking about you, in fact, it might be damaging. What you really need is a lot of people talking even a little bit about you.
Myth 2 – Guest Posting is Dead!
Imagine you could write a book that was good enough that it made your favorite author notice it. Better yet, they read and like it and even offer to write the introduction for you. That’s pretty good, right? Now imagine instead that your favorite author invites you to write something for their next book. And you can even mention your own book, or at least the fact that you’re a writer. Now that’s great! You get so much more attention from being featured in someone else’s already famous work. But what if you use this opportunity to talk only about your book? You don’t really try to add something to the book you’re guest writing for, you just focus on promoting yourself. It’s really tempting to do that, and even more so when we are talking about guest blogging and guest posting online. Which is why earlier this year Matt Cutts, the head of Google’s Webspam team, called out guest posting on his blog and suggested that we all find better ways to draw attention upon us in the online world – or better uses for guest posts. Use it to build relationships with other people and other companies, use it to craft an image for your brand through carefully picked associations with other brands, use it to define your identity as an organization. Just don’t use it for a hurried, obvious, self-centered plug.
Myth 3 – SEO is Dead!
The answer to this myth is quite straightforward: No, SEO is not dead. But maybe the idea – or some idea – behind the original meaning really is dead. It’s becoming harder and harder to actually “optimize” the results of search engines by means of shady tactics. The main condition for becoming highly ranked is starting to become, well… that you are actually that good and that relevant. Or, as long-time SEO Jill Whalen said when she quit the industry last year:
“Google now works. The tricks to beat and spam Google no longer work as well. Today’s SEO blogs and conferences are bursting with SEO consultants talking about how, when you create amazing websites and content for your users, the search engines will follow. This means, my friends, that my work here is done.”
Some have even gone so far as to declare the term dead and propose new concepts to take its place (such as OC/DC: optimizing content for discovery and conversion). But SEO has been about so much more than trying to manipulate the results and rankings all along.
As long as there will be search engines, there will be a desire to “optimize” them, whatever that will mean at any given point in time.
Myth 4 – Black Hat SEO Does Not Work!
It depends on what “work” means. A lot of black hat tactics will get you higher in the search rankings on a short-term. Tactics such as packing long lists of buzz words on your page, regardless of whether they actually relate to your content and field of business or not, putting lists of keywords in a color that is the same as the background, in the hopes that these lists will be indexed by search engines, or even including links to pages that the user will never be able to actually see will likely help you rank higher for a couple of days. Are you going to get away with it in the longer run? Most definitely not. You will end up being penalized severely by search engines, and the use of these techniques could even result in your web page being banned from the search engine.
Myth 5 – Anchor Text is Dead!
It’s easy to see anchor text as spammy and unreliable, but when done right, it still matters. When anchor text appears naturally in a post, it helps search engines verify both your site and the site you are linking to. If an anchor text is specific (e.g.: “black hat SEO problems” instead of “click here” or even “SEO”), it gives a naturalness vibe to your page. At the same time, you shouldn’t try too hard to make your anchor text a search engine magnet or target by using commercial keywords. Most recommendations on the matter suggest that no more than a third of all anchor text instances should be targeted. Whether an anchor text is targeted or whether it simply happens to fit remains, of course, a delicate issue and generates a lot of interpretation. Which is why you should focus as little as you can on trying to get traffic and clicks from the anchor text, and as much as possible on choosing anchor text that makes sense and is relevant to the link. As for the linked site, if the anchor texts that link to a certain sites are somewhat varied, this might be another indicator of natural site-building. When all the backlinks are anchored with the same text, it is likely that something at least unnatural is going on, if not shady altogether. Anchor text is still relevant, you just need to pay attention to how you use it.
Myth 6 – Disavowing All Your Links Will Fix Your Problem!
It’s fairly easy to control the way you build your own website so that you don’t do anything against the rules. At any rate, it’s easier than controlling what others might do in the way of influencing your page’s ranking on search engines. What if for one reason or another, a link to your site is found alongside a myriad of other links in an attempt of another site to get their 15 minutes of fame? What if the way your site is linked from another page is through some shady anchor text? What if you get penalized on account of backlinks you had nothing to do with? That’s when you should use Google’s disavow tool to mark those links and only those links to be disavowed by the search engine. If you haven’t been penalized yet, and just want to stay on the safe side, it’s best to try conventional methods first, for instance a reconsideration request. If you decide to use this tool as a heal-all solution because you’re in a hurry, or scared or simply unsure what to do, disavowing all the links in an attempt to “clear your name” with certainty will not return the desired results. On the other hand, you might actually get penalized by Google, because the move seems unusual. On the other hand, you might lose any standing in the search engine ranks anyway because now there’s nothing linking to you so there’s very little to put you in the center of the map. The disavow tool was created to fight unnatural links, and that’s all you should be using it for.
Myth 7 – Disavowing Only “Some” of Your Unnatural Links Will Fix Your Problem!
Since you don’t have to throw out the baby with the bath water, do you have to throw out the bath water at all? What happens if you just disavow some of the unnatural links, won’t that be seen as a sign of good will or at least get you some forgiving? It’s very likely that the answer to all of these questions is “no”. You will just lose time waiting for an answer from Google which will probably be a refusal because the uploaded disavow file is incomplete. If you don’t know which links exactly you should disavow, the very first step would be to conduct a link audit. Include everything that’s necessary in the disavow file, but nothing extra.
If there’s one thing Google frowns upon more than unnatural links, it’s the shallow use of the Disavow tool to reduce the problem of unnatural links.
Myth 8 – No-Follow Links Don’t Count!
Not with that attitude they don’t. Sure, they don’t bring you the big points, the “link juice”. That doesn’t mean they’re not helpful though. For starters, the issue seems to be a bit more complicated than it meets the eye: while Google abides by the no-follow instruction, it has been suggested that there’s a more complicated dynamic at work, and where a site is linked by both do-follow and no-follow links, both may have an impact. Even if we were to ignore it, the fact remains that, no-follow links make you more likely to seem natural; they show that easy points are not all that you’re interested in, and Google may even check naturalness based on a do-follow – no-follow ratio. Last, but definitely not least, these links can still bring you traffic, which is really what you’re after. Plus, a lot of comments and even posts can be no-follow and still create buzz and social activity around you, which matters towards referral traffic. Remember: you’re trying to build an image that’s strong enough to get you high in the rankings, not get high in the rankings so you’ll have a better image.
Myth 9 – Negative SEO Does Not Work!
Various mistakes such as incorrect redirects, duplicate content, de-indexing your own site, are some of the most frequent reasons for concern, along with black hat SEO tactics. But outside enemies may be on the rise, too! At the very least, the change in tone in Google’s official wording on the matter may be a forewarning. In 2012 Google changed its position on the issue of negative SEO from:
“There’s almost nothing a competitor can do to harm your ranking or have your site removed from our index”
“Google works hard to prevent other webmasters from being able to harm your ranking or have your site removed from our index.”
So what could happen? The two most obvious examples would be that malicious parties could try to either leave spam anchor texts on your site, or use low-quality links to point to your site. Either way, these attacks shouldn’t work or do any irreversible damage if you keep a close eye on your links, both inbound and outbound. If damage is done before you identify it, you could still try to fix the situation either manually, by submitting reconsideration requests or semi-automatically, by using the disavow tool.
It also helps if you’re aware of your own site environment:
- Is your website fairly new?
- Are you on a competitive market?
- Have you been using a brand-building slow-growing strategy?
In the end, it comes back to the decisions you make. For now, guarding yourself against negative SEO is still in your power. You can easily get alerted by e-mail when such a think might happen.
Myth 10 – SEO is Easy!
It should be pretty clear by now that it is not! It becomes more and more complex with the layer of abstraction that is added to it. Google aims to make the technical signals harder and harder to read. It took away the ability to get keyword data for users arriving to websites from Google searches. It made fewer and fewer updates to the Pagerank in the past years (5 updates in 2011, 4 in 2012, 2 in 2013, none so far), leading some to speculate that Pagerank might even go away for good. But it also geared its algorithm towards understanding conversational search queries or personalizing search results. By all accounts, SEO isn’t what it used to be. It takes a clearer vision, better crafted site architecture and a more genuine interest towards providing quality content.
SEO just got a whole lot more interesting. And it’s here to stay!
What myths or misconceptions would you like to add to this list?Photo credits: 1 2 3
The post 10 SEO Myths and Misconceptions that Should Die in 2014 appeared first on SEO Blog | cognitiveSEO Blog on SEO Tactics & Strategies.
You’re getting no blog comments, you’re becoming disillusioned, you’re about to to give up…
But there is a way forward.
Have I caught your attention? I hope so because comments are so important.
Over 90% of everyone that visits your site is going to be a lurker who will never comment, get over it!!
Your blog is part of your social media community and you want community involvement. Encouraging and promoting comments on your blog will lead to a stronger community with more support for your content.
But it’s not that easy. And it’s like the chicken and the egg scenario! You get more comments when you have comments in place already.
So how do you kick off these comments and ensure your blog doesn’t look like a ghost town!
Here are 7 amazingly simple ways to get more blog comments.
1. Make it easy to comment
If somebody comes to your website, really enjoys your website and then wants to comment you need to make sure it’s easy to comment.
There are lots of different commenting systems available and some are much more popular than others.
If you’ve previously created an account with a comment system some allow you to stay logged in. So when you arrive on the website you can comment without entering your details again.
If you have to enter your login details again the chances are you won’t bother or you forget what the login details are.
So make sure to have a commenting system that is popular and allows your users to stay logged in so they don’t always have to enter their login details.
Disqus is one of the most popular commenting systems and is available on 3 million websites. Once you login you stay logged in so you never have to enter your login details again. Reducing this friction helps a lot.
Action: Make sure that you use a popular commenting system and make sure your visitors don’t have to remember their login details each time to come to your site.
2. Link back to a commenters blog post
There is a WordPress plugin called CommentLuv. When someone posts a comment it automatically links back to their last blog post.
Linking back gives the commenter an incentive to provide a comment in the blog.
In the following you see a comment and a link back. This was from Kim Garst’s website who gets a ton of engagement on everything posted and has built up a really strong community of supporters.
Action: Consider CommentLuv as a possible plugin for commenting.
3. Do outreach
Not having any comments on your blog is completely your fault and not anyone else’s!!
If you have a blog that’s not getting any comments you need to reach out to people that may have something interesting to say about your article and ask for comments on it!
When you have comments you get more comments. It’s hard to get the first person to comment so encouraging this will lead to more.
Figure out who the audience is relevant to and then reach out to them and tell them about the post. Ask them to come back and comment.
If you are doing outreach you really need to manage this correctly. You can use Excel to keep track of your outreach or manage it really well using a tool such as Buzzstream.
Buzzstream will ensure that you can keep track of who you reached out to. There are some great serial commenters out there!
It’s not a case of using outreach to get all your comments. It’s useful to get initial comments and you’ll get more comments on the back of those comments!
Action: Build your outreach program for new blog posts. You could just spend 15 minutes reaching out to relevant people and implement a good content sharing strategy.
4. Get more social shares
You can write a wonderful piece of content but if no-one gets to see it then it will sit there on the shelf with the other posts.
One way of getting more people back to your content is getting your visitors to share out the content. With more people coming back to your content you have a better chance of getting comments.
And if you’ve done your outreach and got some comments and then you get sharing going on your site… wham, bam, thank you mam… you’ll have some more comments.
Here’s our social sharing which is a plugin called Flare.
Action: Promote your post as much as possible to get more shares which will lead to more comments.
5. Have multiple comment options
What happens if you install Disqus but a really heavy Google+ user arrives on your site and likes to comment and share on Google+.
You could decide to replace Disqus with Google+ or you could give the person multiple options for commenting. When they arrive they can comment on Disqus or Google+.
This is an option we are now considering. We get great comments on Disqus but believe that we are missing out on conversation on Google+.
Action: Consider having multiple comment systems on your blog. Maybe your audience is really active on Facebook so you could add Facebook comments as a second option or maybe it’s Google+.
6. Interact with other commenters
If you build up a relationship with relevant people that comment regularly then they will start commenting on your blog.
If you’re using Disqus you can follow people. You can then track what conversations they are having and start interacting with them.
Here’s an example from my friend Warren.
Action: Check out your commenting system and find out if you can follow people that are relevant to your blog. Start interacting with them and they will interact with you!
7. Ask for comments
There are no tools involved in this one!
One of the best ways of getting comments is asking for them.
For example, have a question at the end of post that encourages people to answer.
What I try to do is ask multiple questions and give people options. For example, if I ask the question on this post ‘What other tips do you have’ you may not have other tips. So I could also ask ‘are there any tips you would use’.
Action: Give some people encouragement to comment and give them multiple options. Don’t ask a question that is hard to answer unless you have an easy to answer question beside it. Try to have at least one question that is relevant and easy to answer for most of your audience!
Blog commenting is an extremely important part of a blog but with the vast of visitors will not comment (lurkers!).
But you can actively promote comments and when you do the initial ground work then you can ease off a bit because blogs that get comments get more comments!
Ok, so here is where I follow through and encourage you to take action. Here are some options:
1. Comment below – Let me know are their tips above you would use? Are there any tips you would like to add? We find out now if you’re a lurker or a commenter!
2. Each point has an option for action. Consider implementing one of those points and increase the comments you get.
3. Share this – If you share you’re community might enjoy it and I’ll get more chance of comments!
Posted by russvirante
Penalization has become a regular part of the search engine optimization experience. Hell, it has changed the entire business model of Virante to building tools and services around penalty recovery and not just optimization. While penalties used to be a crude badge of honor worn by those leaning towards the black-hat side of the SEO arts, it is now a regular occurrence that seems to impact those with the best intentions. At Virante, we have learned a lot about penalties over the last few years—discerning between manual and algorithmic, Panda and Penguin, recovery methodologies and risk mitigation—but not much study has been done on the general response of websites to penalizations. We have focused more on what webmasters ought to do without studying what webmasters actually do in response to various penalties.
How webmasters respond matters
As much as we often feel a communion among other SEOs in our resistance to Google, the reality is that we are engaged in a competitive industry where we fight for customers in a very direct manner. This duality of competition—with Google and with each other—plays out in a very unique way when Google penalizes a competitor. We learn a great deal in the following months about the competition, such as the sophistication of their team (how quickly they respond, how many links they remove, how quickly they recover), their financial strength (do they increase ad spend, how much and on what terms), and whether they eventually recover.
It is also important from a wider perspective of understanding Google’s justifications for particular types of penalties that seem sweeping and inconsistent. Conspiracy theories abound regarding Penguin updates; I can’t count how many times I have heard someone say that penalties are placed to encourage webmasters to switch to AdWords.
So, I decided to investigate the behavior of webmasters post-Penguin from a macro perspective to determine what kinds of responses we are likely to see, and perhaps even answer some questions about Google’s motivations in the process.
- Collect examples: I collected a list of 100 domains that were penalized by Penguin 2.0 last year and confirmed their penalization through SEMRush.
- Establish controls: For each penalized site, I identified one website that ranked in the top 10 for their primary keyword that was not penalized.
- Get rankings and AdWords data: For each site (both penalized and control), we grabbed their historical rankings and AdWords spend from SEMRush for the months leading up to and following Penguin 2.0
- Get historical link data: For each site (both penalized and control), we grabbed their historical link data from Majsetic SEO for the months leading up to and following Penguin 2.0.
- Analyze results: Using simple regression models, we identified patterns among penalized sites that differed significantly from the control sites.
Do webmasters remove bad links?
After a Penguin 2.0 update, it is imperative to identify and remove bad links or, at minimum, disavow them. While we can’t measure disavow data, we can measure link acquisition data quite easily. So, do webmasters in general follow the expectations of link removal following a penalty?
Aggressive link removal: It appears that aggressive link removal is a common response to Penguin, as expected. However, we have to be careful with the statistics to make sure we correctly examine the degree and frequency with which link removal is employed. The control group on average increased their root linking domains by 41 following Penguin 2.0, but that could best be explained by a few larger sites increasing their links. When looking at an average of link proportions, only about 22% of the control sites actually saw an increase in links in the three months post-Penguin. The sites that were penalized saw a drop of 578 root linking domains. However, once again, this statistic is impacted by the link graph size of the individual penalized sites. 15% of those penalized still saw an increase in links in the three months following Penguin.
So, approximately 22% of domains not impacted by Penguin 2.0 had more root linking domains three months after the penalty, while only 15% of those penalized had more root linking domains post-Penguin. Notice how small the discrepancy is here. Webmasters responded differently only by 7% depending on whether or not they were penalized. While certainly those penalized removed more links, the practice of link building in general was very similarly affected. In the three months following Penguin, 78% of the control websites either dropped links or at least stopped link building and lost them through attribution. This is remarkable. There appears to be a deadening effect related to Penguin that impacts all sites—not just those that are penalized. While many of us expected Penguin to have a profound impact on link growth as webmasters respond to fears of future penalties, it is still amazing to see it borne out in the numbers.
What I find more interesting is the variation in webmaster responses to Penguin 2.0. Some penalized webmasters actually doubled down on link building, likely attributing their rankings loss to having too few links, rather than being penalized. We can tease this type of behavior out of the numbers by looking at the variances in percentage link change over time.
The variance among link fluctuations for sites that were not penalized was .08, but the variance among sites that were penalized was .38. This means that the behavior of websites after being penalized was far more erratic than those that were not. Some penalized sites made the poor decisions to greatly increase their links, although more sites made the decision to greatly decrease their links. If all webmasters responded uniformly to penalties, one would not expect to see such an increase in variance.
As SEOs, we clearly have our work cut out for ourselves in teaching webmasters that the appropriate response to a penalty is very much NOT adding more and more links to your profile, because this behavior is actually more common than link removal post-penalty. It is worth pointing out that it is possible that the webmasters disavowed links rather than removing them. We do not have access to that data, so we cannot be certain regarding that procedure. It is possible that some webmasters chose to disavow while others removed, and that the net impact on link value was identical, thus making the variance calculation false.
Do webmasters increase their ad spend?
I’ll admit, I had my fingers crossed on this one. Honestly, who doesn’t want to show that Google is just penalizing webmasters because it helps their bottom line? Wouldn’t it be great to catch the search quality team not being honest with us about their fiduciary independence?
Well, unfortunately it just doesn’t bear out. The evidence is fairly clear that there is no reason to believe that webmasters increase ad-spend following a Penguin 2.0 penalty. Let’s look at the numbers.
First, across our data set, no one who was an advertiser prior to Penguin 2.0 stopped advertising in AdWords in the three months after. Of the sites that were not advertisers prior to Penguin 2.0, 10% of those not penalized ended up becoming advertisers in AdWords, while only 4% of those penalized became advertisers. Sites that weren’t penalized were far more likely to join the AdWords program than those that were.
It wasn’t only true that those unaffected by Penguin 2.0 were more likely to sign up for AdWords; they increased their average Ad-spend, too. There was a 78% greater increase in ad-spend by those unaffected by Penguin 2.0 than those who were. Moreover, bidding shifts for those not impacted by Penguin remained similar in two month intervals across multiple randomly selected three-month differences, meaning that there appeared to be no related impact whatsoever.
We can safely conclude from this that there does not appear to be a direct, causal relationship between Penguin penalties and increased AdWords spending. Now, one could of course make the argument that better search results might increase ad revenue in the future as Google attracts more users to a better search engine, but accusations of a fiduciary motivation for releasing updates like Penguin 2.0 cannot be substantiated with this data.
Do they recover?
By the 5th month, approximately 24% of sites that were penalized were at or above their pre-Penguin 2.0 traffic. This is an exciting outcome because it does show recovery from Penguin is possible. Perhaps most important, sites that were penalized and removed links on average recovered 28% more traffic in the five months after Penguin than those that did not remove links. We have good evidence to suggest at least a correlation between post-penalty link removal and traffic recovery. Of course, we do have to take this with a grain of salt for a number of reasons:
- Sites that removed links may have been more likely to use the disavow tool as well.
- Sites that removed links may have been more SEO-savvy in general and fixed on-site issues.
- Sites that did not remove links may have had more intractable penalties, thus their lack of removal was a conscious decision related to the futility of a removal campaign.
These types of alternate explanations should always be entertained when using correlative statistics. What we do have good evidence of is that traffic recovery is possible for sites hit by Penguin, although it is by no means guaranteed or universal. Penguin 2.0 needn’t be a death sentence.
So, in a few weeks, we are likely to see another Penguin update, assuming Google follows its late-spring release date. When Penguin hits, be ready—even if you aren’t going to be penalized. Here are some things you should be doing…
- Know your bad links already. There is no reason to wait to be prepared for removal or disavowal. While I personally think that preemptive disavowal is likely the best practice, there is no excuse to just wait.
- Don’t worry about AdWords. There is no statistical evidence that your competition will surge post-Penguin in any meaningful fashion. The competitors who might come to depend move on AdWords also have less organic revenue to invest in the first place. At best, these even out.
- Don’t double down. While we can’t be certain that link removal gets you out of penalties (it is merely correlated), we can be certain that even a correlation doesn’t exist for increasing links and earning recovery post-Penguin penalties.
- Never assume. The behavior of your competitors and of Google itself is far more complex than off-the-cuff assumptions like “Google just penalizes sites to force people into AdWords” or that your business will know intuitively to remove or disavow links post-Penguin.
Hopefully, this time around we will all be more prepared for the appropriate response to Google’s next big update—whether we are hit or not.
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don’t have time to hunt down but want to read!
I’m here a few days early in Fort Lauderdale, getting prepared for the Pubcon SFIMA conference being held on Thursday, April 24, 2014. I’m honored to have been asked to speak on two separate panels this time:
2014 SEO Basics – While many of the core rules of SEO still hold true, there are some tactics that were OK in early 2013 that are not OK in 2014. This session will cover the 101 basics of SEO today. Make sure your Search Engine Strategies are correct. I’m speaking with Kathryn Parsons, the Marketing Manager (Paid and Natural Search) at Office Depot.
Tomorrow’s SEO Today – Social Search and Beyond – As search results become more personalized, it’s only natural that social media networks play a bigger role in these tailored search results. Learn how social search produces results that are specific to the individual and how your brand can stay relevant in these results as the social impact on search continues to grow. I’m speaking in this session with Mindy Weinstein, the SEO Manager and Trainer at Bruce Clay, Inc..
But these are just two sessions at this year’s Pubcon SFIMA conference that you should definitely see–since I’m speaking. But, there are other speakers that you should not miss, including:
Brent Csutoras – Social Media Strategist, Kairay Media
Steve Floyd – CEO / Founder, AXZM
Lisa Buyer – President/CEO, The Buyer Group
David Szetela – Owner and CEO, FMB Media
Jeffrey Eisenberg – Partner, Eisenberg Brothers & Associates
Stoney DeGeyter – President, Pole Position Marketing
Carolyn Shelby – Director of SEO, Tribune Company
Rebecca Murtagh – Chief Strategist / President, Karner Blue Marketing LLC
William Leake – CEO, Apogee Results
Matt Rogers – Head Of Industry, Large Customer Sales, Google
Below is what happened in search today, as reported on Search Engine Land and from other places across the web. From Search Engine Land: Search Marketers: Keep Calm, Carry On Everybody loves progress, but nobody likes change. This adage is [Read More]